JungleSkip
V.I.P. Member
If the wolf coaster indeed has a swing launch segment, it will be much longer, I'd imagine.I wonder how the length of this compares to the Werewolf coaster at Epic?
If the wolf coaster indeed has a swing launch segment, it will be much longer, I'd imagine.I wonder how the length of this compares to the Werewolf coaster at Epic?
I wonder how the length of this compares to the Werewolf coaster at Epic?
Hasn't the (speculative but informed) consensus been that it's going to be a little over a minute?If the wolf coaster indeed has a swing launch segment, it will be much longer, I'd imagine.
True, but it's never done well. The hoped for mainland Chinese never showed up to visit, even before Shanghai was built. The park was placed to capitalize on the huge tourist industry between Hong Kong and the casinos in adjacent territories. But the political situation has caused a near complete collapse of tourism. It's doubtful that a vibrant tourist industry will return in the near future. And, as you basically said, Shanghai, a more complete park, will continue to get the bulk of mainland Chinese visitors. This park is kind of doomed to ever get more than the numbers IOA got before Potter. It's going to be tough to ever make any real profits there. Fortunate for Disney, they only minority share the ownership with Hong Kong investors.I don’t think opening a ginormous park in mainland China has done this park any favors. Particularly after a relatively lackluster opening.
This is more or less what I was going to say. Dating back to the mid 2010s there have been huge obstacles thrown at the park - crackdowns on short-term visas from the mainland to curb parallel trading, the 2019 protests, Covid… these all had as big or bigger impact as the 2001/2008 recessions had on WDW. It’s also just not in a very good location - the Macau bridge should have helped but that opened right at the start of the things listed above.True, but it's never done well. The hoped for mainland Chinese never showed up to visit, even before Shanghai was built. The park was placed to capitalize on the huge tourist industry between Hong Kong and the casinos in adjacent territories. But the political situation has caused a near complete collapse of tourism. It's doubtful that a vibrant tourist industry will return in the near future. And, as you basically said, Shanghai, a more complete park, will continue to get the bulk of mainland Chinese visitors. This park is kind of doomed to ever get more than the numbers IOA got before Potter. It's going to be tough to ever make any real profits there. Fortunate for Disney, they only minority share the ownership with Hong Kong investors.
Problem is you can use facts to prove anything.If I were Disney, I'd start auditing the analytics departments to figure out who is creating the reports that support decision-making in this company. If the decisions are made by the CEO without any support, the board should relieve him of his duties. Too many decision have gone sideways lately across multiple business units under the Disney umbrella.
This is more or less what I was going to say. Dating back to the mid 2010s there have been huge obstacles thrown at the park - crackdowns on short-term visas from the mainland to curb parallel trading, the 2019 protests, Covid… these all had as big or bigger impact as the 2001/2008 recessions had on WDW. It’s also just not in a very good location - the Macau bridge should have helped but that opened right at the start of the things listed above.
Problem is you can use facts to prove anything.
This timeline is substantially better than if they had built the fully-designed HK second gate that would be opening about now. I suspect that part of the reason they’re not too bothered about pulling the plug on things like Harmonious and Starcruiser is because the actual use of that money (some misses mixed in with the hits) is substantially better than what could have happened - having a second park that’s less useful than the Covid quarantine city that was built on the land instead.