| # | Author | Message |
11
| jmuboy
Thu 7/2/2009 9:51a | A Mystic Point station makes the most sense, its right in the middle. |
12
| leemac
Thu 7/2/2009 10:43a | <<I have read Leemac saying there is room for two more dark rides in Fantasyland... so that is 2 more e-tickets, and a few more c tickets, and then all the room for expansion is capped out.>>
Both flank buildings to the castle (Pooh and PhilharMagic) have room for another tenant each. Also the Buzz building has also been designed to be expandable. |
13
| leemac
Thu 7/2/2009 10:48a | <<I'm not as surprised that the Pirates expansion land/area didn't make it because it wouldn't have cost many times what these things likely would have ... I'd love to believe they'll make it later on down the road because you know Shanghai isn't opening sans Pirates.>>
Pirates Land had a number of different guises. However the largest version was massive and would have been significantly more than the plans in place for any of the three themed environments to be inserted. I still feel that it would have added a true "wow" factor to the park but ultimately it is about balancing out the menu and these plans do it even if I'm not happy with the locations - it is exceptionally poor master planning in my view. |
14
| Anatole69
Thu 7/2/2009 1:39p | ^^ You are not alone in that judgment.
I wonder how many voices inside the company think that the Toystory Land, as it is currently planned, also blows.
- Anatole |
15
| chrislow
Thu 7/2/2009 2:11p | If I were an executive for the Hong Kong company who negotiated with Disney on this deal, I'd be worried right now. They tout the "exclusive" deals that are part of this agreement intended help compete better against the future Shanghai park. But, sorry folks, there's not much power in the "exclusiveness" of that Toy Story Land. If I were negotiating the deal, I'd push for Midway Mania or Astro Blasters or both for that land AND ask for exclusivity as well.
This leaves open all kinds of neat things that will come to the Shanghai park first and further drive attendance problems in Hong Kong - things like Pirates, Little Mermaid, Tower of Terror, and Toy Story rides that already seem like a perfect fit for the land being built in Hong Kong.
Even though the two E-Tickets look awesome, this feels like short term planning intended to calm the current fears of lower than expected attendance. The real long term issue of a tiny park that was poorly planned from the start will continue after these new lands open - especially when Shanghai cuts its ribbon. |
16
| MPierce
Thu 7/2/2009 3:37p | I don't know why, but it kind of seems like this expansion is kind of disjointed, Maybe I'm not looking at it right.
I wonder if this is going to infuse any excitement into the present crowds in Hong Kong.
Reguardless of anything else, this should bring a beautiful park one step closer to becoming world class.
I'm just curious if Disney had to foot this bill to maintain their right to build in Shanghai? |
17
| Spirit of 74
Thu 7/2/2009 5:12p | <<Pirates Land had a number of different guises. However the largest version was massive and would have been significantly more than the plans in place for any of the three themed environments to be inserted. I still feel that it would have added a true "wow" factor to the park but ultimately it is about balancing out the menu and these plans do it even if I'm not happy with the locations - it is exceptionally poor master planning in my view.>>
I would have loved to have seen the massive Pirates 'land' expansion myself. But if it was the only thing, I could see how that might not be smart.
Still, it would have been nice and I believe they will add some version down the road.
As to the locations, many people have been talking about them.
I admit I haven't studied maps and the like, but why were the locations chosen? Weren't the expansion pads put in to begin with when they chopped so much from the plans?
Why are these locations bad and what does that mean for future expansion(s)? |
18
| SuperDry
Thu 7/2/2009 6:23p | <<< it is exceptionally poor master planning in my view. >>>
I've never been involved with theme park master planning, so I'm sure I don't see all of the issues to be considered, but one thing occurs to me:
Each of the new lands seem to be mostly built out into the space available, leaving little room for future expansion within each. Of course, there's the obvious area in the lower left of the concept map for an additional land or expansion of Grizzly Trail.
What else is bad about the design from a master planning point of view? |
19
| SuperDry
Thu 7/2/2009 6:30p | Although the concept map is drawn to scale, I just discovered that the Google Maps satellite view has recently been updated such that most of HKDLR is shown fairly recently (after construction of iasw) instead of the previous bulldozer stage that has been there for years (remnants of which can still be seen in the westernmost portion of the resort). So, you can look at the satellite picture and compare it to the concept map to see that they really are using all of the space between the railroad tracks and the southern berm of the park. You can also now see the size of the reclamation for the eventual 2nd gate: it's at least as big as HDKL and would appear to accommodate additional resort hotels as well (in addition to the 3rd one that can go between the current two). |
20
| SuperDry
Thu 7/2/2009 7:04p | <<< Each of the new lands seem to be mostly built out into the space available, leaving little room for future expansion within each. >>>
Actually, it looks like Toy Story land has room for an anchor E-ticket to be added at some point. |
