ATTRACTIONS
The Bewilderwood forest adven- ture park in Norfolk (right) is “winning hearts and awards”
first National Lottery launched in the UK in 1994. By the end of the dec- ade, the Lottery had raised around £7bn for good causes, a large propor- tion of which fuelled the UK heritage attraction industry. The thin permeable membrane between commercial attrac- tions and museums became even thinner while commercial attraction operators such as Merlin and Heritage Projects could do nothing to stop the tidal wave of public funds flowing into competing attraction developments; despite cries of foul play. I recall Merlin CEO Nick Varney and I questioning publicly how Tesco or ASDA shareholders would have reacted to a government plan to set up free supermarkets in every city. Yet the commercial attractions sec- tor then comprised of lone voices with no lobbying power. Lottery-funded attractions from the Eden Project to the International Centre for Life got funding and opened, often in direct competition with the commercial attractions on their doorstep.
HIGH PROFILE FAILURES At the point when money, knowledge and expertise should have come together in the perfect project, the industry created the perfect storm – the Millennium Dome. Indeed, what we learnt from the 1990s was that big budgets alone were not a guarantee of commercial success. Projects had to have a heart. Post-Dome, more multi-million pound Millennium- and
Lottery-funded mistakes ensued; the National Centre for Popular Music, BIG, The Earth Centre. We all knew that list off by heart by the mid noughties. During that period, many consultants, suppliers and advisors sold their souls to the devil by not raising concerns for the future viability of these high cost projects. Who’ll confess now to have taken the silver dollar rather than question whether these projects would work? Big budgets allowed extravagant investment in technology; with hands-on interactives, immersive theatres, special effects and devices of all kinds, but there was little thought for long-term running costs or replacement. Such high investment in public-funded attractions drove higher and higher spending in competing theme parks as the next ride had to be bigger and more thrilling to keep the market coming back for more. Yet true gems shone through with relatively low-cost projects such as Bewilderwood winning hearts and awards, while innovative projects such as the
42 Read Leisure Management online
leisuremanagement.co.uk/digital
“A good story well told is still the most important basis for an attraction. Even at its most innovative and costly, technology is only there to serve the storytelling process”
London Eye created new market demand and delivered a great return to guests and investors. I returned to Disney’s Magic Kingdom recently to revisit Pirates of the Caribbean before visiting Universal’s The Wizarding World of Harry Potter and those truisms were evi- dent. A good story well told is still the most important basis for an attraction. The story has to be real and relevant to its location for it to appeal. We know that technology, even at its most innovative and costly, is only there to serve the sto- rytelling process. We have learnt too that visitors truly love interaction with great staff and we have given that inter- action a name -– guest service – and placed it ahead of making money in our priority list. We are also confident that in through a pre-show, followed by the main show and out through the gift shop is the experience guests love most. Decades apart, these two attractions reconfirm the fun- damental principles of our industry. We are in the enviable business of making memories and when we do it well, those memories last a lifetime and even change lives. What a great industry to be in. Bring on the next 30 years. l
ISSUE 1 2011 © cybertrek 2011
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76