Originally Posted By sjhym333 I love EPCOT. It is my favorite park. In fact when I just need to get away from things for awhile I will usually turn off my phone and head to EPCOT for a few hours. Part of it is just the amazing scope that the park had when it opened and also because as a child I grew up in NYC and our family lived at the NY Worlds Fair which prompted my love of Disney attractions. My question for discussion is this: Did EPCOT effectively kill Worlds Fairs in the United States? The last USA Worlds Fair was in 1984 in New Orleans and there hasn't been one here since. So it got me wondering that because EPCOT is sort of a fair in design, did it kill the US of having a fair ever again? Discuss
Originally Posted By leobloom I wouldn't say WDW killed off the Worlds Fair concept. If you think about it, the Worlds Fair parts of Epcot have died off over time. Future World isn't very much like a Worlds Fair these days, and World Showcase probably wouldn't receive much attention if it wasn't for its alcohol and overpriced restaurants. People these days just expect different kinds of entertainment than what they got with Worlds Fairs.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 True, though they are still happening around the world and the US is still participating in them.
Originally Posted By hopemax I lived near the Canadian border in WA State during Expo 86 in Vancouver. And it was a VERY big deal. Not only was there lots of interest because it was so close, there was a lot of nostalgia for Seattle's WF in 1962 and to a much lesser extent the 1974 fair in Spokane. I think mostly the world just changed. Companies no longer needed to showcase their products in a world's fair environment in a country with 1000 television channels and then later the Internet. Marketing strategies changed. You can reach many more Americans, much more effectively. Which I think has bled over to Disney as well. Who wants to sponsor an Epcot pavilion or an attraction? Also, we've changed in that we don't want our tax dollars used for these types of projects - Olympics, sports stadiums, etc. We think it's a waste of money for such a short time or to service a select few people. And even with private donations, we'll still throw a fit about construction ruining everything and properties sitting vacant when it's all over. And I'm not quite sure how to eloquently explain this, but when the Gordon Gecko "Greed is Good" lifestyle filtered down through all levels of our society to the point where everything is "Me First" or "I've got mine" I don't think people are very receptive to the ideas of "cultural exchanges" and grand ideas of technological innovation leading to the betterment of all the people of the world. Too close to socialism. Doesn't fit with our kill or be killed social Darwinism way of living. So no, Epcot didn't kill WF's in the US.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 Great points. I agree that many companies have no desire to put the money into pavillions at either Disney or Worlds Fairs when they can do much more with their dollars in other formats Which poses an interesting question. Is the reason we are seeing growth in Disney parks in the ways that we are due to the fact that Disney cannot line up sponsors willing to throw down millions of dollars? So Disney is slower to build new E-Ticket type attractions?
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: I just can't believe that Uncle Walt would EVER create a park that had the ability to murder ANYTHING else!!!
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I agree that part of the change is just a cultural change away from that sort of advertising. Disney's parks have significantly fewer corporate sponsors than they did 15 years ago, and significantly fewer than 30+ years ago Another huge factor is the relative ease of travel these days. It's not too much more difficult to book a trip from the east coast of the US to a World's Fair on the west coast, as compared to booking a trip to Europe. Yes, there are a few more hurdles, but the costs are eerily close when you're considering visiting just for a replica of the original And as an interesting note, I'm definitely a member of the generation that grew up without World's Fairs in the US. I was able to be a performer at the 2010 Shanghai World Expo with other people in the same age range, and I heard more than a few comments that the Expo was just like a "temporary Epcot". I don't think that Epcot edged out these events in the US, but it's definitely a cultural frame of reference for a certain generation
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Which poses an interesting question. Is the reason we are seeing growth in Disney parks in the ways that we are due to the fact that Disney cannot line up sponsors willing to throw down millions of dollars? So Disney is slower to build new E-Ticket type attractions? << I don't know, does Universal use that excuse? I don't think the lack of sponsorship has anything to do with it. Sponsorships got you Mission: Space, the SSE "upgrade," Lights Motors Action, etc. The problem is with Disney management and their creative structure.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I would partially disagree. I think having a sponsor pushes Disney to build or upgrade attractions since they don't have to foot the majority of the bill. Having said that though, I think most corporations no longer see the value of being connected to a Disney theme park attraction.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh "I'm not quite sure how to eloquently explain this, but when the Gordon Gecko "Greed is Good" lifestyle filtered down through all levels of our society to the point where everything is "Me First" or "I've got mine" I don't think people are very receptive to the ideas of "cultural exchanges" and grand ideas of technological innovation leading to the betterment of all the people of the world. Too close to socialism." I don't think there is an eloquent way to express that kind of thinking. It isn't that there is a problem with things being too close to socialism; it's that socialism is too close to crony capitalism, misery, and mass deaths. Socialism is robbing the middle class to line the pockets of the politically connected and keeping the poor dependent upon their "benefactors".
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost The big reason is that a Worlds Fair is hugely expensive to put on. Forget about the land usage and pavilion building, the infrastructure of the surrounding area is a real head shaker. Montreal held Expo 67 and basically went bankrupt doing it. They even had to build an island in the middle of the St. Lawrence. There was one there already but it had to be massively expanded. Private enterprise entered the scene and built a lot of hotels but accessibility from there to the Fair Grounds was at the expense of the city of Montreal. They had to build bridges across the St. Lawrence, rebuild others to handle the traffic, built a subway under the St. Lawrence for access, paved and widened streets and so on. They had to acquire and build massive parking lots on the East side of the St. Lawrence. The 1976 summer Olympics were held there in the hopes that since they already had the transportation and housing in place, they might as well try and see if they could recoup some of the expenses from 9 years earlier. I don't think that they ever did. I love Worlds Fairs but I have only been able to attend two of them. Expo67 of course, I happened to be in Japan in 1970 when they had their Worlds Fair in Ozaka. I don't even know if or when or where they are being held now. I never hear about them ever. In other words, I don't think that Epcot killed the Worlds Fair, in fact the scope of Epcot isn't anywhere near the spectacular extravaganza that a Worlds Fair is. It's just a hint of one. Basically, in today's world, Worlds Fairs actually killed themselves off, due to massive costs and low return on investment.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 Though there was one in 2012. And ones planned for 2015, 2017 and 2020. I agree that the cost of building a fair is probably too expensive for any city and state in the current political climate and budget. I have been to NYC Flushing Meadows recently and I keep thinking that there were two fairs there (39 and 64) and it would be great to see another, but no one would put the money up for it I am afraid
Originally Posted By leobloom >> would partially disagree. I think having a sponsor pushes Disney to build or upgrade attractions since they don't have to foot the majority of the bill. Having said that though, I think most corporations no longer see the value of being connected to a Disney theme park attraction. << Then how do you explain the less-than-stellar attractions that have sponsorships?
Originally Posted By sjhym333 There are a lot of reason I think there are less than stellar attractions. But I would point to the Spaceship Earth redo and to a lesser extent the Test Track redo as places where we got makeovers because of a sponsors involvement. I think the less then stellar part comes from partners who are willing to put forth a limited budget for a project. Isn't the reality for participants at EPCOT Innoventions? New attractions at a fairly cheap price with a pretty tight target message. Then you could also look at Wonders of Life which sits empty because Disney has no interest in redoing it and there seems to be no sponsor willing to pour tens of millions of dollars into it. The same could be said about World Showcase that sits just the same as it did since 1988 when Norway opened. Is that because World Showcase is full? No. It is because there isn't a country or a foreign company willing to foot the bill for a new WS Pavillion.
Originally Posted By dizneed << The big reason is that a Worlds Fair is hugely expensive to put on. Forget about the land usage and pavilion building, the infrastructure of the surrounding area is a real head shaker. Montreal held Expo 67 and basically went bankrupt doing it. They even had to build an island in the middle of the St. Lawrence. There was one there already but it had to be massively expanded. Private enterprise entered the scene and built a lot of hotels but accessibility from there to the Fair Grounds was at the expense of the city of Montreal. They had to build bridges across the St. Lawrence, rebuild others to handle the traffic, built a subway under the St. Lawrence for access, paved and widened streets and so on. They had to acquire and build massive parking lots on the East side of the St. Lawrence. The 1976 summer Olympics were held there in the hopes that since they already had the transportation and housing in place, they might as well try and see if they could recoup some of the expenses from 9 years earlier. I don't think that they ever did. >> Expo 67 was a great expense agreed, but it was glorious and put Montreal on the International map. The ’76 Olympics solidified Montreal’s International stature, but came at a huge cost! The whole Olympic ordeal ended up costing ten times the original amount with construction companies holding the city hostage for more money knowing that the city would have to pay because of the deadline, even though the deadlines still weren’t met! The needless purchases of brand new construction equipment among other materials that were kept by the construction companies or sold to any high cash bidder, I can go on but I think we all understand how it works…. Nothing was recouped 9 years later! In fact, it was the exact opposite, the city had to borrow money from Provincial and Federal governments. It’s still costing us a hundred million dollars a year to maintain to this day!! All of this to say that any major event can cost a huge amount of money and resources, natural or otherwise, not only in its construction but also in the ongoing costs of maintaining it. But Montreal remains an absolutely beautiful city. Back on topic, I believe that a combination of all media such as TV, smart phones, LED mobile and stationary bill boards, website pop-ups (which are a pain IMO), social, newspapers (paper or electronic), etc., along with monetary and logistics costs, have basically evolved to a point that Fairs and such are now just part of what once used to be.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I agree. Even the popular 64/65 NY Worlds Fair ended up losing money with the NY Worlds Fair not having enough money at the end of the fair to do everything that Robert Moses promised in terms of building Flushing Meadows park out. The city was also given several building from the fair as part of the parks. There was really no plan for the buildings and the city had no money to keep the buildings up. Today the NY State Pavillion (MIB towers) and the two museums in the park are the remaining buildings (though the NY State Pavillion is closed and in terrible decay). The US Pavillion and the Aquacade buildings were eventually torn down. We used to have a guy who posted on this board all the time Erik Paddon I think was his name. He is a big Disney/Worlds Fair scholar and he could probably talk a lot more about this if he is still around. Very very knowledgeble. While I agree with most of what is being said here, I still have a feeling that the building of EPCOT (as well as other reasons stated) contributed to the collapse of US Worlds Fairs. When you have many of the major corporations with permanent multi-million dollar attractions at EPCOT, what would be the point of building something somewhere else in the US. EPCOT has had a large built in audience since it opened and I think most companies see no real reason to do anything more.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost sjhym333 I see what you are saying but hugely disagree. Epcot has nothing compared to a well run Worlds Fair. The whole complex of Epcot would have fit on one island in Montreal. People who love Worlds Fairs, to my knowledge, consider Epcot a Theme park with almost no comparative countries represented. Sort of the Mini-me of Fairs, if that much. No, Epcot had nothing at all to do with the end of Worlds Fair popularity and magnitude. They still exist, but in far off places, as far as we are concerned. But spectacular they were/are! There is hardly anything about WDW/Epcot that is currently spectacular.
Originally Posted By sjhym333 I guess I am speaking about the original EPCOT Center of the early 1980's which was more Worlds Fair then it is today. Where technology and entertainment met. I have been thinking of doing a long post about the early years of EPCOT Center. It was a very different park many years ago and had a very different vibe.
Originally Posted By dizneed Indeed it was different. EPCOT then and now are not even comparable. While we were evolving through all of these years, EPCOT Center took a break and has now fallen behind in both the times, and our expectations. That being said, I still LOVE that darn park!!
