Can I just confirm that there is NO political incentive in Pairi Daiza getting pandas - they did not have lengthy talks with Brussels and China, deciding whether the secret services of the two countries would join forces to allow the panda 'ambassadors' to come over. That particular panda transfer, like so many others, was NOT at all political, because firstly, Pairi Daiza is not a National zoo (so it symbolizes nothing) and secondly, China have absolutely no interest in Belgium - to them it is a minunscule country with no power or economic strength. Only 1.8% of Belgium's tiny exports actually go to China anyway, so... The primary incentive, if not the only incentive in the Pairi Daiza transfer is money. What else could it be? Prestige? Pairi Daiza don't care about that... that is why they keep their white tigers in a pit... Pandas are there for profit so that they can build more exhibits for rarer animals that interest zoo nerds like us!!!
Can I just confirm that there is NO political incentive in Pairi Daiza getting pandas - they did not have lengthy talks with Brussels and China, That particular panda transfer, like so many others, was NOT at all political, Prestige? Pairi Daiza don't care about that This is rubbish...!
Except that as both myself and @lintworm have explained, the boost in footfall (and increase in income) is short-lived.... whilst the loan costs keep coming. Those million-dollar payments to Beijing have a nasty tendency to add up, as does the cost in keeping the animals themselves. The collections which don't suffer problems are those big enough (San Diego, Berlin) or independently wealthy enough (Beauval, Pairi) to take the blow. For instance, the Edinburgh animals arrived in Dec 2011; the zoo recorded income of £14.9M and expenditure of £13.5M in the 2012 annual report with a net profit of £1.4M. However by the 2017 annual report the zoo reported income of £14.6M and expenditure of £15.4M with a net loss of £0.8M. Even disregarding any increase in costs, it cannot be denied that 5 years into a panda loan the zoo had less income than it did at the start of the loan.
As for Beauval, this is off-topic but I'm still going to answer. This is a slightly truncated list of Beauval's developments since 1990. 1991: Arrival of white tigers 1992: Great Apes complex 1993: Vivarium 1994: Bird aviaries 1995: Seal lions 1996: Raccoons, otters and macaques 1997: Gorillas and manatees 1999: White lions and African savanna 2000: Addition of three white rhinos 2001: Parrot nursery built 2002: Australian house 2003: African elephant area 2004: New vivarium 2005: Okapis 2006: Somalian asses, Javan langurs, clouded leopards 2007: Penguins and pampas 2010: Asiatic Plains 2011: China area (built in anticipation of Pandas) 2012: PANDAS 2013: New bird aviaries built and old ones given a complete makeover 2014: Maitres des airs show. 2015: Sea lion show, opening of a hotel 2016: Hippos, nyalas, vultures and red river hogs. 2017: Massive new habitat for lions, African wild dogs, meerkat, bongos, lesser kudus 2018: New habitat for arctic wolves, brown bears, cheetahs.... 2019: (So far) skyfari and tazzie devils. So spending, was high in the 1990s due to rising popularity, then decreased due to zoos' descending popularity, and now, against the flow of descending popularity in most collections, they suddenly get tonnes of money to build massive, state-of-the-art complexes for a variety of new and old species. What caused this sudden resurgence in 2012 after years of depletion in the early 2000s? Pandas of course. And, yes, correlation does not imply causation, but if you would be hard pressed to find me another plausible reason as to why Beauval suddenly had much more money to spend after 2012. As for this post, would you care to give me a grain of a reason as to why it is? Then I can't actually do anything without repeating previous points, which I will do anyway First point: there is no political incentive!!! I know pandas are used as political tools by China, but that doesn't mean that is always the case! Belgium and China have virtually no trade incentives, they are on opposite sides of the globe and Belgium is a landlocked country with virtually no overseas exports. It isn't political - trust me - I study Geography, Economics and History. As for the second point, same answer. And the third. They don't mind how they look to zoo nerds, that much is displayed by their extravagant theming and apparent disregard for animal welfare in certain cases.
I thought you said that... ...because it sounds awfully like you are claiming Pairi need the (alleged) panda profits to continue developing and obtaining species The cost for all the odd species (and geological specimens, and genuine architectural theming from overseas, and so forth) is more than adequately covered by the fact a literal billionaire owns the collection.... as are all the financial costs of having giant pandas!
It's not as if the European council was in Belgium and that Brussels is often considered politically to be the "capital of Europe". Not saying that the Pairi's import was political (I don't have an answer for that) but since China is trying to create ties with Europe (as you can see by the numbers of European pandas and pandas holders leaping since 2017), Belgium would be a perfect candidate and definitely not a country China doesn't care about.
I never gave the example of Edinburgh and I admit it didn't work out. All I am saying is that Beauval and Pairi Daiza got their pandas for purely monetary reasons. (And it worked)
Oops lol that was funny I am saying there is no political incentive for China to do give Pairi pandas. Brussels is not associated with Pairi, and therefore Pairi is not associated with the EU. Therefore, either China chose the wrong zoo to do dealings with, or it was not political, and I suspect it is the latter; Chinese politicians and ambassadors are not stupid
With regards the 'political' point, I wonder if you've taken that point too literally? I'm sure even at your age, you have heard of workplace politics, which I'm sure Andrew was referring to, rather than the governing of the countries.
Isolating this post from others, which I accept may have been slightly aggressive, and meaning this question in the kindest way possible, (this is why chatting online is harder than speaking, because the reader doesn't know what tone you are using) but in what way would workplace politics influence the decision to get pandas?
Actually you started off by point-blank saying that giant pandas are profitable and disputing our statements that this is only true in the short term: ...so I provided actual figures to disprove your claims. Again repeating an unsubstantiated claim and ignoring the point that in the case of Pairi the developments you cite as proof are paid for by a literal billionaire. This latter point, by the by, is liable to have a bearing on the issue of why Pairi were approved by the Chinese government if they are contacted by a collection which can a) easily afford the loan costs and b) pay to bring over and employ a whole team of Chinese keepers to work with the animals, it's an easy choice. In other words the monetary gain and motives are on the part of China, not Pairi.
Firstly, don't waste your energy responding to this post -I won't respond as, from experience, it's a waste of my time debating with zealots who just keep doubling down on initial statements without really listening or addressing counter-points made by others. But..... 1. That's just a little patronising, how do you know what other posters areas of expertise are? 2. Besides, just because you study a subject doesn't make you a complete experts (or right) on all related matters; 3. Just to emphasise the point, I've got a cycling proficiency certificate and driving licence (both of which I studied for and passed tests) but know sod all about bikes or cars (struggle to identify any makes I've never driven) and freely admit I'm not the best of drivers. I've also got a degree in economics but wouldn't ever purport to be 100% right about all or any issues involving economics. As a professional, one thing I do know is that knowing the limits of your knowledge and experience is as important as any qualification you have (or are studying for). Sometime as little humility goes a long way. Peace, out -have a good Sunday.
Firstly, I didn't, the posts you quote were referring (not explicitely, I admit), to Pairi and Beauval. When? I never said Edinburgh made a lot of money out of them. Secondly, I gave all the proof I have at my disposal, which is proof enough unless you suddenly morphed into an investor overnight TLD I have given solid proof that Beauval has profited out of the pandas, and that the main reason they got them must have been for monetary reasons, because it cannot, logically and mathematically, be political. I never said that Pairi's developments were proof to profit via Giant pandas, and the zoo is only now subsidised slightly; Pairi is not a zoo like San Diego or even Beauval...
I never said it as offering proof that I am right, I said it because many of the people on this thread tend to patronise me and always say I am wrong simply because I am younger... I never said I was an expert: I agree with your three points set out, but when you are saying I am being patronising, I find that offensive and a bit hypocritical... Then, your finale ('sometime as little humility goes a long way') is unfair, and I get where you are coming from to some extent. Some of my posts on this thread may sound aggressive because you people disagree with me, and so you are bound to slightly twist the tone with which I post my comments and take it in an aggressive way, just as I do sometimes. That is a problem with chats online - tone and the way you say something completely changes a sentence from aggressive to, in some cases kind. None of my posts were meant in an aggressive, patronising or arrogant way... Have a good Sunday as well Peace Not gonna lie, this can be interpreted in many different ways, as an example. One could interpret it as it is meant (or at least how I think it is meant), where you are saying that a lot of people (myself included) on this forum tend to just post blindly without taking into account what others have said deeply. But it could also be read as extremely insulting, especially with the inclusion of zealot, which can mean anything from nerd to terrorist. If I were in a bad mood (which I'm not, since I am on Zoochat, which is, honestly, the highlight of my day normally) I could easily interpret it as a direct attack on my personality and extremely offensive. If you don't reply, I don't mind, because you are being true to your word, but I just wanted to set out my intentions as clear as possible.
I never realised this was a comedy site,but I have been laughing solidly for 30 minutes reading this!!!!
This is my last post as well since we're truly getting off-topic but anyway, Pairi is kind of associated with Bruxelles knowing that it's probably the closest major Belgian zoo there is to it and that Bruxelles has no proper zoo. Again, I'm not saying the main reason to bring them was political but even if it was, Pairi would probably be a very good if not the best fit in Belgium
Glad to know I have saved you 4 hours of sleep https://www.quora.com/Is-it-scienti...er-equals-the-benefit-of-the-2-hours-of-sleep not the most trustworthy source, but...
