Mickey and Minnie’s Runaway Railway - Disneyland

Disney Irish

Disney Irish

Premium Member
BrianLo said:
If Anaheim co-owned Disneyland we wouldn't see this petulant battle going on, they'd actually have a hand in the economic engine of their city.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it'd be any different than it has been in the last couple years, in fact it might be worse. Anaheim would want more say on what goes on in DLR and then block things if they don't get their way. How is that different than what we've had in recent years?
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Disney Irish Bruh said:
I don't know if it'd be any different than it has been in the last couple years, in fact it might be worse. Anaheim would want more say on what goes on in DLR and then block things if they don't get their way. How is that different than what we've had in recent years?
Click to expand...

Well yes, cutting off the nose to spite the face is still something Anaheim might have done regardless. :rolleyes:
 
D

DanielBB8

Well-Known Member
BrianLo said:
Indeed, I'm not really following the logic here. HKDL and SDL are now the two most unique castle parks out there, affordability is not the issue for them. It's TDO that for some reason 'can't afford' more unique projects.

The optics are completely different than Paris, Disney splits ownership and it is far more beneficial for them to see Shanghai/HKDL be successful. Honestly I'd prefer all split ownership in the future. The biggest issue I can foresee is if one government group plays hardball and blocks expansion in the future. Far more likely to affect HK and seemingly not yet the case.

But then again... governments will still play hard ball. If Anaheim co-owned Disneyland we wouldn't see this petulant battle going on, they'd actually have a hand in the economic engine of their city.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why you say HKDL and SDL can afford and TDO can’t afford. It is very clear that HKDL can’t afford to keep maintaining losses 3 years straight with their majority stake and required portion of expansion as owned by the HK government and shared by Disney as the minority. SDL is also majority owned by the Chinese government, but they obviously have deeper pockets and obviously an instant success compared to HKDL.

TDO is extremely successful and CAN afford to expand because it’s beyond successful.

We can say HKDL and Paris can’t afford because they are money losing operations and need to save as much as possible, but the examples of Mystic Manor and Ratatouille show that this is absolutely not the rule and reality.

Governments like Anaheim are playing hardball, but they will lose if Disney takes it’s balls. HKDL can lose it all, but so will Disney. For GMTM to suggest Disney can never own HKDL is not realistic. Keep losing money. Then the HK government will have cold feet about wasting public money on a theme park. Disney enters into these partnerships because it’s a easy and cheaper way to launch a theme park in a new region. Eventually, it doesn’t go as planned. Or maybe Disney was outmaneuvering Hong Kong as it builds a new park in Shanghai in a new government partnership. It’s a win win.

As for clones, it’s irrelevant. So there’s your logic.
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
DanielBB8 said:
I don’t understand why you say HKDL and SDL can afford and TDO can’t afford. It is very clear that HKDL can’t afford to keep maintaining losses 3 years straight with their majority stake and required portion of expansion as owned by the HK government as shared by Disney as the minority. SDL is also majority owned by the Chinese government, but they obviously have deeper pockets and obviously an instant success compared to HKDL.

TDO is extremely successful and CAN afford to expand because it’s beyond successful.

We can say HKDL and Paris can’t afford because they are money losing operations and need to save as much as possible, but the examples of Mystic Manor and Ratatouille show that this is absolutely not the rule and reality.

Governments like Anaheim are playing hardball, but they will lose if Disney takes it’s balls. HKDL can lose it all, but so will Disney. For GMTM to suggest Disney can never own HKDL is not realistic. Keep losing money. Then the HK government will have cold feet about wasting public money on a theme park. Disney enters into these partnerships because it’s a easy and cheaper way to launch a theme park in a new region. Eventually, it doesn’t go as planned. Or maybe Disney was outmaneuvering Hong Kong as it builds a new park in Shanghai in a new government partnership. It’s a win win.

As for clones, it’s irrelevant. So there’s your logic.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious/sarcastic about affordability, hence the quotes. Hong Kong is bringing far more unique offerings to their parks than TDO seems to be able to do amongst four parks. It's not about affordability, it's about being cheap bastards or having flawed decision making.

Hong Kong was a disaster because it was a poor mans Disneyland clone. It has clawed its way into relevance once it stopped trying to emulate.

Projects will ALWAYS be superior if they are upfront developed for the park they are intended to occupy. This is why clones (true plug and play clones) matter. I'm glad everyone is content seeing every Disney park as one amorphous blob where anything goes. Or has such apathy that they are content as long as their home park gets the good. But that's not how P&R functions. A rising tide lifts all ships. This is why decisions to clone (or not) are relevant, regardless of whether one will ever step away from their given AP bubble. The difference between appreciating the art of it and just seeing it as a vessel to provide you with the best rides out of the bunch.

Disney is NOT trying to run Hong Kong into the ground to acquire the government's share. This is not a game of chicken, they are on the hook for half of it (unlike Paris where they were in it for the royalty). They have their own shareholders to answer to on losses. That's the difference there, Disney WANTS Hong Kong to succeed very badly.
 
GiveMeTheMusic

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
The government can’t just liquidate its stake to Disney, even if the park truly crashed and burned. That’s not how it works in a communist country. If the park did so poorly that the government was forced to reevaluate, they would buy out Disney and level the park. Heck, some HK politicians were advocating for that last year when Disney was trying to get approval for expansion.
 
D

DanielBB8

Well-Known Member
GiveMeTheMusic said:
The government can’t just liquidate its stake to Disney, even if the park truly crashed and burned. That’s not how it works in a communist country. If the park did so poorly that the government was forced to reevaluate, they would buy out Disney and level the park. Heck, some HK politicians were advocating for that last year when Disney was trying to get approval for expansion.
Click to expand...
HK is not Communist yet. Two systems. HK is run independently until 2047. As for leveling the park, does this sound familiar? “Disneyland project should be terminated, with the land used for resettling low-income Hong Kong residents.” Leftist politics exist everywhere.

Hong Kong won’t abandon Disneyland. It’s a major tourist attraction despite the economic losses. In fact, they want Disney to expand the resort into a second park as soon as possible and they want renegotiate management and royalty fees because they know Disney is double dipping. They want management fees to be offset from royalty fees.
 
GiveMeTheMusic

GiveMeTheMusic

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DanielBB8 said:
HK is not Communist yet. Two systems. HK is run independently until 2047. As for leveling the park, does this sound familiar? “Disneyland project should be terminated, with the land used for resettling low-income Hong Kong residents.” Leftist politics exist everywhere.

Hong Kong won’t abandon Disneyland. It’s a major tourist attraction despite the economic losses. In fact, they want Disney to expand the resort into a second park as soon as possible and they want renegotiate management and royalty fees because they know Disney is double dipping. They want management fees to be offset from royalty fees.
Click to expand...

This does not change the fact that Disney cannot buy out the government. They hold all the cards here and they always will.
 
FullSailDan

FullSailDan

Well-Known Member
truecoat said:
Of course not, they'd have to bulldoze half the park just to access the Yeti. On top of that, they'd need to burrow to the center of the earth to fix the base...or so I've been told. Am I right, @marni1971?
Click to expand...

No no, you have it all wrong. Since they connected a power line between this and FoP, which is in the same building as NRJ, they'd have to close 3 rides. AND the noise would unacceptable to the animals so they'll need to relocate too. o_O
 

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

Back
Top Bottom