Originally Posted By Moon Waffle First off, let me say that I realize I'm crawling into a hornets nest with this post, but it's something I feel needs to be asked. Hopefully, the SoCal residents can be as objective as possible, as I will also attempt to do. It seems to me that with the tax structure, political climate, and space (or lack thereof) that California has no longer become a good place for Disneyland. The recent problems with the city of Anaheim just seem to magnify this issue - I mean how many cities on earth would bend over backward to have someone like Disney as a "tenant", and yet Anaheim fights against the inevitable tax revenue, tourism, and exposure that Disney wants to bring. Personally, I love SoCal. The weather, the culture, it's great. And I'll be honest and say that I DON'T want Disneyland to leave this area for so many reasons. BUT, when the theme park budget for new attractions is consumed by ridiculous things such as air gates on every ride, or converting every ride to fit the definition of a "common carrier", it seems that Disneyland CAN'T be all that it should be, or wants to be. It seems too much of the budget is sucked up in ridiculous projects that add little or no guest enhancement, let alone any new rides. The landlocked area that the DLR exists in only magnifies the problem to the "nth" degree. Land is at a premium price, and 9 times out of 10 there is some sort of complaint from a neighbor or business nearby about what is being proposed in the way of expansion or development. Give me free fireworks any night of the week, or at the very least, ignore my compliants if I chose to move next to the world's most popular theme park. So that's my gripe. Go ahead; flame away. Just remember that I said I do like many aspects of SoCal, and ultimately I do like having Disneyland located there. What I DON'T like are the ridiculously abusive laws, regulations, and climate in SoCal that seem to have restricted my favorite theme parks in to a shell of its former self. Surely, something must change.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss No flames here. But are you suggesting they move? Disneyland isn't going anywhere, regardless of the surroundings... unless an earthquake puts it into the ocean.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA There are some points of view which seem to suggest that in the long run, it would be more cost effective for Disneyland to shut down the parks in SoCal and move it elsewehere. It seems highly improbable and impossible, but I have heard it before. Or maybe it's the crack talking...
Originally Posted By Roger55 LoL, Can't believe this is even a topic of discussion. Maybe a discussion about the challenges DLR faces operating in the SoCal area would be interesting. But to suggest closing or moving DLR because of these problems??? Sheesh!
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle No I'm not really suggesting they up and physically move the park; I don't see that happening. But my point is that we all complain about the lack of an "Indy-calliber" ride since 1995, but in reality its the SoCal climate that has forced this upon Disney. What do they do from here? Or better yet, CAN they do anything?
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I do not believe any regulations, lack of land, or community support have or is preventing Disney from building anything. They indeed have built since Indy, but what they built has not met critical acclaim.
Originally Posted By Roger55 There is still lots of room to build something like Indy at DL. Big Thunder Ranche and Festival Arena are onstage areas that could easily be used for a new project. There are also backstage areas that could be used for an attraction. Like trekkeruss said, the reasons for lack of E-ticket scale rides being added to DL has nothing to do with the SoCal climate. It has everything to do with the economy and decisions of Disney leadership.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Maybe a discussion about the challenges DLR faces operating in the SoCal area would be interesting. But to suggest closing or moving DLR because of these problems???" Disney did consider moving the resort closer to San Diego at one time. From a long term financial standpoint it *could* make sense for Disney to move it So Cal theme park business elsewhere. Doing so would allow the company to expand its hotel operations and other vacation related businesses on the West Coast. And boy, would I love to see a fresh new Disneyland out here. It really is unfortunate that the Walt Disney Company didn't have the guts to buy up more land around Disneyland back in the 60's.
Originally Posted By Elderp I think they should move the park to San Bernagetto. I bet San Bernardino City Hall would much rather have Disneyland than flood downtown (an actual proposed idea).
Originally Posted By NJ AP Personally I think they should move to New Jersey or Eastern, PA so I could go anytime. LOL I think Disney attendance figures are better, though, with So Cal weather. It is raining buckets AGAIN over here.
Originally Posted By DlandDug An important part of the magic of Disneyland is its location. When you walk into the enclosed area, you leave Southern California behind. I also like the fact that Disneyland is in an urban setting. There's so much to see and do down here. One of the biggest drawbacks for WDW for me is the lack of urban infrastructure.
Originally Posted By x Pirate_Princess x Well if weather's a factor, why not move it to Palm Springs, so during the winter, it's a nice 75 degrees? LOL
Originally Posted By x Pirate_Princess x Modesto is too far north. Of course, bringing it to Palm Springs would subject it to the influx of Weekend --umm-- "visitors" from our neighbor to the South.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I wonder what they would do if DLR was massively damaged by a major earthquake? One where it would cost billions to repair everything. Would they move it somewhere where they could snap up thousands of acres. Not on a WDW scale, but something where they could have a controlled environment. Or would the just buy out and bulldoze neighboring properties and expand the resort. Of course, if DLR were totaled by a major earthquake, it would be safe to assume that half of SoCal would be destroyed as well.
Originally Posted By ni_teach Well, if the Angles baseball team can move to Los Angeles, maybe Disneyland can move to Los Angeles in the same way ;-)
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I think "The Anaheim Disneyland of Modesto" has a nice ring to it.> Or even Merced. There ain't a damn thing to do in this town, so it would be quite welcome.
Originally Posted By TinksBestFriend Do you remember? When the Angles were starting they played in Wrigley Field in Los Angeles. The location is now a park. Moved to Anaheim and became the California Angles. Then became the Anaheim Angles. And - well you know the rest of the story.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip SoCal will NEVER be a bad place for Disneyland. Sure, some of the locals in Anaheim get a little testy. They get that way in Orlando too. Kind of a classic case of forgetting who it was that brought you to the party. But that whole Southern California vibe (at least to an outsider), that feeling of "we are damned cool because of where we live and everything we do better reflect that coolness" has undoubtedly made Disneyland a better park than it ever would have been otherwise. Not that I would EVER want to live there. But it is a damned fine place to visit.
