Hong Kong Disneyland To Open Early, on Budget

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Prices Show Confidence
In Chinese customers

By GEOFFREY A. FOWLER
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
November 23, 2004


HONG KONG -- Hong Kong Disneyland will open within budget on Sept. 12, 2005, and adult guests on peak days will pay 350 Hong Kong dollars (US$45) to enter the park, Walt Disney Co. and the Hong Kong government announced.

"This is truly a happy day for us," said Henry Tang, Hong Kong's Financial Secretary, as he made the announcement yesterday, flanked by Mickey Mouse. Disneyland will be a "driving force for tourism growth for Hong Kong, and family-tourism development in particular," Mr. Tang said.

The park is a joint venture of the city's government and Disney, in which the company invested US$314 million in return for a 43% stake in the park and management fees for operating it. The Hong Kong government is expected to spend US$2.8 billion to complete the park and related infrastructure. It has created 11,400 jobs during construction, and will have 5,000 employees on opening day.

The opening date comes earlier than expected, after Disney corporate officials last month set a target date of Oct. 14, 2005 -- even as some staff speculated that construction delays would push the launch into 2006.

"This is the fastest Disneyland ever built, and in five years' time we turned water into a magic wonderland," said Mr. Tang. It is also the smallest Disneyland of the five major Disney resorts world-wide, and is considered a testing ground for Disney's wider ambitions in China -- which include TV broadcasting, films and another theme park in Shanghai.

Beyond physical construction of the park's rides and attractions, Hong Kong Disneyland has been rolling out marketing initiatives targeted at tourists in southern China, who are expected to make up 30% to 40% of the park's visitors.

The pricing announcement offers a first measure of Disney's confidence in the spending power of Chinese customers, whose per-capita disposable income even in the most wealthy cities like Shanghai is about US$1,800 per year.

In addition to the adult price of HK$350, children ages 3 to 11 will be charged HK$250, and people older than 65 will be charged HK$200 for entry to the park on weekends and peak holidays. That places Hong Kong Disneyland's adult entry price slightly below the parks in Paris (US$49) and Tokyo (US$50).

Hong Kong Disneyland group managing director Don Robinson declined to say what he expected per-capita visitor expenditure would be at the park, an industry average measure that includes the entry fee, food, lodging and retail purchases. In past interviews, Disney executives have said they expect Hong Kong Disneyland's per-capita spending to be in the same range as the company's other theme parks.

"One needs to really look hard if affordability is an issue," said Sim Kok Chwee, director of the Pacific Asia Travel Association. "It will for quite a while be sustained by folks from the more prosperous cities in China rather than rural areas," he said.

But China's one-child family policy may offer a price reprieve on potential visitors. "If you have a few children, it becomes quite expensive. But a full day's enjoyment for just one child may not be beyond their means," said Mr. Sim.

Write to Geoffrey A. Fowler at geoffrey.fowler@wsj.com
 

Tim G

Well-Known Member
DisneyFan 2000 said:
How exciting.... Well, not really but I'd like to see how China react to an empty park.
Sorry to say, but it's not empty... looks good, NOT as it should....... but still pretty good...
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
How exciting.... Well, not really but I'd like to see how China react to an empty park.

It is better than any park they currently have.

Also, WDC is taking a major risk with this park. Hong Kong is not a major tourism destination, and China, although very populated, is not a rich nation.

Sure, WDC could build another DLP.....but then, they could end up with another situation like that a DLP too.
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
It is better than any park they currently have.

Also, WDC is taking a major risk with this park. Hong Kong is not a major tourism destination, and China, although very populated, is not a rich nation.

Sure, WDC could build another DLP.....but then, they could end up with another situation like that a DLP too.

Not if they saved money by building less hotels (which was what led to DLP's first financial problems). And imo, DLP is still the ruler of all MKs.

IMO this park is empty. Themed, yes but there aren't enough rides (I'm not even talking about original ones...)
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
Not if they saved money by building less hotels (which was what led to DLP's first financial problems). And imo, DLP is still the ruler of all MKs.

IMO this park is empty. Themed, yes but there aren't enough rides (I'm not even talking about original ones...)

The number of rides is a direct effect of the anticipated capacity.....The Hong Kong park is only expected to have about 6-8 million visitors per year, it does not need as many rides as the other MK parks.

I am count 12 rides and shows that the park will open with for the first phase....plus all of the other attractions....seems like a good start....seems like about what WDW's MK opened with.
 

cherrynegra

Well-Known Member
But then my question is are the number of attractions enough to handle the volume of people in the parks?? That park is going to be packed!! And if there are long lines everywhere, and then people in the paths, yikes!!
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
cherrynegra said:
But then my question is are the number of attractions enough to handle the volume of people in the parks?? That park is going to be packed!! And if there are long lines everywhere, and then people in the paths, yikes!!

I just don't know if the company should risk financial stability over guest satisfaction.

Look at DLP.....it opened with a ton of attractions and very high debt.....the park has never really lived up to financial expectations. Hong Kong DL could be packed, and it could be a nightmare to visit, but only if people head there in large numbers. The jury is still out on whether that will actually happen or not.
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
speck76 said:
I just don't know if the company should risk financial stability over guest satisfaction.

Look at DLP.....it opened with a ton of attractions and very high debt

That was only and I repeat, only because of the huge number of hotels at opening phase! The park was actually doing reasonably well...
 

Lynx04

New Member
I think it is a good idea to make the price of addmission 45 dollars, like they are going to do. It looks as if they have learned from their mistakes (building half parks and charging full price).
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Lynx04 said:
I think it is a good idea to make the price of addmission 45 dollars, like they are going to do. It looks as if they have learned from their mistakes (building half parks and charging full price).

Every park WDC has ever opened has been opened as a "half park"

Check out the timeline of additions for Disneyland.....it was pretty barren when it first opened.

3 parks could be considered "full parks" at opening:

Epcot - (still was missing 3 pavilions and 2 countries)

DLP (but still had a large "phase 2" open 3 years later)

DisneySea (still, only built for 11 million visitors, and now HAS to expand due to popularity)

Now, part of Epcot's costs and cost overruns ehlped contribute to a weaker company as a whole, a company that was almost raided by Wall Street sharks in 83-84.

DLP....we all know that story.

DisneySea....sure....probably the best park built recently by the WDC....but its costs were fronted by another company (just as most of the HK costs are fronted by the HK government) and the park was still not built big enough for the demand. The shame is that the overall impact of DisneySea on the Tokyo Resort as a whole has not been as expected. Tokyo Disneyland attendance has fallen off by great numbers.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
That was only and I repeat, only because of the huge number of hotels at opening phase! The park was actually doing reasonably well...

But if you translate that to the HK project.....the park is only being built with 2 hotels....and they are not even BIG hotels. I would assume if they are expecting 40% of the visitors to come from Mainland China....they would need a place to sleep.

On top of that, the majority of the parks costs are being covered by the government. The major costs have been those related to reclaiming the land from the sea.....the park is costing as much as DisneySea did....I don't really think we can expect much more until the park can be considered a sound investment.
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
I see your point and partly agree (suprisingly). I know Disney is scared in another investment, but I as a consumer can't settle for waiting until it's a sure thing.. For example, Disney's AK. I loved it, but for the price I paid I felt cheated.
It's a shame someone will feel the same as I did just because Disney wanted to play extra safe... Just my opinion.. :wave:
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
I see your point and partly agree (suprisingly). I know Disney is scared in another investment, but I as a consumer can't settle for waiting until it's a sure thing.. For example, Disney's AK. I loved it, but for the price I paid I felt cheated.
It's a shame someone will feel the same as I did just because Disney wanted to play extra safe... Just my opinion.. :wave:

I also agree with you.

It is a shame that a somewhat complete park can not be built for a reasonable cost and without major financial risk.

I think DAK is a 1/2 park....I think it will still be a 1/2 park after Lucky is there and Everest opens. I also don't think if Beastly Kingdom was around, it would be that much better. (Along with the rollercoaster, the other major draw in BK was a giant maze.......not really what I would consider a headline attraction). Regardless of what I think, DAK still had a cost around $750 million or so.....which is a very large chunk of change.

So, how does Disney open a more complete park without placing the company in a financial risk? In today's economy, they can not really go by the philosophy of "If we build it, they will come", so they are pretty much stuck with a particular price point.

Do they spend less money on the theme? Would DAK be more enjoyable if it had 1 more e-ticket, but no Tree of Life? Would it be better if it did not have the level of detail in Africa and Asia, but had another animal trek?
 

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
Well, no.. I'd prefer top notch theming any day (WDSP comes to mind).
Maybe if they could find sponsors? They're a big company. They can figure it out!

EDIT: Just look at DisneySea. They went by the philosophy "If we build it, they'll come". They were prooved right. Why not give this philosophy a second chance?
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DisneyFan 2000 said:
Well, no.. I'd prefer top notch theming any day (WDSP comes to mind).
Maybe if they could find sponsors? They're a big company. They can figure it out!

EDIT: Just look at DisneySea. They went by the philosophy "If we build it, they'll come". They were prooved right. Why not give this philosophy a second chance?

The market dynamics of the Tokyo resort are much different than any other resort area.

The park is located in the largest population center on the planet.

97.5% of visitors come from Metro Tokyo.

68% of visitors are 18 or older. (hence the need for more E-tickets that appeal to adults)

71% of visitors are female (which I find strange)

TDS was built to hold about 11 million people per year.

The year prior to TDS opening, TDL had 17.3 million guests.

Last year, the two parks combined had 25.4 million guests.

The NET impact of TDS on the resort is only 8.1 million per year after 3 years....it was only 5 million in the first year.

TDS is needing expansion now because it is handling over 13 million per year, the park needs more capacity.....at the same time, attendance is down 5 million at TDL, so TDL is adding new attractions to bring people back to the park.

As good as TDS looks from here.....I am not so sure I would call the entire TDL Resort project a success.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom