Originally Posted By mousermerf Like the importance of building Flamingo Crossing? Even the most pixie-dusted amoung us has to admit that's one of many missteps.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Like the importance of building Flamingo Crossing? >> Is anything actually being built at this point?
Originally Posted By mousermerf Well, they just finished the roads/landscaping and amid the empty parcels is a billboard advertising retail, restaurant, hotel, and timeshare space available. Lovely that they paid all that money to put in those roads, sewage, landscaping, etc...
Originally Posted By Manfried I think that World Showcase needs some new creative leadership and business leadership combined that can go out and get some interest from some countries around the world. Some good ones I would like to see added would be: Russia South Africa Australia Egypt Greece India
Originally Posted By mousermerf And why was the apparent cash cow that was the UAE completely ignored? They're not even trying.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo >>>Having the infrastructure doesn't mean the crowds will show up. The Magic Kingdom will always be the top draw. EPCOT will always be second fiddle. There's nothing you can add to EPCOT that will dramatically change the attendance trends. There may be gradual ups and downs, but unless overall attendance to WDW increases EPCOT will remain a park with extra capacity.<<< We definately are the exception. EPCOT and DAK are the only reasons to go to WDW IMHO. Last trip, we spent 1.5 days at the MK, but 2.5 days at DAK and a portion of 6 days at EPCOT.
Originally Posted By FenwayGirl Agree with you Dave. Epcot is our #1 part of WDW...even our little ones love it! DAK runs a close second.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Hence why Epcot is the only WDW park to have its own annual pass. But the cosmic consensus that "MK 1, Epcot 2 grunt grunt" keeps the powers that be from thinking about all the missed opportunity.
Originally Posted By danyoung >...Flamingo Crossing? Even the most pixie-dusted amoung us has to admit that's one of many missteps.< Umm, ahem..... I actually think it's not a bad idea, if implemented correctly. Think of how many people stay off property and eat off property solely to save money. If there was a complex of motels and eateries still on Disney property, much cheaper than Disney hotels but still benefitting from some theming, I'd think that would inspire quite a few people to stay there. The only problem was with the timing. And Disney was caught flat footed just like the rest of the world by the economic slowdown.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Same thing happened in Paris in 1992 Dan, sadly it has cost ever since. WDW got lucky. I do wonder how well the Four Seasons development will fare?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Umm, ahem..... I actually think it's not a bad idea, if implemented correctly. Think of how many people stay off property and eat off property solely to save money. >> Not only that. How many people do all this off property stuff over on I-Drive -- the doorstep of Universal and Sea World? Flamingo Crossing is a deliberate attempt to get tourists out of the shadow of other attractions on the east side of WDW. Of course, I'd rather see new attractions at the parks, but when it comes to getting a return on investment Flamingo Crossings probably wins in spreadsheet-land.
Originally Posted By mousermerf Detour: Jim McPhee, now VP of all things new and wonderful, was previously supervisor of World Showcase Attractions. Perhaps things will change?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Spreadsheet-land did so well for DCA didn't it? >> DL isn't bankrupt, is it? Quite honestly, I think DCA probably fares better in spreadsheet-land than any other view of how that park might be judged. I'm not a huge fan of DCA, but I also recognize that an investment that was much larger in scope probably would have spelled complete disaster for the whole Disney parks organization when attendance fell off of the cliff post-9/11. That's from purely a spreadsheet perspective, of course.
Originally Posted By danyoung >Flamingo Crossing is a deliberate attempt to get tourists out of the shadow of other attractions on the east side of WDW.< Absolutely. And from Disney's point of view, that's a very attractive reason. > I'd rather see new attractions at the parks...< So would I!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I don't know that the addition of another country would significantly improve the Showcase over what it is right now. I love the themeing of the Showcase, but basically you’d be talking about adding a few more shops and a restaurant. Big deal. I'm sure having countries staffed by CM from that country is both a logistical problem and a major expense. I just don't see anyone doing it who is not currently there. I think Disney is doing a good job just keeping the countries it has. I like Epcot just fine the way it is. Send the dollars over to the MK.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I don't know if will ever see another pavilion added to World Showcase on the level of what is there now. So, I would dial back what is asked of the next guy. Instead of an entire pavilion, maybe they add a recognizable landmark from a new country and get a limited sponsorship...concentrating on those things that might be able to be turned into E-tickets. I could have seen Everest or the Matterhorn towering at the back of World Showcase. To an existing pavilion I could see adding a scaled down replica of the London Eye or reving the idea of Mt Fuji. I like World Showcase for what it is but I fully understand I'm in the minority.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I don't know if will ever see another pavilion added to World Showcase on the level of what is there now.>> I seriously doubt there will ever be another pavilion. <<Instead of an entire pavilion, maybe they add a recognizable landmark from a new country>> Any attraction (not a shop or restaurant) would be a big plus.
