From a young age, people learn to think of things in factors of five. For whatever reason, teaching is easier through the “5, 10, 15, 20…” method. Perhaps it’s this aspect of our nature that causes so many people to think of Walt Disney World in such terms. Why would anyone stop at four parks when five is so much easier to wrap your head around?
The problem with this line of thinking is that it puts your entire perspective of Walt Disney World in a state of limbo. After all, Disney hasn’t added a new park in Orlando since 1998. That’s 17 years and counting. To put this into perspective, consider that Epcot, Hollywood Studios, and Animal Kingdom all opened during a 16-year span from 1982 to 1998.
Image: Disney
For all the speculation about the fifth park, Disney keeps unveiling new ways to expand the parks that actually do exist. Animal Kingdom is famously receiving an Avatarland expansion at some point over the next few years after an interminable wait since its announcement in 2011. During the summer of 2015, Disney finally confirmed the long-standing rumor that Star Wars and Pixar expansions are in the works for Hollywood Studios.
That’s a lot of enhancements for the two less popular parks at Walt Disney World. It’s not the news that people have anticipated since 1998, though. Everyone knows that Walt Disney covertly acquired over 43 square miles of land during the 1960s. Only a third of that space has been developed thus far. There’s still plenty of room for growth, and Disney owns so many intellectual properties that they could easily fill several more parks if they choose to spend the resources doing so.
With the Harry Potter license continuing to pay dividends at nearby Universal Studios, Disney does appear to recognize that they have to up their game in an increasingly competitive marketplace. Until they announce a new park, however, all that we can do are speculate on what might have been if any of the rumored fifth parks for Walt Disney World had been built. Here’s everything you need to know about four (apparently) mythical Disney theme parks in Orlando, why Disney considered building them, and how/why they chose to go a different way.
How Do Rumors Get Started?
Image: Disney
During the early days of the internet, a few people enjoyed strong relationships with Disney cast members, including Imagineers. Before the concept of the internet scoop was a part of the zeitgeist, some of these people would post details about impending Disney theme park projects. Their success ratio was intermittent at best, but that’s not a reflection of whether their information was correct. The Walt Disney Company oftentimes enters the discussion and even the planning stage for an idea before dismissing it as impractical. This is true even today, which is why one of the parks you’ll read about is no longer a standalone entity.
The point is that in the days before social media existed, internet readers took note of anyone who had viable connections to Disney employees. People who successfully projected future theme park plans garnered respect and credibility. One of these individuals was Jim Hill, who continues to proffer similar conjecture-based announcements about the future of Disney today.
Suffice to say that more than a decade of suggesting Disney projects has earned Hill some notoriety, but he’s also far from perfect with his predictions. In fact, many of the theme parks listed below are ones whose potential development he chronicled, oftentimes as the original source. With regards to the first park, however, a much larger publication started the rumors.
Disney’s first comments on the fifth gate
Image: Disney
In August of 1998, Disney’s Animal Kingdom was barely three months old. The Los Angeles Times, a newspaper that had chronicled Disney theme parks since day one and even a couple of years prior to that, investigated the company’s future plans. They acquired an important quote from someone who would know about Disney’s impending theme park plans.
During the majority of the 1990s, Judson Green, the then-president of Walt Disney Attractions, held a title equivalent to being leader of Walt Disney Parks and Resorts today. He determined the overall direction of Disney theme parks. When pressed for ideas about the proverbial fifth gate, i.e. the next Walt Disney World theme park, Green offered this thought-provoking response: “It’s really premature to talk about a fifth gate at Orlando. The fact of the matter is we are only beginning to think what that theme might be.”
In other words, as early as 1998, Disney already had a series of plans for its follow-up to Animal Kingdom. Almost 16 years later, there’s still no fifth park. One of the reasons for this is that then-CEO Michael Eisner famously experienced several setbacks in dealing with key Disney personnel at the upper levels of the company. Green himself left The Walt Disney Company in 2000. A 19-year veteran, his exit created additional headlines about the problematic direction of Disney during that era.
While Green did achieve his primary goal, setting the table for the expansion of Disney theme parks into China, even that park, Hong Kong Disneyland, wouldn’t open for another five years after his departure. All plans Green had for the fifth gate fell by the wayside after he left. Coincidentally or not, they leaked during the year that followed his exit.
The LEGO Move
Image: Lego
LEGOLAND Florida broke ground in 2010, and it debuted in 2011. A full decade before the park opened its gates for the first time, however, Jim Hill reported that it would take on a different form. At the time of the rumor in 2001, there were already three LEGOLAND parks in existence, with a fourth opening scheduled in Germany the following year.
Even though LEGO Global Family Attraction was dealing with a relatively new park in San Diego and an upcoming project in Günzburg, they jumped at the opportunity to discuss a joint venture with executives from The Walt Disney Company.
Hill chronicled high level meetings that transpired in Burbank, California, between two of the most powerful family-friendly companies in the world. LEGO, one of the strongest companies in Denmark, structured an ambitious plan for the growth of their company. One of the most daring involved building a park with the LEGO name as part of Walt Disney World.
Your first question is undoubtedly why Disney would like the idea. That’s easily explained. In 2001, the company was in the middle of tumult that eventually led to the resignation of Roy E. Disney, nephew of Walt Disney and son of Roy (Oliver) Disney. The two men built Disneyland and Walt Disney World, and the son of Roy represented the connection to the glory days of the park. By the turn of the millennium, Disney was feuding with CEO Michael Eisner, who was notoriously frugal. Roy E. Disney would never consider a Disney theme park that didn’t have the stamp of his family’s legacy on it.
Plastic is a cheap material. Who knew?
Image: Lego
Eisner was less concerned with the history of the Disney family. His focus was on the share price of the DIS stock and the net revenue of the company that impacted it. He loved the idea of a theme park that required little heavy lifting from Disney employees to bring to life. The cost of a LEGOLAND Park at Walt Disney World made too much financial sense not to explore, at least to someone who wasn’t attached to the Disney legacy.
The financial struggles of Animal Kingdom were the driving force behind Eisner’s thinking. The park failed to meet its pre-opening projections for attendance and revenue. And it missed by A LOT. After spending over $800 million to build the world’s coolest joint theme park/zoo, Disney’s Animal Kingdom suffered a great deal of negative publicity during its early days.
Also, people weren’t quite sure what to think of the historically unprecedented merger of concepts. A lot of potential customers waited to hear what the reviews were for Animal Kingdom. Since those evaluations were middling, park traffic disappointed Disney executives. Hill estimated that Disney would need to invest another $200 or $300 million in order to lure enough visitors to bring Animal Kingdom up to its initial projections. That would make the park an investment of over a billion dollars simply to match original expectations.
This situation explains why the plans that Disney was considering for a fifth gate as early as 1998 fell by the wayside. At the time, they simply didn’t have the money to spend on a new project while the most recent one struggled. LEGO presented them with a remarkable plan for park that would be cheap to build. LEGOLAND California had cost only $130 million to build, and Disney would be splitting the costs with a different company. Even at full price, however, the amount they’d need to invest to add a LEGOLAND gate to Walt Disney World would cost less than the investment they’d have to make to bring Animal Kingdom up to snuff.
Unfortunately, cheap to build means cheap overall…
Image: Lego
On paper, this plan looked great. LEGO and Disney are two of the most popular toy manufacturers in the world, LEGOLAND had proven itself popular in Europe, its California reception was better than expected, and they could build a new park for much cheaper through a joint venture. They were only a few problems. The most obvious one would be determining who was in charge. Eisner was a notorious control freak, and he wasn’t about to cede power at one of his company’s crown jewels to the leaders of a different company.
There was also the issue of cost. Even at a cheaper total than building a new park, Disney execs weren’t convinced that the new addition would add enough traffic to justify the public relations hit they’d take for allowing a non-Disney (but officially licensed) park on Disney grounds. LEGOLAND California claimed less than a quarter of the traffic of Animal Kingdom, the least successful of Disney’s four parks at the time. While two million annual guests is wonderful for a non-Disney theme park, that type of bump wasn’t enough to move the needle on Disney’s dial, even in 2001.
Perhaps the determining factor, however, was the decidedly low-tech design of LEGOLAND theme parks. Even Disney’s Imagineers would struggle to make such cheap set pieces seems worthy of the Disney park brand. They ultimately decided that working to improve what they had was better than introducing another potentially sub-standard park on the heels of the mediocrely received Animal Kingdom. In the process, they broke the hearts of many unknowing Duplo fans.
Aftermath
Image: Lego
For their part, LEGO remained adamant that they should continue to build their brand via theme parks. They’ve admirably done exactly this, expanding their park holdings to six with four more in the offing. They even found a spot to build their own park in Central Florida at the site formerly used by Cypress Gardens.
The good news for Disney was that they managed to redeem Animal Kingdom to the point that it has supplanted Hollywood Studios. The most recent Walt Disney World theme park claimed 10.4 million in attendance last year, making it the seventh most trafficked park in the world. Since its shaky start in 1998, attendance has increased by 1.8 million, an average of more than a hundred thousand guests annually. Re-investing in Animal Kingdom made perfect sense at the turn of the millennium, and it continues to do so, which is why Pandora: The World of Avatar is on its way in 2017 (or later).
Root for the bad guys
Image: Disney
For several years, there were three popular rumors about the fifth gate. The most prevalent of them is the one that makes the most sense. Since the introduction of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs into pop culture in 1937, NO ONE has created more memorable villains than The Walt Disney Company. I mean that in terms of quality and quantity. Beginning with the Evil Queen Grimhilde, we could spend the rest of this article describing memorable evil-doers and why they’ve stood the test of time in the memories of Disney fans. We’re obviously not going to do that, but let’s hit the high points.
No list would be complete without mentioning Maleficent, first introduced in 1959’s Sleeping Beauty, the character was brought into the realm of live action in 2014 when Angelina Jolie portrayed the titular lead. Captain Hook shows up in every Peter Pan movie, and he’s also quite popular on ABC’s Once Upon a Time. Gaston from Beauty and the Beast is more than just a hilariously egomaniacal foil for Belle. He’s also a viral video sensation. Cruella De Vil doesn’t just have devil in her name; she’s also the source of inspiration for one of the greatest Simpsons songs ever. Then, there’s Uncle Scar, who single-handedly sets back familial relationships among the kings of the jungle through his actions in The Lion King.
Finally, if we bring the concept up to date through a recent Disney purchase, think about Star Wars from the perspective of cult of personality. Luke Skywalker was never as popular among fans as Han Solo, the ne’er do well imprisoned by Jabba the Hutt due to poor relationship choices. His lack of team spirit is right there in the name, yet he eventually joins forces with the good guys to stop the Evil Empire. And no matter how popular Solo is, no matter how much debate he provokes about who shot first, Han Solo is nowhere near as established in the pop culture zeitgeist as Darth Vader.
The Dark Side has more than cookies…
Image: Disney
As much as anyone else here, Darth Vader exemplifies how people perceive villains. Walter White never becomes a cultural icon unless he develops the Heisenberg persona. Nobody cares about Dr. Jekyll until he devolves into Mr. Hyde. John McClane is an angry man in danger of becoming a weekend dad before Hans Gruber invades Nakotomi Plaza. And Batman is merely an uptight billionaire with anger management issues without the Joker cracking jokes while wreaking mayhem on the suckers still inexplicably living in Gotham.
In every realm of storytelling, villains differentiate and elevate heroes. Since Disney has the world’s greatest catalog of evil-doers, their rogues gallery represents a competitive advantage in the theme park industry. By monetizing the bad guys, they could theoretically double sales. Think about it from a different perspective. A product that appeals exclusively to women excludes 49 percent of the population while one catering to men is even worse; it excludes 51 percent of humanity.
The same rationale applies to merchandising sales, Disney’s bread and butter. Selling The Lion King toys without releasing a Scar brand is a mistake. They miss out on a key component of their revenue stream. We know this from Star Wars sales. A recent study of the revenue generated by each character determined that Darth Vader leads the pack. Disney figuratively leaves money on the table every time they ignore potential villain revenue.
Disney has recognized this for a long time now. Even before they owned the Star Wars license, they had their own data that suggested they should merchandise bad guys more often. The problem is that performing this action requires a fundamental change in behavior after more than half a century of sameness. They would have to do something bold to display their villains in the most buzz-worthy manner possible. The Walt Disney Company realized exactly what they needed, and it was a…
Dark Kingdom
Image: Disney
Rather than start marketing a wide variety of merchandise for villains seemingly out of nowhere, Disney came up with a great plan. They would build an entire park full of evil doers, and then they would capitalize on the word-of-mouth to launch an entirely new line of products. It was exactly the kind of visionary thinking predicated upon potential revenue increases that make Disney a Fortune 100 company in the first place.
Once they started evaluating the issue, however, a few holes popped up. Since literally the first day at Disneyland, children had struggled with the scarier elements of some rides. Initially, it was Snow White’s Scary Adventures that frightened children. They didn’t enjoy the too lifelike Evil Witch, which is to say that she absolutely terrified many kids. To a certain extent, that’s the idea of putting the bad guys on display for everyone. It’s supposed to add an extra burst of adrenaline and a bit of entropy to the experience.
A park featuring Disney’s rogues gallery could offer more thrill rides and more excitement than, say, the basic attractions at Magic Kingdom. They could also use the world’s most popular theme park as a basis for an antithetical location. If a Disney Princess would have her own castle as the central point of Magic Kingdom (Cinderella’s Castle) and Disneyland (Sleeping Beauty Castle), logic dictates that one of their enemies host a castle at Dark Kingdom.
Image: Disney
The plan was for Maleficent to lord over the villains as the hostess of Dark Castle, a sort of Mirror Universe concept. The park would offer twisted versions of established Disney attractions. If Ariel has an Under the Sea ride, it’s only fitting that Ursula offer a nefarious counterpart. Dark Kingdom plans included mountain peaks matching the famous ones at Magic Kingdom, albeit with a dark spin. Think of them as evil mountain ranges with Disney villain themes.
In the end, Disney couldn’t justify a new park with such a bold premise. They would have to risk too much for potentially little gain if the idea didn’t prove mainstream enough. Eventually, they rebooted the plan a bit as Shadowlands, an extension within Magic Kingdom that would include some of the same premises. It didn’t seem like a great fit with the kid-friendly themes of the rest of the park, though.
Alas, Disney chose to populate their theme parks with bad guys in a more general sense rather than build an entire park recently. The recent Mickey’s Not-So-Scary Halloween Party included a Hocus Pocus Villain Spectacular, a returning favorite from past years. Also, during May of 2014, the Memorial Day 24-hour celebration, Rock Your Disney Side, included a villainous pre-parade. Starting in January of 2016, Disney will even add the Club Villain experience at Hollywood Studios. At a hefty price of $99 per person, you can enjoy dinner and dancing with evildoers such as Cruella De Vil, Maleficent, the Queen of Hearts and Dr. Facilier. Clearly, this idea isn’t going away anytime soon, and I for one hope that Disney eventually brings Dark Kingdom to life.
Night Kingdom
Despite the similar titles, this park has no similarities to Dark Kingdom. The hook of the park is right there in the wording. It’s a nighttime facility. According to Jim Hill, who once again had a great rumor that proved incorrect, it would allow only 2,000 guests daily (well, nightly) similar to SeaWorld’s Discovery Cove.
Hill had this to say about the park in 2008: “And – yes – the Mouse is actually going to build this $520 million project. Current plans call for this niche park to officially throw open its doors in October of 2011, just in time for the start of Walt Disney World’s 40th anniversary celebration.”
I’m not looking to call Hill out for his prediction. I’m simply pointing out how likely this premise seemed several years ago prior to falling apart completely. You can already tell one negative about it. Magic Kingdom enjoyed 19,332,000 visits in 2014, an average of approximately 53,000 guests each day. A park allowing admittance to only 2,000 would mean that over 96 percent of all visiting guests at Walt Disney World would leave disappointed.
There’s also a financial issue. Hill reported that Night Kingdom would cost $520 million to build. That’s roughly $260,000 per daily guest. Even over the course of a decade, Disney would need a profit margin of $72 per guest simply to break even, and that’s before we include daily operating expenses. The numbers on this one never made any sense, which is why it was all the more surprising that Hill seemed so confident that the plan was moving forward.
In 2008, SeaWorld was garnering a lot of attention for Discovery Cove – this was several years before the release of Blackfish – but they have wholly different site traffic considerations than Disney does at Walt Disney World, far and away the most popular theme park in the world. It was obvious to anyone considering the project that the 2,000 daily limit would never work for several reasons. Why, then, was it even considered?
Velvet ropes at the fifth gate
Image: Disney
Night Kingdom would operate from 4 p.m. to midnight, and this “boutique park” rather than full theme park would provide guests with an unprecedented park experience. Disney intended to hire 4,000 cast members – yes, two for every one site visitor – to create a velvet rope type of atmosphere for their most exclusive park. Unprecedented features such as zip lines over crocodile dens, hand feeding of live animals, and even a penguin playdate were in play for this park.
Of course, all of these amazing features, ones Walt Disney couldn’t have imagined when he was building Disneyland, came with a hefty price tag that would give ordinary people extreme sticker shock. In a way, it was the forerunner to Disney’s current operating practices at parks. By catering to guests with expensive options, they could entice the One Percent to spend boatloads of money at a place where they wouldn’t have to interact with the standard Disney rabble. They would even enjoy a special Broadway type of show that would be the finest of any Disney theme park, rewarding the higher paying clientele.
Image: Disney
Night Kingdom was also a forerunner for an idea that WILL become real in coming years. One of the strongest selling points for the swanky park would be a nighttime safari similar to the Animal Kingdom Kilimanjaro Safaris experience. The difference is that all the nocturnal animals that sleep during the day would be on display after dark, something a regular Animal Kingdom guest could never experience at the time.
Of course, you probably know that Disney later added a nighttime safari for guests staying at Animal Kingdom Lodge. Entitled Sunset Kilimanjaro Safaris, it’ll eventually become available to everyone as the park moves away from a half-day experience. They’re also almost ready to add Rivers of Light, a nightly show with fitting nature themes.
In other words, the original concepts for Night Kingdom were largely grafted into Animal Kingdom improvements instead. Once again, Disney chose to improve the quality of their fourth gate rather than expand to a fifth one. Given what we’ve lost in the process in terms of opportunity cost, Avatarland and the nightly additions to Animal Kingdom had better be spectacular.
A theme park not so far, far away
Image: Disney
The most famous rumored fifth gate ties together several of the themes above. It’s an expansion that would be cheap to make, it would be a boutique park, and it would highlight an already discussed Disney villain. That park is obviously Star Wars Land, which you’ve assuredly heard is going to become a part of the massive update to Hollywood Studios.
During its original planning stage, however, Star Wars Land would stand on its own. The Disney acquisition of Star Wars from George Lucas in 2012 was an exciting development on several fronts. It meant that they could continue the movie franchise, of course, but it also gave Disney the keys to one of the best-selling merchandise machines that they didn’t already own. Star Wars instantly flipped from being the competition to standing as one of Disney’s linchpin intellectual properties.
The company spent months discussing the best ways to monetize the license, something they’re still doing today, and a theme park was a logical conclusion. After all, Star Tours has remained a consistent draw since its Disneyland debut in 1987. When they reinvented it with multiple branches in 2010, Star Tours – The Adventure Continues proved that the icy reception of the prequel movies had done little to besmirch the overall popularity of Star Wars as a franchise. And if Jar Jar Binks can’t destroy you, you’re invincible.
Like many Star Wars products before it, Star Wars Land would mercilessly punish its devoted fanbase by charging them to live out their dream. The idea was of a Jedi Training School, not to be confused with the children’s show they run at Hollywood Studios. For a measly $200, a person could enter the park and feel like a new recruit learning the ways of The Force.
Image: Disney
Like Night Kingdom, Star Wars Land would remain open fewer hours than standard Walt Disney World parks. So, a price more than double the cost of Magic Kingdom would make even Comic Book Guy choke on his 100-taco meal. Even to single techies with tons of disposal income, the charge is outrageous. You have to REAAAAAAALY want to be a Jedi Master to pay that kind of price.
How did Disney intend to justify the cost? Have you ever heard of fantasy baseball camps? They’re the ones where people get to spend the weekend training with their favorite players. Star Wars Land as initially planned would work a lot like that. A customized menu of options would allow for heavy personalization. With technology advancing at a rapid rate, Disney intended to give people the type of Jedi Training they desire to make them feel like they really accomplished something by the time they left the park. In that regard, Star Wars Land would have represented a unique opportunity for some of the most loyal fans in the world to live out their dreams, albeit at a dazzling cost.
As you know, Disney eventually decided to go a different way with the concept. The Star Wars Land they’ve announced is a much more conventional theme park experience featuring new rides and character interactions, albeit ones people who visit during Star Wars Weekends already know. Don’t get me wrong. The presence of an actual Star Wars area at Hollywood Studios guarantees a crowd increase so significant that I can easily envision it overtaking Epcot to become the second most popular theme park at Walt Disney World. Keep in mind that it is currently last, 90,000 guests behind Animal Kingdom and over 1.1 million guests behind Epcot.
So, I’m projecting a massive spike in park traffic the instant Star Wars Land opens. It’s just unfortunate that something with so much promise got reduced rather than expanded. When Disney purchased the Star Wars license, nobody was hoping that they’d do just enough. People want Disney to shoot the moon on this particular franchise, and I’m dubious that the current iteration of the concept will satisfy guests.
Still waiting by that fifth gate…
Image: Universal
Here’s the amazing thought about Disney’s stagnation during the timeframe from 1998 until today. Islands of Adventure at Universal Studios is newer than any theme park at Walt Disney World. And it’s already experienced a major upgrade with The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Animal Kingdom won’t get one until Avatarland finally debuts in 2017 or 2018. This lack of progress explains why Disney is so focused on improving Hollywood Studios with Star Wars Land and Pixar Place expansions. Their current setup is remarkably dated relative to the historical progress of Disney theme parks as well as the development of others across the world. If you’re about to argue the point, consider that Animal Kingdom is only six years newer than Disneyland Paris a park that is notoriously run down by Disney standards.
Disney’s failure to build a fifth gate continues to frustrate customers to this day. Many observers expected them to finally announce a new park in 2015, but the company chose the boosting of a current Walt Disney World property instead. Will there be any new developments in 2016? If there are, nobody is saying anything yet.
In fact, Disney seems perfectly willing to improve what they have rather than expand beyond their current borders. Given their record-setting attendance in recent years, it’s hard to argue against this strategy, frustrating though it might be. Still, with so many popular intellectual properties and so much Orlando property, it’s undeniable that Disney will eventually open their fifth gate. The question is what form it will take and whether any of the ideas above are explored once more. Which of these concepts do you wish had come true? Do you have any other suggestions for potential Disney parks?
