NYT: China Approves Disney Theme Park in Shanghai (More info)

I know there's some Disney fans here. Thought some folks would be interested.

Link

LOS ANGELES — After a courtship of about 20 years, the Walt Disney Company has won approval from the central government of China to build a Disneyland-style theme park in Shanghai, Robert A. Iger, Disney’s chief executive, said Tuesday.

The agreement for a Shanghai Disneyland is a landmark deal that carries enormous cultural and financial implications. Analysts estimate the initial park — not including hotels and resort infrastructure — will cost $3.5 billion, making it one of the largest-ever foreign investments in China.

The initial resort, with a mix of shopping areas, hotels and a Magic Kingdom-style theme park, will sprawl across 1,000 acres of the city’s Pudong district — with the theme park occupying about 100 of those acres. It would be a little bigger than Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif., and on par with the parks in Paris and Tokyo. It is expected to open in five or six years.

Disney’s plans are ambitious: If further development of the resort happens as expected over the coming decades — still a big if — it will encompass more than 1,700 acres and have a capacity rivaling Disney World in Florida, which attracts about 45 million annual visitors.

I've been to the one in Hong Kong, surprisingly there were no crowds but the park is very small compare to the one in Orlando. Even the rides seem small.

There's one ride for adults and that's space mountain, but my niece(5) and nephew(7) seem to love it.

Wow. I was just in China this time last month and would definitely go back to see this!

What did the French call Euro Disney? A cultural Chernobyl? and Mickey a Rat simbol of American Imperialism?

Can it be that Red China is less threatenned by incorporation of an American Icon than France was?

What did the French call Euro Disney? A cultural Chernobyl? and Mickey a Rat simbol of American Imperialism?

Can it be that Red China is less threatenned by incorporation of an American Icon than France was?

Yeah...the Chinese seem like some of the last people that would want Mickey Mouse walking around with their children taking photographs. Talk about a weird clash of cultures.

Also:

Q: How do you confuse a French soldier?

A: Give him a rifle and ask him to fire it.

France sucks. They sure did love Mickey Mouse and the Americans in 1944 didn't they?

Wow. And thus demonstrating that virtually any thread in Tailgate will turn into bashing someone completely unrelated to the topic.

As to the actual topic, I could see a park potentially creating some real synergy for Disney. I know it's a long way from guaranteed, but if, 10-20 years from now, 10 Billion Chinese grandmothers are buying Mickey Mouse dolls (which will likely be made in Afghanistan, by then) for their grandkids, then that could be a wonderful (and profitable) thing.

Wow. And thus demonstrating that virtually any thread in Tailgate will turn into bashing someone completely unrelated to the topic.

Sticking with the bashing theme, and contributing general trivia on all things I otherwise can't comment on.

Remember when North Korea's Kim Jong's son and grandson got caught using a false passport entering Japan to visit Japan's Disney World.

The Japanese thew them in the klink and when they said they were actually N. Koreans there to visit Disney, Japan went to China because they had no diplimatic ties with N. Korea. China said it wasn't Kim Jong's son. Then came back the next day and said, uhmmmmm, it's him... To which Japan released the guy into china's custody quietly.

Moral of the story, They love Disney in the far east. Even Communists.

Can't post a link because it's from my eTrade account, and I think you have to be a subscriber to go there. But

SHANGHAI (Dow Jones)--The Shanghai Municipal Government will own 57% of the Disney theme park to be built in Shanghai, the People's Daily reported Thursday, citing unnamed sources.

Walt Disney Co. (DIS) will own the remaining 43% stake, it said.

Now, I've read this before, that the only parks that Disney wholely owns are the two in the US. (I think I read that they own 33% of Paris, and 45% of Hong Kong.)

Frankly, this is puzzling to me. I have trouble understanding why Disney would ever even remotely consider permitting the Disney name (which, frankly, is their company's most valuable asset, by far) on something which is as high profile as a Disney theme park, which Disney didn't own 100% of. Never mind something that they don't even have a majority of.

The damage that could be done to the Disney reputation if the place does a bad job is staggering, to me.

Only reason I could imagine them allowing it is if it's a situation where the local government won't permit anything "foreign owned", and demands that they use some local token.

And if that's the case, then I'd be even more nervous. I'd be worried that the government would decide to just kick me out. Or that the park would do a crummy job, I'd attempt to "pull their franchise", and the government would refuse.

(Although I have to admit that I have trouble figuring out how any company could spend Big Bucks in China, and not be worried that the Chinese government, 5 years from now, will simply announce that they've decided that the HP factory is now People's Factory Number 72, and you don't own it any more.)

I know, I'm paranoid when it comes to the idea of a major business located in a Communist country.

Now, I've read this before, that the only parks that Disney wholely owns are the two in the US. (I think I read that they own 33% of Paris, and 45% of Hong Kong.)

Frankly, this is puzzling to me. I have trouble understanding why Disney would ever even remotely consider permitting the Disney name (which, frankly, is their company's most valuable asset, by far) on something which is as high profile as a Disney theme park, which Disney didn't own 100% of. Never mind something that they don't even have a majority of.

Some Thoughts.

1. Disney still provides all the chochkey and merchandise to the stores so Disney still take significant profit out of those parks beyond just the ticketting fees.
   
2. Disney likely still maintains quality control over the parks, which is something they do exceptionally well.
   
3. Disney really isn't primarily a theme park company anylonger. They're a media company. Them parks represents a smaller and smaller percentage of their bottom line. (my guess).
   

Some Thoughts.

1. Disney still provides all the chochkey and merchandise to the stores so Disney still take significant profit out of those parks beyond just the ticketting fees.
   
2. Disney likely still maintains quality control over the parks, which is something they do exceptionally well.
   
3. Disney really isn't primarily a theme park company anylonger. They're a media company. Them parks represents a smaller and smaller percentage of their bottom line. (my guess).
   

According to the financial statements I've read lately, theme parks account for 30% of the company's profits. (TV networks account for 45%, but that's all of their networks: ABC, ESPN, Disney, and Lifetime.)

(I was surprised at how tiny a fraction of their revenues comes from merchandising. I don't remember the percentage, but it's single digits.)

But my wondering is based on my perception that except for the money from ABC and ESPN, pretty much everything else the company does is based merely on the goodwill that the Disney name has spent 50 years accumulating.

IMO, that name is worth a heck of a lot.

Heck, let somebody on ES start a thread on "I'm going to Disney", and see how quickly it gets two pages of people posting about how great their Disney trip was, 5 or 10 or 20 years ago.

That kind of "advertising", people who were your customers 20 years ago who still talk about how great their experience was, is worth a LOT of money.

(And the reverse is true, too. People remember bad experiences a lot longer than good ones. The reason Disney has such good customer goodwill is by not allowing any bad ones.)

And to me, the goodwill that the Disney name has accumulated, is almost exclusively due to how well they've treated people in their parks.

IMO, when you mention the word "Disney" to people, what they think of is either the Walt, himself, on the old Wonderful World of Disney TV show, (If they're an old fart like me), or a Disney park.

Edit:

Still, my Disney stock certainly is enjoying this news. I guess a lot of people who are a lot richer than me don't have my concerns.

some of the Disney brand has gotten some damage in just my subjective view after I've hard how crappily they treat their interns/entry level workers... but granted they treat them like crap because there are thousands of people willing to be abused by Disney simply because they love Disney so much.