Question 2: To what degree do you consider that these factors were (a) foreseeable and (b) controllable by either Euro Disney or the parent company, Disney?
Answer:
I believe that these factors could have been foreseeable, my personal feeling is when Euro Disney was established the considerations maybe been taken into account… however I feel that they worked in the arrogant nature of the American thinking. In this I mean, they expected the Europeans to act as Americans and thrive over this newly designed theme park. I feel that they forgot that they were producing a massive theme park bigger than any other theme park in Europe for the American mentality. They may have calculated the exchange rate, and did not calculate the European culture. They could have foreseen the problems I described in question 1 but they did not foresee the European mentality/culture. However Disney did an exceptional job controlling the errors in their ways. Merely a year later they understood the problem at hand and controlled the situation and turned the loss in to profits.
Question 3: What role does Ethnocentrism play in the story of Euro Disney’s launch?
Answer:
Ethnocentrism played roles on both sides of the story. Batting for Team Disney, ethnocentrism batted a 4 for 4 with 2 homeruns in developing a theme park based around American culture, with American food, American characters, and gave the appearance “We were arrogant… We’re building the Taj Mahal and people will come… on our terms” The American mentality of business. This ethnocentrism clashed with a fury against the Europeans view of ethnocentrism. Europeans have different lifestyles, including that they have wine with their meals, which shocked the French when Disney banned alcohol in their parks. The French along with the rest of Europe didn’t really care about the American characters. Overall ethnocentrism was a huge problem in the start up of Euro Disney, which was worked out eventually.
Question 4: How do you assess the cross-cultural marketing skills of Disney?
Answer:
Poor! They didn’t have skills in cross-cultural marketing. They put an American theme park in the middle of Europe with American mentality, American food and did not heed to the cultural values of Europeans. However with the new CEO in 1993 the park understood their problem and made the changes. They then started their new marketing plan, which included the skills of cross-culture. They started selling breakfast, which the Europeans eat every morning. Here is where cross-culture comes in to play. The Europeans came to breakfast and ordered food, American food. They started to include French and European favorites like Zorro and Mary Poppins. Their advertising campaign included famous European characters with the magic kingdom. With in a year they took off sales boosted.
Question 5:
- Why did success in Tokyo predispose Disney management to be too optimistic in their expectations of success in France? Discuss.
The people of Japan love this kind of stuff. They adore Disney characters; they loved the scale of the American idea, the large theme parks. Also Japanese visit California, in short they have been to Disneyland. Tokyo did not have many places like Disneyland; they embraced the idea and took hold of it. The Japanese also did not care about the American nature of the park, they went to enjoy it and have fun.
- Do you think the new theme park would have encountered the same problems if a location in Spain had been selected? Discuss.
I feel that they would have run in to a whole slew of new problems. If they had chosen Spain, the factor of Isolation would be hard to over come. It would make it hard for the rest of Europe to get to Euro Disney in Spain. New cultural issues would arise, as well as the same problems of ethnocentrism. The attraction that Paris had brought many people to Disney, now we are talking about being in the middle of Spain, out of the way for many people, in a area that does not bring as much attraction as Paris does. So yes I feel that they would have encountered some of the same problems, but also would bring up a few new ones.
Question 6
Where should they go next?
My opinion would be to put one up in Australia near Sydney or Melbourne, my reason for this is simple, Australia is a closed off country that allows tourist to come in. Putting up a small Disney there would allow those people who live in Australia to go.
Another location would be in the northern area of the USA, maybe outside Chicago or Toledo, Ohio. This will allow those who live in the north as well as Canada to experience the Disney theme parks.
South America
If it were my choice, I would choose the northern part of the USA or Canada. This will allow Disney to bring a new market of people that feel that it is too far to drive to get to the two other locations of Disney in America. This will bring in people from Chicago, Canada as well as the middle class people who can’t afford the cost of travel and lodging.
Question 7: Given your choice of Local X for the newest Disneyland, what are the operational implications of the history of Euro Disney for the new park?
Answer:
Since my choice is to include Disneyland X in the north, it would depend on whether it was built in the States or in Canada. Other than local law the operational implications would follow the standards of the other 2 Disney parks in the States given the mentality and cross-cultural values of the Canadians and the north. The park will include the same mentality of the Euro Disney, in that it will respect and tend toward the market they are trying to target. Ice Disney will follow the same goals to include all the cultural values and expectations of its target market.