Originally Posted By Darkbeer <a href="http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2006/07/25/4475.aspx" target="_blank">http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/ jim_hill/archive/2006/07/25/4475.aspx</a> >>The good news is ... Bob Iger has reportedly signed off on a rescue plan for Disney's California Adventure. According to those who are familiar with this theme park revival project, Disney's new CEO has agreed (in principle) to spend hundreds of million of dollars over the next decade in order to turn DCA into a worthy companion for Disneyland. As one Disney insider who was privvy to these plans recently told me: "The scope & scale of the DCA revival plan is unprecedented. We're talking about complete redos of certain sections of this theme park. In 10 years time, you won't even be able to recognize the place." <<
Originally Posted By oc_dean DCA approval ... Matt leaving .. any other major news out there??? cough-peoplemover-cough ;~
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Outsourcing sounds fine to me. Having a huge staff of salaried people at WDI seems -- archaic. That example of the 'Ice Age' attraction is a great example. Thinkwell did the re-do for $3million; WDI did the 'Monsters, Inc.' re-do for $30 million. The 'Pooh' re-do in Critter Country cost WAY too much for what they installed in Disneyland. It's like Industrial Light + Magic. Yes, they're George Lucas' company and they do the special effects for the 'Star Wars' movies... But guess what? They also did the special effects for 'Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest' and 'Chronicles of Narnia' as well as a host of other movies over the years. Just because Disney doesn't have a special effects unit on the studio lot, doesn't mean that Disney can't get terrific special effects in their movies. Same with the theme parks, imo.
Originally Posted By a1stav ^^^^ WDI used to do many projects for outside companies, but now days they can't compete (probably price). I wonder how inflated the budget reports are though. If Sally Corp can do Challenge of Tutankhamen for under $10 million I don't see how Pooh cost $30 million. I also know that all over the Internet it was reported that Revenge of the Mummy was budgeted around $60 million and I have heard from a couple of good sources that it was closer to $40 million.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<I don't see how Pooh cost $30 million>> If you had a better understanding of WDI's massive overhead, with higher-than-average salaries for the industry, especially for executives, you wouldn't be asking this question.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <<I don't see how Pooh cost $30 million>> <If you had a better understanding of WDI's massive overhead, with higher-than-average salaries for the industry, especially for executives, you wouldn't be asking this question.> My question was rhetorical IdleHands. I understand the overhead and the executives and the other issues all too well.
Originally Posted By leemac No idea what this Ice Age thing is but the comparison seems skewed. I'm certain that they couldn't have re-purposed a building, installed a track and show scenes for $3m. It might be more like a layover (like HMH or iasw holiday).
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Knowing Jim Hill's track record, I'll wait to celebrate until I hear it some place else as well. It doesn't mean it won't happen, I just don't see it happening so suddenly. I hope it is true, and that we really won't be able to tell that it is the same place, but I'm just a little skeptical. And for Pooh, a lot of money went into retrofitting the existing space. I believe that the removal of the Bears was budgeted into Pooh's cost, along with leveling out the building, and making it suitable for the attraction. It is always more expensive and difficult to use an existing building than to just tear the whole thing down and start over (See also: Test Track and Mission:Space at Epcot).
Originally Posted By Darkbeer ^Alas, that is not always the case in California. Due to the costs involded in getting the permits and meeting current building codes, many times it is better to use an old building, strip it down and replace the interior from scratch. When was the last time Disney built a new building? Well, that would be the DVC model home... but before that? In DCA I can think of the Millionaire building and ToT as the only two new buildings after park opening. As for Disneyland, the last things I can think were built from scratch was the Festival of Fools area/Big Thunder Ranch restrooms and cabin and Indiana Jones, along with Toontown.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros There's a small building in a bug's land that has restrooms in it. It is very small, but is still a building. And there is a box that the Chew Chew Train goes through, but I doubt that is considered a building. And of course all of DCA, DTD, and the GCH were built recently. But that is interesting that in California it can be easier to get permits to remodel a building. I would suspect that the building costs for remodeling would still be significantly more than rebuilding, but in the case of something like CBP, where they are going to carefully remove a lot of things (the AA's) anyway, it could be cheaper to just fix up what they have. However, I would think that the designing of that would still be more expensive. Either way, it appears that they did in fact just reuse an existing building, so that must have been the best option.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<My question was rhetorical IdleHands. I understand the overhead and the executives and the other issues all too well.>> Sorry, a1stav. Stuff like that doesn't always register with me. As you can tell by the new moniker, my brain is far more idle than my hands. 8^D
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA leemac, here's a link to Thinkwell's site and a page describing the 'Ice Age' attraction. Based on what I see in the video provided, it's hardly a 'lay over.' <a href="http://www.thinkwelldesign.com/what_we_do/international_ice.html" target="_blank">http://www.thinkwelldesign.com /what_we_do/international_ice.html</a>
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <<My question was rhetorical IdleHands. I understand the overhead and the executives and the other issues all too well.>> <Sorry, a1stav. Stuff like that doesn't always register with me.> <As you can tell by the new moniker, my brain is far more idle than my hands.> 8^D> I wrote that Idle_Brain.
Originally Posted By idleBrain <<I wrote that Idle_Brain.>> My post #8 was referring to a copy-n-paste line from a1stav's post #7. The one right below yours. Now who's got the idle brain? %^}
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> spend hundreds of million of dollars over the next decade in order to turn DCA into a worthy companion for Disneyland. << Please don't allow anyone like the person described at miceage.com a few months ago -- the DisCo employee (an Imagineer, no less?) who is supposed to have commented that DCA's lack of enough attractions was the primary reason the park was a big joke, not its lame, mediocre placemaking -- anywhere near that money. >> In 10 years time, you won't even be able to recognize the place. << For your lips to God's ears. And if and when the bulldozers arrive, I hope they're big, tall and wide. As big, tall and wide as possible.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL Wow JiM, thanks for the link to Thinkwells' site. I've got to say though, the most impresive thing, besides the fun look of the Ice Age attraction, was the last page of text stating it took only 6 months to complete the entire ride. This looks to be more than a few notches above Monsters Inc.
