Originally Posted By CMM1 Well, Disney already has the blueprints for the DisneySea park - is it only a matter of time before they decide if they want to shoot for keeping WDW guests on site for a whole week (5 theme parks plus water parks would mean 7 days, not to mention all of the other attractions at DTD and throughout the resort)? Or will they continue to build out AK a bit more before looking to add a "5th gate"? Or will they turn their attention to Anaheim? They do have the land over on Harbor Blvd and could connect another park via monorail to their current properties.
Originally Posted By leemac I would be very surprised if another DisneySea project was ever built. The core team is now no longer at WDI and most of the execs there are not convinced that the concept is that sound.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 They obviously don't need the original "core team" to build a park. Look at all of the Magic Kingdoms. Most of them were built without the original core team. I'm sure whoever is in charge at the time at WDI could come up with another DisneySea concept. I don't disagree with you about the execs feeling it might not be a good idea though.
Originally Posted By parkman3852 The problem with Texas is that, unlike California and Florida, few people want to vacation there. Thus, another U.S. Disney resort will likely never happen. Well, I guess I shouldn't say never, but it is highly unlikely given how saturated the US theme park market is. In any case it I can't imagine Disney, or anyone else, trying to promote Texas as a resort destination. Hans has it wayyy wrong. Texas is an excellent location for Disney. Texas has a large population and is virtually tied for the 5th most visited state in the union. It has an awesome sea port for Disney cruise lines and one of the worlds most visited airports. There have been reports for yeras about Disney looking for land in the Houston area. Houston is 2 thousand miles to either LA or Orlando. It does make some sense.
Originally Posted By planodisney However, WDW gets a huge number of vacationers from Texas, but because of population, land availability and weather, Texas would actually be a great place to build a Disney resort. Who the heck ever wanted to vacation in the swamps of central Florida before WDW was built?
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I couldn't disagree more with this statement. I am a shareholder of Cedar Fair and my dividends have increased every year for the last 10 years. That is not a sign of weakness in my opinion." Just because Cedar Fair has good financial management does not mean that its attendance, or attendance in general, is trending upwards. USF is a case in point: attendance was down last year but revenues increased due to cost cutting measures. If theme park business in this country was on the rise there would be major new parks opening on a regular basis, and you can rest assured that Disney would take advantage of positive market conditions. What we see instead is very slow growth and just about zip in terms of expansion.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt Hans has it wayyy wrong. Texas is an excellent location for Disney. Sorry, I don't agree. You aren't going to get a sizeable number of foriegn tourists to vist Houston when they could go to far more interesting places like Vegas, Florida or California. The investment required to make a Texas Disney destination attractive to a broad population would likely make the project unfeasible.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Texas has a large population and is virtually tied for the 5th most visited state in the union. It has an awesome sea port for Disney cruise lines and one of the worlds most visited airports.> I'm not saying that Texas isn't a place where people would like to visit. I was in fact hoping to go to San Antonio this spring. However, I wonder how many visitors to Texas and DFW are like me, who have only been to Texas to change planes while on the way to somewhere else. I used to admit there was some logic to building in Texas, but as of now I don't see it happening for a long time.
Originally Posted By happyingilbert Another location that might be fun is Williams, AZ (the Grand Canyon). It was just cleared to start on a huge amusement park project, which should be really neat. The people that own the Railroad, hotel, and restaurant have just put it up for sale and it would really be a jewel and keep with the whole Disney vision. It is a few hours away from Las Vegas which already pulls people into the area. I think that would be a neat direction for Disney to head into.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<Disney already has the blueprints for the DisneySea park - is it only a matter of time before they decide if they want to shoot for keeping WDW guests on site for a whole week>> No way would Disney spend $3bil on a fifth gate at WDW.
Originally Posted By berol PricewaterhouseCooper thinks the theme park industry will grow monetarily for the rest of the decade, US and worldwide.
Originally Posted By alexbook >>Who the heck ever wanted to vacation in the swamps of central Florida before WDW was built?<< Exactly. Orlando and Anaheim would barely exist as cities if it weren't for Disney. The true Disney spirit would involve building something we haven't even thought of in some totally improbable location. If it's truly unique, people will be drawn to it from everywhere.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss It isn't quite as simple as that. Disney chose Anaheim and Orlando for specific reasons.... they didn't just build in an orange grove and a swamp.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 True. Both were selected very carefully, with the help of research firms. Anaheim was (correctly) projected to be the future center of SoCal population; Florida already got millions of winter visits from northerners, a good chunk of whom drove straight through central Florida, and the rest could be persuaded to swap Miami for Orlando.
Originally Posted By leemac <<PricewaterhouseCooper thinks the theme park industry will grow monetarily for the rest of the decade, US and worldwide.>> There is a big difference between people spending more money and having more places to visit. Theme parks are expensive to develop and there aren't many players capable of entering that market. That said PwC have close ties to the three largest players in the market (and near unbreakable relationships at Disney) so they are speaking as experts in the field.
Originally Posted By berol They bundle amusement parks with theme parks. They mentioned new development as a reason for increased $. They only had a paragraph or 2 so that's all I could figure out without spending a grand.
Originally Posted By alexbook Okay, I'll admit I overstated the case, but you have to admit that both DL and WDW were huge risks, and both locations seemed like really odd choices to the general public and even to many "experts". There was no shortage of people who told Walt that no one would drive all the way out to Anaheim just to go to an amusement park. I guess what I was really trying to say was that a lot of the suggestions I hear kicked around strike me as "safe", vergeing on boring. Let's get away from the idea of cloning or expanding the existing parks and do something that Walt would have found really exciting.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I'd visit a Disney Park in Texas if it was in San Antonio or Austin. If it was in Dallas-Fort Worth or Houston, fogetaboutit.
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle Who cares what city the park is located in? It's Disney! As long as it's not in some war-torn third-world country, I'll be there! After all, when you go to Disney you truly leave the outside world behind and enter that magical little world Disney has created. Sure, when I'm at the DLR I'm physically in SoCal, but I'm enveloped in that Disney experience so it really doesn't matter what city I'm in. I would feel the same way about Texas, Virginia, Idaho, Nebraska, New Jersey, Alabama - WHEREVER Disney put a new park. I'm going to a Disney park, not really to the city it's located in.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "PricewaterhouseCooper thinks the theme park industry will grow monetarily for the rest of the decade, US and worldwide." Well of course, but is that growth substantial enough to support another multi-billion dollar theme park/resort investment in the U.S.? No, I don't think so.
