Originally Posted By MikeHunt My goodness gracious do menu planners/marketing teams really need to do this? On the Disney webpage Animal Kingdom's official attractions include: African elephants Disney Animals Gorillas Lions Rhinos Tamarins Tigers ......among the 28. This is "double dipping" and padding the attraction count in overt fashion. Look, if you want gorrilas as an official single attraction then please don't list Pangani Forest Trail as another attraction, easy as that. Hello "red faces"!
Originally Posted By MikeHunt Instead of doing a red face marketing pad job why not advertise like this: Pangani Forest Trail, featuring lions and gorillas That way it is listed as a bona fide single attraction but let's everyone know that it is a deluxe attraction
Originally Posted By FerretAfros DAK has always had issues defining attractions, since they really don't fit the typical mold. The park map has the attractions listed as we would think of them, but also shows icons for where animal exhibits can be found (of course, the key for the icons is on a separate piece of paper that you have to be clever enough to pick up). I think that's the best solution, at least for in-park information. Online, it's a little trickier. They need a way to let guests know that the trails are more than just a quick walkthrough, but also not set the expectations too high, since they're not on the same level as the safari. The MyMagic+ system has made them add some "attractions" to their lists that would have previously fallen under a difference category (like meet & greets with FP+), while many theater-based attractions seem to get demoted because they don't offer FP+ because it isn't necessary. At times, it seems really arbitrary which things count for what There are some more heinous acts of padding the attraction rosters of parks, like HKDL's opening day roster that featured such classic attractions as City Hall, or WDW's Studio's Academy of Television Arts and Sciences Hall of Fame Plaza (AKA, a dozen bronze busts of has-been actors, one of only 8 "attractions" in the park!)
Originally Posted By MikeHunt This is even more egregious than the "City Hall" debacle. This is a clear case of "double dipping" to make the park look more desirable. This is a flat out lie whereas the Hong Kong city hall thing is just plainly pathetic and desperate.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Well "Mr. Vulgar Name for Female Genitals", do you really think people are so stupid that they think "Gorillas" is some kind of E-ticket attraction? Disney isn't trying to pad an attraction count, just letting people know what can be found there. P.S. Saying that name was rather amusing in Jr. High School. Not so much now.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I guess, but it's really no different than counting each of the Main Street Vehicles or each railroad station as a separate attraction (which all the DL-style parks do). I see it as a way of highlighting some of the more popular animals, while also showcasing the park's offerings in general. If you click on any of the animal pages, it says where they can be found, and has a wealth of information about the animals and the work Disney is doing with them (for instance, the Migratory Birds page is about twice as long as the Expedition Everest page, which even includes FP+ info and a warning about it being scary) For what it's worth, they also list all of the Oasis exhibits as one attraction, and don't even mention things like permanent meet & greets (which count in other parks), so I think it all balances out in the big picture I think they just need to reorganize the DAK homepage a little better. The animals should be in the first or second spot, since they really are the focus of the park. If you go there expecting to ride a bunch of rides it will be disappointing, but if you go there expecting an exploratory zoo-like experience it's a lot of fun. They also shouldn't call them "Disney Animals" since that sounds like Tigger, Dumbo, and Bambi; these are real animals and trying to apply Disney branding just looks dumb (As a side note, I saw that the sharks and sea turtles in Epcot also count as "Disney Animals" but apparently not the manatees or ever-crowd-pleasing dolphins. Go figure)
Originally Posted By MikeHunt Ok you are not understanding. This is not about the quality of the attraction per se. It is about double counting. Pangani is listed as a single attraction Gorillas is listed as a single attraction Gorillas is a part(subset) of Pangani already. Thus double counting.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Ok you are not understanding.<< I understand, I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Although Disney tries their darndest to convince us that DAK is "Nahtazu", the park still relies heavily on the zoo concept. As I pointed out, Disney has done this before with the Main Street Vehicles (which are honestly more for atmosphere than an actual ride) and each of the stations on the Railroad. Interestingly, DAK's Wilderness Express only counts once, but Rafiki's Planet Watch counts separately This also isn't unique to Disney. How many times has Universal Hollywood made a big splashy summer marketing campaign about their new "ride" (advertised as such) that was really only a portion of the classic tram tour? At least when Disney reintroduced zebras (after they were removed shortly after the park opened because they didn't play well with others) to the safari a year or two ago, the only publicity was a quick Blog post that was easy to miss entirely
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder I'm betting the idiot who is using this screen name is also the same jerk who is the Wirecoathanger person. Not funny and needs to go.
Originally Posted By danyoung >do you really think people are so stupid that they think "Gorillas" is some kind of E-ticket attraction? Disney isn't trying to pad an attraction count, just letting people know what can be found there.< Well, regardless how inappropriate his screen name is, I'm gonna have to agree with Mike on this one. The way the animals are listed on the Disney website, it looks like there's an attraction called Rhinos, another called Lions, another called African Elephants, etc. It seems like a pretty big cheat, trying to make it look like there's more there than there is. And it's not at all necessary.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<The way the animals are listed on the Disney website, it looks like there's an attraction called Rhinos, another called Lions, another called African Elephants, etc.>> You're kidding right? I would never in a million years think they were stand-alone attractions. If they WERE an attraction they would never have such a simple name. It would be something like "Gorillas: Expedition to the Heart of Africa".
Originally Posted By MikeHunt And now you are missing the point Road trip. The point is not necessarily how smart or stupid OR informed or uninformed the guest is(and for what it's worth let's not forget not all guests are as seasoned as those who would be on a Disney message board) The point is Disney's red faced attempt. Whether you knew or did not know about the stand alone status is completely irrelevant to my point of this thread. I'm just saying that Disney is intentionally misleading by double counting the attractions. Also, even if it is "industry standard" (like Kong and the tram at universal) it doesn't make it right.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I reviewed the website to make sure I wasn't missing something. I still feel the same way as I did before; it is not padding. There are at least several hundred different species of animals at the AK, and they only list five of them as "Disney Animals". They are the ones that many visitors would be most interested in and would want to be able to find without a huge amount of searching. Many people feel that by taking the Safari they will see all the animals they are looking for. That is not true... of the five animals listed you will only see two of them on the Safari, the rhinos and the lions. I think it is a good thing for Disney to give additional information on where to find the animals most people look for. I don't think Disney is trying to deceive anyone. AK is what it is. For those only interested in "rides", it is a half-day park. For those who find the many animal exhibits fascinating... I've spent two consecutive days at the AK and left feeling I still hadn't seen it all.
Originally Posted By MikeHunt Fine, but why list those "important" animals under the attractions list as if they are just like every other independent attraction when clearly they are not. This is a mislabel. The better approach is to either A)advertise the gorillas, lions and tigers ect. On the webpage but not put them under the attraction list or B) eliminate pang forest and jungle treck as titled attractions. Fair is fair. Pick one or the other but you don't get it both ways.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo <Also, even if it is "industry standard" (like Kong and the tram at universal) it doesn't make it right.> Let's boycott! I'll start working on the website to spread the word. Disney should not be allowed to get away with such egregious dishonesty.
Originally Posted By MikeHunt The silly thing is that Animal Kingdom boasts of a legitimately stellar lineup already and using trickery and deceit on the unwitting guest only debases itself. Such a shame, really.
Originally Posted By danyoung >You're kidding right? I would never in a million years think they were stand-alone attractions.< You and I know what's there, so we can see listings like these and know what they are. Someone who's never been there sees something on the Attractions list called Elephants and might be led to think that it was a stand alone attraction. That's why I think it's uncool that they are listed that way.
