With the influx of giant Pandas that is currently happening in Europe does anyone think that the zoos getting them will start to lose out financially? As it stands there are pairs of black and white balls of fur at Vienna, Edinburgh, Madrid, Beauval and Pairi Diaz a with a pair due at Rhenen in the next few months. Then in the next few years Prague, Copenhagen, Berlin and Finland will also have them so how far is Joe Public going to have to travel? If Pandas are everywhere then how are zoos going to recoup the million a year it costs to rent them? Is it going to be financial suicide unless the zoos get cubs? Let's hear your opinions folks?
I don't think it'll make too much difference while it's one zoo per country (though I'd be interested to know if pandas genuinely make enough entrance/secondary spend difference to recoup the costs anyway? I always slightly assumed that some of the cost was written off as worth it for perceived prestige!).
I remember reading a NG special on the whole Giant Panda business a few years ago. It stated that most Non-Chinese zoos keeping them (not including the "diplomatic" pandas) actually lose money, as increased sales of tickets and merchandise do not cover the initial outlay and running costs / leasing fees.
Prestige? Maybe a few years ago in the days when they weren't leaving China as regularly but I think their days as a status symbol are coming to an end and they appear to be a marketing tool now. Look at Edinburgh and all the panda tat they sell now! On another note can anyone think of any more zoos that would go down the panda route? I'm surprised that Dublin hasn't approached China yet. Other than Dublin the only major city zoos in Panda free countries are in Portugal, Italy, Hungary and Switzerland. How long before these jump on the band wagon? @Batto It doesn't make any sense to me for zoos, not the richest institutions anyway, to throw money away on some immobile balls of fur. Does anyone know if Prague are going to have to pay or is it part of their special arrangement with Beijing?
I guess it all depends on the negotiating skills of the individual zoo management; some zoos (like Vienna) added a joint research deal to the panda contract; others got industrial sponsors (like Fujifilm & The National Zoo) to join. Fujifilm is Lead Corporate Sponsor In Returning Giant Pandas to the National Zoo
Interesting, if a zoo found a sponsor then they would (presumably) turn a profit. I didn't realise contracts were negotiable though, I was under the impression that it was 1 million per year as standard.
Well I like pandas. But I never understood why they are so appealing to the public. They are not uniquely rare nor unusual to look at: nor phylogenetically unusual, nor is a "herbivorous carnivore" so unusual, nor a bamboo specialist nor is the giant panda strictly a herbivore. Has anyone studied the APPEAL of giant pandas? It seems to be based on misconceptions, about the uniqueness of pandas including the "last chance to see". The rarity of pandas inside and outside China was pushed early when conservation messages hit mainstream populist media: it represents conservation in public memory, like Elvis or the Beatles represent the music of their decades, or the Apollo missions represent the notion of science to people of a certain age. With time the symbolic importance will diminish.
As for prestige @Brum: there have been political struggles and bidding contests between neighbouring zoos about who should get Giant Pandas, with Belgium as a more recent example. Belgium’s political pandas to arrive 23 February I don't know any details, but it depends what the Chinese want to have additionally (like a research cooperation) to seal the deal. Didn't work out for LA Zoo, for example. As for the financial investment, I found this: Pairi Daiza is paying China €700.000 Euro per year to exhibit 2 pandas, 1 million Euro annually for food and care, and an extra €100.000 annually for insurance. If interested, I can add the source, but there is some foul language in it... @SealPup: the playful cubs hit all the notes on the positive emotional spectrum of most humans. And the dichromatic colouration is just too iconic, as if specially designed for marketing purposes. All in all, Giant Pandas are big business. The Chinese know that, and since they're reproducing them now regularily, they want to make some profit.
Well why are giant pandas so iconic in the first place? No one doubts they are appealing but the appeal, in the past, was like a superstar status. Zebras and killer whales are bichromatic, and just about any baby mammal is cute and playful - could just as easily be baby polar bears. I still say the appeal was because they were a figurehead species a few decades ago. That makes their extreme appeal a matter of cultural memory, and memories fade. It also means wildlife conservation orgs and zoos will have to pimp new species as pandas become passe. Indeed in Japan the red panda is currently more popular, from what I can make out.
@Batto I'll take your word on the costs. I knew about the Belgium political debate and I was surprised they didn't end up at Antwerp. Also LA and the golden monkeys proved to me that zoos and Chinese loans aren't always the best bed fellows.
Seriously,why did giant panda so appealing? I've seen people waiting on the lines for hour to see them.Maybe they're endangered?No, they're vulnerable now.Maybe they're cute?But why nobody like other cute species but giant panda? Also,giant panda are expensive.Really expensive.
Yes, other bichromatic species do exist, but few get the whole "cute, humanoid & fluffy" aspect right. We'll see whether their popularity will dwindle when more are around.
All bears are cute humanoid and fluffy. True a combination of traits makes a panda appealing, but not all that uniquely appealing. Is there any evidence pandas had their modern appeal to the Old Chinese? If the appeal of pandas hit deep psychological notes you would expect so.
All bears are, but Giant Pandas and Polar bears seem to be more popular among (Western) zoo visitors, may it be due to the colour, elusiveness or good marketing (haven't seen a single major movie starring a Moon, Sun, Spectacled or Sloth bear. Have you?
If they were going for accuracy, Sloth Bears should have been in at least every adaptation of The Jungle Book. Sadly, a bear is generally a bear to Hollywood, though the Disney cartoon at least gave Baloo the long claws.
Surely one of literatures (and recently cinemas) most popular bears is from deepest, darkest Peru! Paddington is extremely popular in the UK, possibly the reason spectacled bears are reasonably common over here.
Well as you pointed out Baloo doesn't look like a sloth bear but Bagheera still calls him one in the latest Jungle Book!
