New attractions for AK

[lebeau]

I'm not trying to argue or stir up anything. I'm just interested in seeing how so many people consider this a half day park. :wave:

I think a big part of the "half day" complaint is that most of us here on the forums have been to DAK many times. If you're a first timer, you can spend the whole day wandering around and exploring easily. But once you've done that a few times, the appeal of wandering around wears off (for most people) unless there is something new to find.

While I certainly enjoy soaking up the atmosphere at DAK, I can no longer spend a day doing it. I've seen the animal exhibits enough that I no longer linger. I find that most of the rides and shows don't have a lot repeatability for me.

I'd be very interested to see if the average casual tourist has the same issues with DAK that frequent Disney guests (or at least forum posters) seem to have.

 

[kapeman]

Cretaceous trail

That's a new one on me and I don't see it on the map.

Is is similar to the Jungle Trek and the Pangani Exploration Trail?http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/guides/animalkingdom/ak-africa-pangani.htm

 

[_Scar]

If you can't find anything to do at DAK then I question whether or not you can fit a full day of DHS and Epcot.

DHS has a ton of shows and Epcot has a ton of edutainment.

 

[lebeau]

If you can't find anything to do at DAK then I question whether or not you can fit a full day of DHS and Epcot.

DHS has a ton of shows and Epcot has a ton of edutainment.

At AK - Primeval Whirl and EE were ruled out due to height restrictions (not that they would have been ridden anyway). Dinosaur was ruled out as too scary. Kali was ruled out for the moisture factor and my wife and daughter are deathly afraid of bugs. That left the safari, animal exhibits, the playground and shows. I figured at best I could get my daughter to sit through 1 show. We could spent maybe an hour on animal exhibits. We could have made a 1/2 day of it. But there was always more we wanted to do at some other park.

At Epoct - Other than Mission: Space, every ride was doable by the whole family. My daughter's favorite was Gran Fiesta Tour (she loved seeing Donald lose his pants). We could have made a half day out of the Mexico pavillion alone. She also loved the Living Seas pavillion. We spent a lot of time exploring the World Showcase and coloring the masks at the Kidcot station.

At DHS - We never stayed more than 1/2 day. And we hit the same attractions over and over again. My daughter loved the Muppets and the Great Movie Ride. And of course the playground. My wife wanted to see the American Idol show. (She also managed to sneak away to Tower of Terror while I had the girls at the plyground). But those handful of activities kept us coming back.

Also, I should note that both parks had more and better dining options. We went to Epcot because we had reservations at the Garden Grill and Akerhaus. We went to DHS because we had reservations at 50s PTC and the Sci Fi Dine-in. The dining options at AK just weren't as appealing to us.

If you ask me, what DAK needs most is a dark ride or two. Toss in another e-ticket and some more dining and you've got a park that will be a full day for most everybody.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I think a big part of the "half day" complaint is that most of us here on the forums have been to DAK many times. If you're a first timer, you can spend the whole day wandering around and exploring easily. But once you've done that a few times, the appeal of wandering around wears off (for most people) unless there is something new to find.

I think the problem with DAK is that it isn't enough of a zoo to warrant endless repeat visits for the animals and garden atmosphere, as I do in my local zoo.

Nor enough of a theme park to warrant endless repeat visits for the attractions and atmosphere, as I do with the MK.

:shrug:


Still a fine park regardless.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Does anyone remember the fire that use to come out of the cave on the river that you could see from the bridge crossing over to Camp M/M? Was that originally something to do with BK??

Yeah, the Discovery River Boats were never given a chance to succeed. Rather than invest any actual money into the attraction they just tried to make it work with no budget. They could pour some money into the attraction by adding special effects and what not (including some of the originally intended mythical animal encoutners) and they would then have another high capacity attraction for the park.

That's a new one on me and I don't see it on the map.

Is is similar to the Jungle Trek and the Pangani Exploration Trail?http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/guides/animalkingdom/ak-africa-pangani.htm

The Cretaceous trail is a very basic and short trail with very little to offer.

For those of you that are putting together the breakdown of the park, it's highly variable. First and foremost, it doesn't seem like anyone is factoring in walking from attraction to attraction - the park is so spread out that you could easily spend 30-60 minutes of any given day walking between attractions.

Animal Kingdom is my favorite park, and Epcot is my least favorite. To the people that view Animal Kingdom as a glorified zoo, or simply don't bother with the animal exhibits, I often have a similar approach to World Showcase. However, I've aimed to curb that in recent years and realize some of the great offerings in World Showcase.

To me, Animal Kingdom and Epcot are actually very similar as parks. They aren't necessarily driven by rides, but rather the experience and the environment. I can spend 45-60 minutes in the Maharajah Jungle Trek or Pangani Forest, as well as a considerable amount of time in the Oasis Gardens, Tree of Life Exhibits and the Discovery Island trails. I don't go to Conservation Station/Rafiki's Planet Watch that often, but when I do, I'll probably spend 45 minutes back there as well. But I also recognize that to do all that, takes up several hours of my day and I still usually struggle to spend a full day in the park.

The great thing about Animal Kingdom is that while things are spread out, there are time consuming activities near the major Fastpass attractions so in theory you don't have to back track that much.

 

[IWant2GoNow]

I think a big part of the "half day" complaint is that most of us here on the forums have been to DAK many times. If you're a first timer, you can spend the whole day wandering around and exploring easily. But once you've done that a few times, the appeal of wandering around wears off (for most people) unless there is something new to find.

While I certainly enjoy soaking up the atmosphere at DAK, I can no longer spend a day doing it. I've seen the animal exhibits enough that I no longer linger. I find that most of the rides and shows don't have a lot repeatability for me.

I'd be very interested to see if the average casual tourist has the same issues with DAK that frequent Disney guests (or at least forum posters) seem to have.

I would be interested in that also. I, personally, am a once a year visitor at best. And I do know how to get around and what rides to hit in a pretty logical order but I could definitely see, if I was a local, where it would wear very thin very fast.

 

[Atomicmickey]

A couple of things:

"The Cretaceous trail is a very basic and short trail with very little to offer."

As an amateur paleontologist and artist--I have to say that the dinosaur sculptures on this trail are absolutely world-class jaw dropping. Worth ambling around there just to see them, if you're at all inclined. But, yeah, it's a minor area--just one that appeals to me personally.


And as a person who visits the parks once every two years at best, I find lots appealing about Animal Kingdom.

The park itself is the biggest attraction to me. I just like being there, and don't feel the need to rush off to the next E-Ticket--I love to linger, check out the plants and wildlife, and just lose myself in another world.

The theming in Africa and Asia is mind-blowing to me. I took a bunch of pics of Asia and sent them to a relative who has spent a lot of time in India and Nepal and Tibet--and they fooled him for a second into wondering if I'd actually gone there. Super cool.

Love Yak and Yeti. Love Tusker House.

And Festival of the Lion King is one of my very favorite things in the entirety of WDW.

So, like all of you, I wait patiently for some new attractions for AK that would really make it a HUGE experience, but until then, I find something to delight me every time I go!

 

[misterID]

OK I decided to do a little math to either prove or disprove the whole 1/2 day park thing. I had to assign a value to wait times for attractions and shows but they are far from out of the ordinary and IMHO a little on the light side. The ride and show lengths are from Disney by the numbers.

Rides
KS 22 minutes + 20 minute wait
E:E 3 minute ride time + 20 minute wait
Kali 4.5 minute ride time + 20 minute wait
Dinosaur 3.5 minute ride time + 20 minute wait
PW 2.5 minute ride time + 20 minute wait
Triceratops Spin 2 minute ride time + 20 wait

157.5 minutes for rides

Shows
FoW 25 minute show time
Finding Nemo 35 minute show time
FOYLK 28 minute show time
Jammin Jungle Parade 15 minute show time
ITTBAB 8 minutes
Wait times for shows 60 minutes total

171 minutes for shows

Lunch 30 minutes

That totals up to 358.5 minutes or right at 5.5 hours. AK is typically open from 9-5 (8 hours) leaving only 2.5 hours to visit Rafiki's Plant watch, Pangani forest trail, Maharaji Jungle Trek, Cretaceous trail, the Bone Yard, Dinoramma, Village Beatniks, Mor Tiham, and walking time from attraction to attraction.

Again, this is if you did everything. Most people won't. And they really shouldn't have to.

I'm sorry man, but again, this proves there just isn't a lot of variety in the park. If you miss one thing it seriously limits how long you spend in the park. I hate to break it to you guys but the casual tourist' idea of a good time isn't staring at statues or shrubbery. They can do that in a park or museum...or visit a zoo.

No one should pay Disney prices for a museum/park/zoo experience in a themepark.

 

[headhoncho34]

Disney World is in much bigger trouble than the company or its shareholders may want to recognize. And the problem isn't really Universal or Harry Potter. It is Disney themselves. The company has let Walt Disney World decline, become stale, and has failed to invest in keeping the parks vital.

While Disney made a calculated decision to ride out the economic slump by cutting costs and discounting, Universal used that time to their advantage by building the single best amusement park attraction ever (in the United States).

The signs are now obvious that if the Disney Company isn't in a state of creative decline, its Florida property certainly is. The new Fantasy Forrest expansion to Fantasyland is nothing more than a tiny bandage on a much larger problem.

The Magic Kingdom could use at least one MAJOR new E+ ride and several new family rides. It has far too many shuttered shops and restaurants. Epcot is in dire need of attractions in the World Showcase section of the park and some sort of cohesive theme in its Future World section. The Studios park is a total disaster, relying solely on Tower of Terror and the increasingly painful Rock'n Rollercoaster to pull in crowds. Only the Animal Kingdom has been showing progress, but even that park requires a major new land to help the park feel more like a full day experience.

Disney World is a money pit at the moment. Why? Because the company failed to invest as necessary as it went along. And now that Harry Potter has made Disney World's failures obvious to the average visitor, it will be difficult for Disney to recover quickly. Especially if its management team continues to block all major progress and push for clones and character meet-n-greets instead of spending the billions it will take to fix Disney World. The budget allocated to fix DCA is nothing compared to what it would take to put a suitable amount of dazzle and magic back into Walt Disney World.

Unfortunately, the new Fantasyland expansion will likely be a public relations backfire for Disney. Universal builds a MAJOR E+++ ride and land which is fun for the WHOLE family. Disney counter-strikes with a Fantasyland expansion targeted at 10 year old girls. Total misstep on Disney's part. I'm not saying that the Fantasyland expansion won't be lovely, but it certainly won't address the real problems at the resort. It is a cheap attempt to fix a problem which it doesn't even come close to addressing.

I feel terrible for the Imagineers who work so hard to present wonderful ideas which continue to get shot down by clueless theme park management. But one or two amazing new rides is NOT what Disney World needs at the moment. It needs a major comprehensive redevelopment plan on a massive scale. Everything from resort transportation, entertainment zones, theme park redevelopment, and staff member training should be included. And those in Orlando management who stand in the way should be very quickly swept aside. The next manager who cheerfully presents PowerPoint slides showing how much money was saved by incrementally cutting food portions or delaying maintenance should be thanked for their time and then fired. Disney World needs to refocus from an organization 100% focused on the bottom line into one which focuses instead on quality of show. It is one thing to overcharge for a product which is clearly better than what anyone else is capable of offering and quite another to overcharge for a product which it is increasingly difficult to justify its sliding level of quality.

Disney world has too many MBAs and not enough creative types. And that will ultimately be its undoing, not Universal and their AMAZING, inventive, and star quality Harry Potter land.

Disney World CAN be fixed, but it will take far more effort than I fear its management or the Disney Company is willing and able to provide.

Where is the Oriental Land Company when you need them?

 

[unkadug]

...Disney world has too many MBAs and not enough creative types...

Disney World CAN be fixed, but it will take far more effort than I fear its management or the Disney Company is willing and able to provide. ...

You make some good points, but don't discount the depths of their pockets.

Just get rid of some of those MBA's and you'll see a "world" of difference.

 

[Tigerace81]

Not to start a argument but, what your asserting is Disney should pay over 2 Billion est on all the parks? Sorry but thats what ruined Six Flags and will plague SF seen as they emerge from chapter 11. Plus they just dont have the money to really do much.

 

[unkadug]

Not to start a argument but, what your asserting is Disney should pay over 2 Billion est on all the parks? Sorry but thats what ruined Six Flags and will plague SF seen as they emerge from chapter 11. Plus they just dont have the money to really do much.

Who asserted? Where did that figure come from?

 

[Tigerace81]

Who asserted? Where did that figure come from?

Hes asserting Disney needs to spend billions in the parks across the board.

 

[cheezbat]

It's sad how TDO runs things down here. WDW is just the moneymake now. Not the innovater. "Let's charge more money here than any other theme park on the face of the earth." "We don't need to add anything new for 7 years and we won't see any financial decline."
The guys totally have that type of mentality. We all read about it. We see the cheaper attractions added...the cloned attractions. WDW is far from the innovative theme park giant it was.

As for Animal Kingdom? I visit when the park opens at 9am, and leave normally around 3. Last time I was there was May 25th...kids were out of school, the crowds were there, I brought my best friend who had never been, and we did everything but Festival of the Lion King. When did we leave? We got to the park just before 10 am and even with the busy crowds and doing everything, left just before 4 pm.

More attractions are a must here. While AK is a pretty park, it surely doesn't have enough to merit the prices people pay for a 1 day ticket. At least two more big attractions, another zoo-style attraction, and maybe a few smaller attractions or shows and this park would be set.

 

[lebeau]

It's sad how TDO runs things down here. WDW is just the moneymake now. Not the innovater. "Let's charge more money here than any other theme park on the face of the earth." "We don't need to add anything new for 7 years and we won't see any financial decline."
The guys totally have that type of mentality. We all read about it. We see the cheaper attractions added...the cloned attractions. WDW is far from the innovative theme park giant it was.

I understand why this attitude upsets fans here on the forums. I find it sad too from a fan perspective.

But when I put on my business hat, TDO isn't necessarily wrong. If the demand for WDW is elastic enough to support it, they should charge higher prices. If they can raise the price and NOT see a decline in attendance, it would be irresponsible for them not to do so. Their duty is to maximize the value to the shareholders.

As it stands, it seems like Disney can charge whatever they want without making any major investments and people will still come and pay whatever price Disney is asking. If you can get away with that, it makes sense (at least in the short run) to do it.

Where I think Disney might be shooting themselves in the foot is in the long run. The people who are flooding their parks no matter the price are doing so becuase they have an emotional attachment to the "idea" of Disney World. It's why Universal (great as it is) can't truly compete. They're just not Disney.

But, in the long run, if Disney continues to let WDW "decline by degrees" (to borrow from Kevin Yee) that emotional attachment will slowly fade away. And if Universal continues to up their game, future generations may start feeling all warm and fuzzy about them.

Back in the day, Disney totally dominated the animated feature market. If anyone else made an animated feature, Disney would crush it by opening a new feature or even re-releasing an old one at the same time. There was a time when I never thought another studio would ever be able to gain a foothold on animated features.

But then Disney got greedy. They released all their classics on video. So those re-releases didn't play any more. And they started flooding the market with direct-to-video sequels. The Disney brand which used to stand for quality slowly started losing its meaning.

It used to be that families went to see a Disney animated feature at the theaters and waited for everything else on video. Now (with the exception of Pixar which has established its own brand identity) the opposite is true.

For now, Disney can get away with its current practices. And I figure this will continue for the foreseeable future until Disney's bottom line is impacted. The question is, when that happens will it already be too late?

 

[lebeau]

Disney World is in much bigger trouble than the company or its shareholders may want to recognize. And the problem isn't really Universal or Harry Potter. It is Disney themselves. The company has let Walt Disney World decline, become stale, and has failed to invest in keeping the parks vital.

While I agree with a lot of the things you are saying (see rant above) I think you're looking at things a little too much from the perspective of the fan.

Disney World is a money pit at the moment.

I think you're mis-using the term "money pit" here. WDW is a cash cow. It would be a money pit if they were sinking money into it (which they are not) and not getting any return on their investment (which they are even though they are making minimal investments).

And now that Harry Potter has made Disney World's failures obvious to the average visitor, it will be difficult for Disney to recover quickly.

The "average" visitor may not even know the distiniction between Universal and Disney. It will take more than Potter to make a dent on the average tourist. But it's a step in the right direction for them.

The budget allocated to fix DCA is nothing compared to what it would take to put a suitable amount of dazzle and magic back into Walt Disney World.

Disagree. DCA is in a sorry state. WDW just needs a little TLC.

Unfortunately, the new Fantasyland expansion will likely be a public relations backfire for Disney. Universal builds a MAJOR E+++ ride and land which is fun for the WHOLE family. Disney counter-strikes with a Fantasyland expansion targeted at 10 year old girls. Total misstep on Disney's part.

Totally and completely disagree with you here. The average tourist will not associate the FLE with WWoHP at all. They won't see it as an answer to Potter (which is good because it isn't). They don't think about those kinds of things.

The response to the FLE may end up being underwhelming. But it won't backfire.

I'm not saying that the Fantasyland expansion won't be lovely, but it certainly won't address the real problems at the resort. It is a cheap attempt to fix a problem which it doesn't even come close to addressing.

Disagree again. It is a very cost effective solution to some of MK's nagging problems; capacity and lack of dining chief among them. Also, Disney has a huge population (princess fans) that is not being served very well at the parks these days. FLE will help meet the demand for princess experiences.

It's not meant to "fix" the resort. It's a modest project that will keep MK from having to turn away visitors (or as many visitors) on its busiest days.

But one or two amazing new rides is NOT what Disney World needs at the moment. It needs a major comprehensive redevelopment plan on a massive scale. Everything from resort transportation, entertainment zones, theme park redevelopment, and staff member training should be included. And those in Orlando management who stand in the way should be very quickly swept aside.

This would be a terrible business decision. Anyone suggesting such a thing would (rightly) be laughed out of a meeting. Why do you think this is *needed* when WDW is the most visited tourist spot in the world?

Sure, all those things would be great if money grew on trees. But Disney is a business. There's no need to totally revamp something that is working.

However, Disney may be working on something that comes close to what you're talking about. Let's not forget all that secrecy surrounding the "Next Gen" project. It will supposedly change the way WDW guests experience their vacation (whatever that means). If so, I stand corrected.

The next manager who cheerfully presents PowerPoint slides showing how much money was saved by incrementally cutting food portions or delaying maintenance should be thanked for their time and then fired.

Why? If they really made the company more profitable, why should they be fired?

Disney World needs to refocus from an organization 100% focused on the bottom line into one which focuses instead on quality of show.

Disney World is not 100% focused on the bottom line. Be fair. They also focus on quality of show.

But of course they have their eye constantly on the bottom line. They would be fired if they didn't.

It is one thing to overcharge for a product which is clearly better than what anyone else is capable of offering and quite another to overcharge for a product which it is increasingly difficult to justify its sliding level of quality.

The day you no longer feel the product justifies the cost, stop going. It's the only way Disney will ever change.

 

[kapeman]

A couple of things:

"The Cretaceous trail is a very basic and short trail with very little to offer."

As an amateur paleontologist and artist--I have to say that the dinosaur sculptures on this trail are absolutely world-class jaw dropping. Worth ambling around there just to see them, if you're at all inclined. But, yeah, it's a minor area--just one that appeals to me personally.

I assume it is in Dino land, but it is not on any of the maps.

Our family loves the Jungle Trek and I think we would like this as well since my 5yo is obsessed with dinosaurs.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

As it stands, it seems like Disney can charge whatever they want without making any major investments and people will still come and pay whatever price Disney is asking. If you can get away with that, it makes sense (at least in the short run) to do it.

But if they can "charge whatever they want" why do they offer free dining or 35%-40% off hotel room rates? As of now it's a discount strategy to keep attendance figures up and not a re-investment in the parks. How long will that last? If it's until some major new attractions open than it could still be for a few more years because I doubt Star Tours 2 or the Fantasyland expansion will be able to convince tourists to come to WDW on their own and it will take time to build other attractions.

If the current pricing strategy is a response to the economy going down, will people accept regular prices when it peaks again even with new attractions?

I also agree with your comments on Disney animation.

 

[lebeau]

But if they can "charge whatever they want" why do they offer free dining or 35%-40% off hotel room rates? As of now it's a discount strategy to keep attendance figures up and not a re-investment in the parks. How long will that last? If it's until some major new attractions open than it could still be for a few more years because I doubt Star Tours 2 or the Fantasyland expansion will be able to convince tourists to come to WDW on their own and it will take time to build other attractions.

If the current pricing strategy is a response to the economy going down, will people accept regular prices when it peaks again even with new attractions?

I also agree with your comments on Disney animation.

I think the discounts started as a way for Disney to kill the off season. There are still slow months, but nothing like the off season that used to exist.

The discounts turned into a year-long stratefy with the downturn in the economy. Disney had empty rooms and restaurants to fill. But it's still charging a premium price on the surface.

I agree that I don't expect this strategy to change any time soon. And as long as it has lasted, I think people have come to expect discounts. So if Disney isn't careful about weening the public off discounts, it could see a major hit to the bottom line.

I'll be interested to see how they handle it. It's going to take some fancy footwork.