After Avatar - DAK

[Brad Bishop]

I happened to be watching the latest episode of The Magic Weekly (YouTube). One of the topics was something like what comes after Avatar. The host, who's very enthusiastic, talked about how Avatar will pull people in which means more visitors which means more money and more expansion for DAK.

Up until he said this I had the horrible realization that: After Avatar and the nighttime bits that are being added, that's it for DAK for about 20 years. Whether you like Avatar or not, that isn't the issue, first, the execs are going to want a ROI for the costly project that is Avatar. That's going to take a while. Secondly, the current exec team kind of throws you a bone and then you live with it for 20 years.

I do think that there will be retreads in DAK's future across those 20 years as well as price increases. I don't see the current management doing much else.

Imagine if they ignore this park for 20 years they way that they have done to Epcot. It's kind of weird to imagine because Epcot was very much based in 1970s/1980s architecture and it really shows. DAK, thankfully, won't age that way because of two things: 1) foliage 2) 3rd-world country charm (as odd as that sounds). Still, I could see them letting it languish to where it looks something like an old city zoo.

I REALLY hope that doesn't happen. What I'm really doing is seeing a trend from their past and applying it toward the future.

 

[Goofyernmost]

If you look at the way the threads are going lately, it is like feeding time at the aquarium. It's been years with no action, now all of a sudden they are throwing billions into some of the parks, things that aren't even open yet and things that haven't even been started yet, and instead of imagining what those things will be like, many are trying to figure out what is next. Probably another 10 years of nothing or maybe they will set things up so they can go 20 years with nothing new happening. Anyway, it kind of makes me chuckle. Either way, I'm pretty much out of the picture for anything other then what is currently on the burner, so, I guess I just don't care, but, it seems a little premature to worry about "next" when right now isn't even done yet.

 

[mergatroid]

I happened to be watching the latest episode of The Magic Weekly (YouTube). One of the topics was something like what comes after Avatar. The host, who's very enthusiastic, talked about how Avatar will pull people in which means more visitors which means more money and more expansion for DAK.

Up until he said this I had the horrible realization that: After Avatar and the nighttime bits that are being added, that's it for DAK for about 20 years. Whether you like Avatar or not, that isn't the issue, first, the execs are going to want a ROI for the costly project that is Avatar. That's going to take a while. Secondly, the current exec team kind of throws you a bone and then you live with it for 20 years.

I do think that there will be retreads in DAK's future across those 20 years as well as price increases. I don't see the current management doing much else.

Imagine if they ignore this park for 20 years they way that they have done to Epcot. It's kind of weird to imagine because Epcot was very much based in 1970s/1980s architecture and it really shows. DAK, thankfully, won't age that way because of two things: 1) foliage 2) 3rd-world country charm (as odd as that sounds). Still, I could see them letting it languish to where it looks something like an old city zoo.

I REALLY hope that doesn't happen. What I'm really doing is seeing a trend from their past and applying it toward the future.

You seem really caught up in this '20 years' claim, is there any basis to this or just a period of time you came up with?

 

[Chef Mickey]

AK is a different park than EPCOT. If they didn't do much at AK for 20 years (they haven't) it wouldn't show up as much because of the animal draw. Animals, nature, safari, etc will never get "old."

The definition of EPCOT is a community of tomorrow. You wait 20 years to update and it starts seeming like a community of yesterday.

In my opinion, EPCOT's turn is LONG overdue and should have probably been done first.

 

[DisneyOutsider]

AK is a wonderful and delightful park. It's also a very unique park. Nothing else like it. It has seen HEAVY investment in the past five years which will make it a full-day park for anyone.

There is both an entirely new themed land with an E ticket as well as a beautiful new night-time show coming within the next year.

I don't see what the point is in hitting an imaginary panic button about what is going to happen in the next 20 years. Furthermore, assuming that NOTHING will happen in the next 20 years, is just silly and alarmism.

 

[marni1971]

Right now nothing of substance after Avland for a good 5-10 years.

Which is a shame since a 4 minute boat ride and a 4 minute simulator is just the start of what's needed.

 

[JIMINYCR]

I'm not envisioning Disney ignoring the parks for that long of a time. They have been focusing on and prioritizing the overseas expansions and ignored us, but I think things will begin to turn around well before the 20 years. We're beginning to see some improvements with lots to come. Even though its been frustrating waiting, eventually we will get ours. I'm an optimist.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

For me, the biggest problem with not touching AK for another 5-10 years is that it means we'll definitely have to continue living with Dino-Rama for that time. I was holding out hope that the next step for AK would include removing/replacing Dino-Rama. Everything else in the park is so beautiful and immersive that I find it a shame to have something there which (in my opinion) detracts so jarringly from the holistic experience of the park.

 

[Brad Bishop]

I see the problem(s) as reoccurring:
- Iger's "legacy" is built (Shanghai Disneyland) and a new CEO comes in... and wants their own legacy (Maybe Disney Brazil, for all I know)..
- projects are cut (look at Tomorrowland at MK as being 1/2 done for an example of this)
- current management continues to cut services and increase prices and trying to monetize everything ($150 E$H as an example).
- Management look back and say to themselves, "DAK got Avatar.. DHS got Star Wars and TSL.. MK got NFL.. EP got Guardians and Frozen - Done!" for 10+ years..

I just see the current building phase as being short-lived (TSL has already been cut back) and thinned based on the ideas of:
- people are going to come anyway
- We built stuff - aren't you happy? That's right... Pay us more...

Sadly, WDW's saving will likely be by competition from Universal. Universal sat uninteresting to me for years. Dueling Dragons was something I'd want to ride but the rest of it was pretty "meh" to me. Now they're committed, the way Disney used to be, to doing new, cool, innovative things. I look at Universal and I'm excited about what's next. I look at Disney and think, "Oh.. another Omnimover ride with some AAs placed in there because "we want to ride the movie."" - and that's at best.

From what I see: Universal is proactive and Disney is reactive. Universal is how Disney used to be. Universal builds stuff, and keep a lot of us excited, based on, "look what we can do!" Disney, on the other hand, seems to look at Universal and say, "oh... Universal built something... We better Omnimover something... Oh - if we just built a stage then "Dance Party!" We're geniuses!"

It sucks, especially to me who grew up in awe of WDW and the Monorail, PeopleMover, Pirates, Tiki Room, etc. I look at Epcot and think, "Why isn't there a People Mover to take you around the park?"

I look at Disney's current plans and see it more as putting a few fingers in the leaking dike rather than being innovative.

You can even look at the long term plans and see the difference in thinking:
- Universal has a 10 year plan to bring new attractions to USO and IOA. They want to revitalize the parks. Each area is going to be redone. They've purchased land for another park. They just built a new water park. They're building hotels and wanting you to stay on property.
- Disney is building Avatar (still a few years out from opening - in response to Harry Potter), Star Wars, TSL (admittedly, basically a small area of mildly themed, off-the-shelf rides), has built NFL (in response to Universal - 20K Leagues sat dormant for, what, 15 years?), and has retreaded Maelstrom to be Frozen and maybe do Guardians for the Energy Pavilion (forgetting how this breaks theming). Then - nothing.

I see this as Universal setting things in motion and constantly thinking about what's next as opposed to Disney's position which is apparently, "We need to build a few things to compete and we're cutting costs and raising prices."

I don't see anything at Disney after these current projects. There's no long-term growth only short-term gain. As such, after Avatar, I think you'll likely have close to 20 years before something new respectively new (not a retread) rears it's head. It's just how they operate now.

Someone's going to make the obvious comment: "Oh, great, another Universal vs Disney thread..."

Let me ask this: Why, as a long-term Disney fan, do I look at Orlando and equate Disney with stagnation and Universal with innovation whereas, 15 or so years back it would have been the opposite?

That seems like a problem to me (for Disney).

 

[WondersOfLife]

It's nice to know that everyone knows everything about Disney management. Just everything. And everyone. I'm sure EVERYone thought that Avatarland was going to be a thing to begin with as well, hm. Yep. Disney's totally predictable.

 

[mergatroid]

Avatarland could be better than anything Universal has created so far, that's a possibility? I remember many on here saying it would be done badly, wouldn't compare to what Universal was doing and wouldn't be themed properly anyway etc. Now people are seeing how the mountains are looking and getting excited about the prospect. The art work makes some believe that the attractions could be cutting edge with scenery to die for. Some people on here could look very foolish when it opens, or maybe not?

The point is it's not open yet and yet you're kind of writing it off and saying well apart from Avatarland oh yes and Starwars Land, what else has Disney got planned as though they're both an irrelevance? Universal are building too (and I'm a big Universal fan too as some on here will testify) but people could criticise them (and many do) for making rides using too many screens as opposed to your criticism of omnimovers at Disney. Looking at Reign of Kong at Universal I've got to say I'm rather disappointed and not looking forward to riding it in September anywhere near as much as I was before I realised how screen based it actually is! Hopefully the actual visuals will blow me away and I'll love it but maybe not.

You have some valid points and everything you say is an opinion and I'd never dream of telling you that you shouldn't have one or that you're wrong. It does however come across as looking at the parks and judging them in two very different ways. It's like "Ooh everything that Universal is going to do in the next ten years is bound to be fantastic even though I don't know all the details" and yet "Ooh everything Disney is going to do in the next ten years is bound to be terrible even though I don't know all the details". Perhaps Disney will surprise you and it's better waiting to see how things work out before deciding which is best?

 

[Stripes]

I see the problem(s) as reoccurring:
- Iger's "legacy" is built (Shanghai Disneyland) and a new CEO comes in... and wants their own legacy (Maybe Disney Brazil, for all I know)..
- projects are cut (look at Tomorrowland at MK as being 1/2 done for an example of this)
- current management continues to cut services and increase prices and trying to monetize everything ($150 E$H as an example).
- Management look back and say to themselves, "DAK got Avatar.. DHS got Star Wars and TSL.. MK got NFL.. EP got Guardians and Frozen - Done!" for 10+ years..

I just see the current building phase as being short-lived (TSL has already been cut back) and thinned based on the ideas of:
- people are going to come anyway
- We built stuff - aren't you happy? That's right... Pay us more...

Sadly, WDW's saving will likely be by competition from Universal. Universal sat uninteresting to me for years. Dueling Dragons was something I'd want to ride but the rest of it was pretty "meh" to me. Now they're committed, the way Disney used to be, to doing new, cool, innovative things. I look at Universal and I'm excited about what's next. I look at Disney and think, "Oh.. another Omnimover ride with some AAs placed in there because "we want to ride the movie."" - and that's at best.

From what I see: Universal is proactive and Disney is reactive. Universal is how Disney used to be. Universal builds stuff, and keep a lot of us excited, based on, "look what we can do!" Disney, on the other hand, seems to look at Universal and say, "oh... Universal built something... We better Omnimover something... Oh - if we just built a stage then "Dance Party!" We're geniuses!"

It sucks, especially to me who grew up in awe of WDW and the Monorail, PeopleMover, Pirates, Tiki Room, etc. I look at Epcot and think, "Why isn't there a People Mover to take you around the park?"

I look at Disney's current plans and see it more as putting a few fingers in the leaking dike rather than being innovative.

You can even look at the long term plans and see the difference in thinking:
- Universal has a 10 year plan to bring new attractions to USO and IOA. They want to revitalize the parks. Each area is going to be redone. They've purchased land for another park. They just built a new water park. They're building hotels and wanting you to stay on property.
- Disney is building Avatar (still a few years out from opening - in response to Harry Potter), Star Wars, TSL (admittedly, basically a small area of mildly themed, off-the-shelf rides), has built NFL (in response to Universal - 20K Leagues sat dormant for, what, 15 years?), and has retreaded Maelstrom to be Frozen and maybe do Guardians for the Energy Pavilion (forgetting how this breaks theming). Then - nothing.

I see this as Universal setting things in motion and constantly thinking about what's next as opposed to Disney's position which is apparently, "We need to build a few things to compete and we're cutting costs and raising prices."

I don't see anything at Disney after these current projects. There's no long-term growth only short-term gain. As such, after Avatar, I think you'll likely have close to 20 years before something new respectively new (not a retread) rears it's head. It's just how they operate now.

Someone's going to make the obvious comment: "Oh, great, another Universal vs Disney thread..."

Let me ask this: Why, as a long-term Disney fan, do I look at Orlando and equate Disney with stagnation and Universal with innovation whereas, 15 or so years back it would have been the opposite?

That seems like a problem to me (for Disney).

Not the way I see it. Keep in mind that Disney has been building a $5.5 billion resort that has devastated capex at their parks worldwide for years. I'll guarantee, once Universal begins their park in Beijing, you'll do a 180. I find it so curious that those who typically go to WDW have a very pessimistic perspective, and think that Disney is so greedy that they don't mind their parks being so stagnant. Yet, Disneyland folks are quite content. Personally, I attribute this to the fact that DL has already had a top notch expansion and knows that more like it are on the way, whereas the expectations of WDW frequents have been tempered by expansions that have been lackluster lately, and don't understand the modern day innovation that WDI has produced so often at their other parks recently, but so sparingly at WDW (until the near future).

 

[bethymouse]

Just wait... Avatarland should be great! I'm just not sure if it will be completely ready by the end of 2017!

 

[Fox&Hound]

See. Ten-fifteen years ago I felt like this. Been here, done that in regards to Disney. But when I look at NFL, Avatar, frozen ever after, new Soarin, Star Wars and Toy Story, Tiffins, and a completely reimagined Disney Springs I think this is one of the most exciting times to be a Disney fan. I don't need something new every time I visit but with all of the new exciting things being added I feel like it will keep me content for some time. Disney will always make additions to their parks but do they really need to sink in millions every year because some guests get bored? Call me a sucker but I still get joy from classics like Pirates and Spaceship Earth. If you are not content with what you have then you will never be content with what you will get...

 

[DC0703]

One thing that AK could really use is a couple of dark rides (in addition the couple new attractions for Avatar land).

AK is a great park, but on a hot really day it can be a bit brutal given that most of the animal exhibits and attractions are outdoors. Dark rides or indoor animal enclosures would give a nice reprieve from the heat and sun.

 

[KaliSplash]

So now people are complaining about Omnimovers and AA's? Wasn't that long ago people were complaining about screens.
Universal will be happy to take your money as you marvel at their innovations.
You must remember, both Disney and Universal do this to make money! That is all. If you have ever been under the impression that there was some other motivation for either of them. (Or Six Flags or Cedar Parks or take your choice), you are nothing thinking things through.
Disney is the big boy on the block. Universal has to find new things to compete. Is there a risk that Disney is not as cutting edge as it once was, absolutely. But I think Mickey's pretty happy with his earnings these days. He will act when he needs to act., They've been doing this since the mid-1950s. I think they know how.

 

[Fox&Hound]

I still argue that if The Good Dinosaur had been a smash hit or even a modest hit then we would be seeing changes come to Chester and Hester's. Sadly, it underperformed and was a critical failure. I think we are stuck with Chester and Hester's for a while.

AK will be in a good place once Avatar comes on board and they get the night show worked out. I wouldn't be surprised if one E-ticket or two C/D tickets found there way to the park in the next five years.

But I think most people will go to Ak in the late afternoon and evenings to take advantage of the new times and the glowing plant life in Avatar land so there should be plenty for guests to do to keep them occupied from later afternoon to the time the show begins.

 

[Fox&Hound]

Imagine if they put a Nick and Judy Zootopia meet and greet back in Rafiki's planet watch area. They would have a brand new hit on their hands for very little. Guests would explore a part of the park they probably never cared to see.

 

[FrankLapidus]

I have zero interest in anything to do with Avatar but I think the park could really benefit from giving classic films like The Jungle Book and The Lion King a presence. Zootopia was a pretty phenomenal success too and offers plenty of theme park potential.

Beastly Kingdom is a lost opportunity IMO, I think adding some more mythical elements to what DAK offers would have been a great move.

Another geographically-linked land would work too if done right. Thematically Africa is brilliantly realised at DAK, there's no reason why a land based on Australia as an example couldn't be just as impressive.