-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Avatar - This is what I'm saying
- Thread starter squidward
- Start date
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
It'll be incredibly hard for us to calculate the return on Avatar until years after its completed. The answer will be in a mind boggling formula which includes any increases in attendance, increases in time spent at AK and does that increase create longer vacations in total, which creates more revenues from a variety of things such as food, and lastly merchandise (which I don't expect to surge because of Avatar).
Speaking of increases in attendance, anyone want to play a game of way-too-early guess Animal Kingdom's post Avatar attendance numbers?
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Given the state of WDW as a whole, I would guess that mostly days at DHS will be swapped for days at DAK with no large net gain for WDW.
And make no mistake, the land will be an out of the park home run artistically. But the stands will be half full. I predict a slow burn gain in attendance once word of mouth starts.
Fox&Hound
Well-Known Member
I think it will be really hard to isolate, which will be great for Disney's PR machine. People will come to enjoy the park at night and see the new night time show and other night offerings. Disney could easily suggest that any attendance bumps or revenue bumps are coming because of Avatar and not the other incentives for guests to visit AK in the coming years.
I still hold out that the sequels will be able to expand on the world of Avatar and help fill in some holes that were present in the first film: memorable characters, intriguing/cute sidekicks, exotic food/food locations. Just wait and have some faith it will all work out in the end.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
I think that number is slightly skewed, but I may be wrong. It's my understanding that the entire DAK project carries a price tag of $1B, but that includes Rivers of Light and all of the infrastructure upgrades necessary to make DAK a park that will be open regularly at night.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
There have been rumors going around recently that Avatar alone had hit $1B.
flyerjab
Well-Known Member
Aside from "pants wetting fans" and the Avatar "mega fans," I am certain that this expansion will do extremely well for this park, coupled with the sunset safaris and RoL show. I could definitely see this being a double digit jump in attendance, especially after word of mouth gets out about the 2 rides and the beauty of the land (especially at night). There will now be more of a reason to spend more time at this park.
And for what it is worth, this park doesn't have to do WWoHP money to be successful. Sure, there are definitely financial targets that Disney is projecting as a result of the plussing of this park as a whole after 2017. But let's at least be real about it. There are probably 2 cultural hits that translate into truly ridiculous theme park business - Star Wars and Harry Potter. They would pretty much transcend most other cultural phenoms that have occurred over the past however many decades. I don't even think that Frozen or Marvel would achieve the return that SW and HP will in the future (Star Trek still might have a crazy draw but I wonder about that IP as time passes).
And for what it is worth, this park doesn't have to do WWoHP money to be successful. Sure, there are definitely financial targets that Disney is projecting as a result of the plussing of this park as a whole after 2017. But let's at least be real about it. There are probably 2 cultural hits that translate into truly ridiculous theme park business - Star Wars and Harry Potter. They would pretty much transcend most other cultural phenoms that have occurred over the past however many decades. I don't even think that Frozen or Marvel would achieve the return that SW and HP will in the future (Star Trek still might have a crazy draw but I wonder about that IP as time passes).
Goofyque'
Well-Known Member
Darn. Now will have that song stuck in my head all day.
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
Which is good, right? We WANT more money spent on new attractions. Unless this is overrun on some silly unforeseen expense.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
It's not good if the land could have been built for $500 million, but ended up costing $1B.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
It (among other projects) got the head of Imagineering fired.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I could see a 15-20% jump for DAK total in the next two years, but it would be from a combo of both RoL/night safaris and Pandora. So, I would expect to see jumps in both 2016 and 2017, though the latter will probably be bigger.
Imagineering is rather infamous for spending a stupid amount of money on even stupider things that really and truly have no affect on the finished product.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Everyone is a little on-edge from defending this project for so many years, but I totally agree with @Disneyhead'71
It's not a bad thing really, but Avatar as an IP is no Potter these days. It was totally supposed to be in Iger's eyes, but it definitely is not. Fortunately, projects live or die by execution. Whereas opening day numbers live or die by the popularity of the brand.
In this case, the "Disney" brand will bring the usual big crowds, the execution will spread via word of mouth and (like Avatar) the attendance bump will have good legs rather than being a purely front-loaded gain.
Whether Avatar is culturally relevant or not no longer matters since the Disney brand remains as strong as ever and the execution appears wonderful...
Now on the other hand - when the brand, execution AND IP all align that's when the true nightmare crowds set in... Star Wars will be be a horse of a different colour.
It's not a bad thing really, but Avatar as an IP is no Potter these days. It was totally supposed to be in Iger's eyes, but it definitely is not. Fortunately, projects live or die by execution. Whereas opening day numbers live or die by the popularity of the brand.
In this case, the "Disney" brand will bring the usual big crowds, the execution will spread via word of mouth and (like Avatar) the attendance bump will have good legs rather than being a purely front-loaded gain.
Whether Avatar is culturally relevant or not no longer matters since the Disney brand remains as strong as ever and the execution appears wonderful...
Now on the other hand - when the brand, execution AND IP all align that's when the true nightmare crowds set in... Star Wars will be be a horse of a different colour.
Marc Davis Fan
Well-Known Member
If the land is marketed as "visit the floating mountains" and "ride a banshee," with the respective imagery shown (very important aspect for marketing this), I think it'll get a lot of attention, excitement, and interest.
The hook isn't "we made a land based on this movie," it's "we made THIS."
It's still useful that it's based on a successful/liked IP, since the "oh yeah, I liked that movie" from some people will only help.
The hook isn't "we made a land based on this movie," it's "we made THIS."
It's still useful that it's based on a successful/liked IP, since the "oh yeah, I liked that movie" from some people will only help.
TyTrap
Well-Known Member
When I saw avatar I was thinking about how I wanted to go to pandora. I could care less about the movie and its cultural footprint on the world. I would like to believe the reason Disney chose to make an avatar land in AK was because they wanted to create a unique experience that also tied in with the themes and values of AK.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this is what so many miss
i agree movies on conservation and saving the environment dont resonate with 8 yr old boys to buy toys but the bottom line is people wanted to escape to pandora, no it wasnt about the plot it was about the place and people ate it up thats why i think this will be bigger than cars land
JMO but the whole DAK expansion is a great idea, no better way to expand this park into the nighttime than ROL and Pandora
doctornick
Well-Known Member
That seems to be the case. When the land was first proposed, we heard about the possibility of a "flex" dining like BoG where it would be quick service for lunch and table service for dinner. Somewhere in the interim they decided to instead have just a quick service within Pandora and put a table service nearby, but on Discovery Island. My guess is that they didn't think the theme was conducive to a proper sit down place in Pandora.