地產博客 > 敢說亮話 返回
瀏覽人次:20033    回應:12
敢說亮話

茶餐廳亂話(622)香港應該放棄海洋公園

 

湯文亮博士

紀惠集團行政總裁
2020年1月25日

  今早跑完步去到茶餐廳,老闆與佢阿媽閒談。老闆話香港政府都要使超過100億裝修海洋公園,茶餐廳亦應該裝修。老闆大娘唔同意,佢話成班官都是洗腳唔抹腳的人,唔係自己錢點使都可以,茶餐廳是自己生意,裝修都要講回報。他們爭持不下,於是問我意見。今次大鑊,我剛剛收了老闆大娘大利是,一定要企在大娘一邊,於是我問老闆會不會裝修茶餐廳後轉型,佢話唔會,咁就夠了。如果唔轉型,裝修之後又唔加得幾多價,甚至唔可以加價。現在潮流興懷舊,裝修後反而會少了一班熟客。所以,我叫老闆今次不如聽大娘話,老闆話我唔叫佢都會聽。

  不單止老闆,香港政府亦要聽大娘話,就算畀100億裝修海洋公園,裝修後人流是否會大幅增加,我相信提出的人都不夠膽保證。其實,香港已經有迪士尼,海洋公園已經是多餘。土地不足是海洋公園先天性缺憾,就算裝修到天花龍鳳都唔會解決,而且由於港珠澳大橋通車,横琴長隆的吸引力比海洋公園大得多。只有兩個方法解決,一是將海洋公園門票大幅降價,變成一個優閒公園,又可以搞下婚宴,做下展覽。或者決斷一些,將整個海洋公園拆卸重建,變成一個地產項目,最少可以解決明年千億財赤。不過,官員不但不夠膽做,連講都唔夠膽講。

 
 
我要回應
我的稱呼
回應 / 意見
驗証文字
 
回應 / 留言規則
  1. 禁止撰寫粗言穢語、誹謗、渲染色情暴力或人身攻擊的言論;
  2. 禁止以名稱/暱稱/綽號/同音字等批評或映射任何人士、機構、公司;
  3. 禁止發佈有關招聘、推銷、廣告等內容;
  4. 禁止公開任何個人資料(如電話號碼、電郵地址、即時通訊帳號等)。

敬請留言者自律。本網站保留刪除/堵截任何留言的權利。

會員登入
登入ID 或 網名
密碼
1. 龍虎豹 2020-01-25 09:39:39
將海洋公園大幅降價變成荔園,都有賣點。
2. 引刀一快 2020-01-25 10:38:16
如果海洋公園加一個世界巨型淡水魚展館,我保證會有3億遊客專程去睇。
3. 真真薯片 2020-01-25 11:45:38
如果海洋公園要錢,又有信心洗完錢後可以改善生意賺得返,佢應該去問銀行借,最多正苦幫佢傾低息,而唔係做申手大將軍

問正苦攞100億,超高薪養住裡面班隻手遮天既高層,仲要蝕到抽筋,有冇摘錯?
4. 浪子心聲 2020-01-25 16:13:34
湯博士新年快樂!!

百分百認同「香港已經有迪士尼,海洋公園已經是多餘的」,還有博士建議的兩個方案(1)將海洋公園變成一個優閒公園,或(2)將整個海洋公園拆卸重建,變成一個地產項目,都是極之有見地的方向,希望政府考慮考慮 。


5. 引刀一快 2020-01-25 17:42:37
如果香港連海洋公園都保唔住,大陸人就會開始睇唔起香港,然後,香港嘅附加值就會一路衰減。
6. 浪子心聲 2020-01-25 18:20:53
刀兄新年快樂:

我個人認為,如果香港政府在處理「海洋公園問題」上表現得「有智慧、有遠見,有決心」,才能讓人家看得起。

現在香港政府建議用一百億救海洋公園,不但大陸睇唔起香港,連香港人都睇唔起自己啦!!
7. 十一哥 2020-01-25 19:25:03
冇諗過救得番…衹係茍延殘喘、等班高層/圍內承建…有細藝…揾多幾年咁解。

初衷…話到明係遊樂..使完又再撥多一百幾十億玩落去…

8. Small Potato 2020-01-25 22:23:56
祝博士及各位讀者:
🎊新年快樂,身體健康🎊

博士好波!希望班高官,睇到博士呢篇文章啦,將呢幅地改做地產項目好過啦,100億條數吾細,用黎起公屋或用係醫療到仲有意義啦
9. 引刀一快 2020-01-26 00:01:10
浪子心聲兄

如果香港連一個自主嘅大型展覽遊樂場都冇,咁香港真係乜都冇,只能做“金融中心”。
拆佢用嚟起樓,我保證大陸同胞笑到肚攣,長隆喺一個大灣區裡面都可以有兩個遊樂場,香港就維持一個都維持唔到。
本來盛智文搞得有聲有色,忽然被炒,今日嘅困局,唔關海洋公園事。
另外,我想講,就算剷平海洋公園嚟起樓,起出嚟嘅樓價都唔會大眾化,亦唔會一次過起十萬單位嚟隊冧港樓樓價,最終,損失嘅係60's以後嘅兩三代香港人,無得又何以償失?
10. Mike Rowse 2020-01-26 12:52:47

Ocean Park’s glory days are behind it – use the site for housing, and invest in Hong Kong Disneyland instead

26 January 2020
  • Between dwindling attendances and fierce regional competition, Ocean Park is struggling. Better to use the 91.5-hectare site to meet a pressing need – housing
  • If money is to be used for theme park development, spend it on expanding Hong Kong Disneyland

Ocean Park occupies a site of 91.5 hectares compared to Tai Koo Shing’s 21.5 hectares. That means we could have three housing developments of a comparable size, providing 40,000 decent apartments and still have 30 hectares left over for green space. Photo: Martin Chan

When my two eldest children were very young, some 40 years ago, we bought annual passes to Ocean Park for the whole family and visited often. It was far and away the best option for a family day out at that time. As the first commissioner for tourism (1999-2000), I visited again to show support and acquaint myself with plans for future development.

The negotiations with the Walt Disney Company, which l was involved in and which led to the agreement to build Hong Kong Disneyland, were ongoing at the time. There was concern in some quarters that a new internationally branded theme park would call into question the existing park’s future viability.

The social disturbances of the past few months haveand the 2019 figure will probably drop below 5 million. But the important point here is that the decline in business began well before the recent troubles led to a sharp drop in the number of mainland visitors.

In return, the park would completely revamp the facility and aim to drive attendance up to 7.5 million by 2027-28. Perhaps unsurprisingly, reception to the request (“give us another HK$10 billion and we’ll try to get back to where we were a decade ago”) was less than enthusiastic.

Recently I visited Ocean Park again. It was a very pleasant day out, not very crowded, hence little queuing, and I particularly enjoyed the dolphin show, as did all the other attendees. I note from thethis is one of the attractions due to disappear in the redevelopment scheme.

Opinion Newsletter

Get updates direct to your inbox

By registering, you agree to our T&C and Privacy Policy
In the decades since Ocean Park opened, development on the mainland side of the boundary has proceeded at pace.next to Macau, now has several theme parks and entertainment zones of high standard, with more under construction. One is called Water World, which I have also visited and which would seem to be a direct competitor to the future water activity area in Ocean Park, now under construction.

I think as a community we now need to face the sad fact that Ocean Park’s glory days are probably behind it, and it is unlikely ever again to attract the vast numbers of mainland visitors that it did in the past, given the competition.

Which leads us to two important questions: is there anything else we could do with the land; and is there anything else we could do with HK$10 billion?

The answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Ocean Park occupies a site of 91.5 hectares compared to Tai Koo Shing’s 21.5 hectares. That means we could have three housing developments of a comparable size, providing 40,000 decent apartments and still have 30 hectares left over for green space.

That could include a slimmed-down facility focused on marine life and the pandas, perhaps run by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department. Increased frequency of trains on the South Island Line plus a spur to the new ocean-side housing mean we have a ready-made contribution to addressing Hong Kong’s criminal shortage of housing.

Which leads us to the second question, where I think the answer is also affirmative. We have one facility here that no other city or province in South China can boast, and that is a world-"" data-pf_style_display="block" data-pf_style_visibility="visible" data-pf_rect_width="702.2584838867188" data-pf_rect_height="170" orig-style="null" style="box-sizing: border-box; box-shadow: none !important;">

Here’s an idea: why not reopen talks with the Walt Disney Company, put our HK$10 billion on the table, and challenge them to do the same. With HK$20 billion, we could accelerate provision of new themed areas to complete the first park and even make a start on the second one on theacross the road.

That would be a resounding vote of confidence in Hong Kong’s future as a tourist destination, both by the government here and by the world’s leading entertainment company.

Some might say I am biased in favour of Disney, bearing in mind my role in the original negotiations and my lifelong nickname of Mickey Mouse. But what could be more appropriate as we come into the new year of the Chinese zodiac, in our house known as the Year of the Mouse.

All we need to do now is find a government with courage and strategic vision. That really would be a magical day.

Mike Rowse is the CEO of Treloar Enterprises

Mike Rowse

Mike Rowse has lived in Hong Kong since 1972, and is a naturalised Chinese citizen. He spent six years in the ICAC from 1974 to 1980, then 28 years in the government as an administrative officer until retirement in December 2008. He is now the search director for Stanton Chase International, and also hosts a radio talk show and writes regularly for both English and Chinese media.

11. 講都唔夠膽講 2020-01-26 14:29:11
創新意念由孔主席提出最好,例如打造華人永遠界規模最大嘅凌灰閣,可以解決未來十年財赤,孔主席可以做永遠主席,獲得永遠大紫宮勳章。
12. 引刀一快 2020-01-26 19:08:03
海洋公園得唔得,睇人啫,論潛力,絕對勝過迪士尼,因為迪士尼本來就係一個主題公園,所有發展局限於細路主題,海洋公園就自由得多,攞香港人嘅錢投資俾人地賺,提出呢個建議嘅人唔該計條數嚟睇下。
香港得番一間大型遊樂場,咁即係唐老鴨做獨市,你一拆咗海洋公園,佢就揸住你春袋,要乜你都要俾,唔係大陸同胞嚟到冇嘢玩,旅客人數大降。