Originally Posted By gadzuux My (admittedly limited) understanding is that disney only holds a percentage of the debtload, and that foreign investors now have part-ownership of the resort. This was the result of a re-financing deal a few years ago, in which disney was fortunate to have new investors step in and save their bacon. But if that's the case, it's not up to disney alone to just "pay off" the debt - it's shared with other entities, and they probably can't just buy them out altogether.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>Well of course you can’t draw direct comparisons; however, it is rather inexpicable why the overall response to DLP has been so mediocre.<<< The overall response to DLP has NEVER been "mediocre". Nothing even remotely CLOSE to that. >>>"Has there ever been a serious attendance problem at Disneyland Paris?" Not serious, but the place has never drawn enough people or siphon enough cash from guest spending to cover the expense of operating the resort and reduce Euro Disney's (the company that operates it) debt.<<< A good try to do some damage control to an erroneous statement, but what you fail to admit: 1) DLP as a park is THE single most visited place in Europe. Someone can correct me if that's changed, but it has been that way almost from opening. 2) The business model for the DLP Resort NEVER assumed that the park would cover enormous debts incurred for the HOTELS and infrastructure built to contain an entire "resort" community of enterprises. Disney has NEVER built along those models. The HOTELS were intended to make their own serious cash - but they completely overestimated the free-spending of thrifty Europeans, coupled with the LOCATION that allowed them to fly or drive home within a few hours... the high population density of their French location was a double-edged sword. Great for location - sucky for convincing people to spend three times a ticket price for a hotel room. DLP has NEVER been received as "Mediocre" and it's never been responsible for pulling down the rest of the resort. If anything, it's the park's legitimate SUCCESS that's KEPT the whole thing from completely being shut down.
Originally Posted By woody "Disney has NEVER built along those models. The HOTELS were intended to make their own serious cash - but they completely overestimated the free-spending of thrifty Europeans, coupled with the LOCATION that allowed them to fly or drive home within a few hours" Another issue is the cheap dollar. Many Europeans and British are finding it cheaper to fly to Florida for vacation rather than visit France.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo ^^^ This is very true - a week in AKL Savanna view = 4 nights in a moderate at DLP for British Pound value.
Originally Posted By WorldDisney <<DLP as a park is THE single most visited place in Europe. Someone can correct me if that's changed, but it has been that way almost from opening.>> Yeah, I pointed this out in my previous post, but it needs repeating though. It's NOT a popularity issue as the case simply seems to be with DCA. People ARE flocking to see it and has been since day 1, it's simply Disney overestimating it's audience and thinking they are willing to spend more money than they actually are. Again, it's understandable when you build a massive resort, you're going to want to make a little money off of it , but to call DLP a 'failure' in the same sense of DCA is apples and oranges. DLP is the no. 1 place in Europe to visit in a continent that has some of them most famous, visual and beautiful tourist attractions in the entire world, but yet people still find time to go to DLP also. The problem is they only want to see it for a day and then go back to Paris, which is only 45 minutes away and either go home there/someplace else or to their MUCH cheaper hotel rooms in the city. We're not talking about Orlando or Anaheim or even Tokyo where staying in a Disney hotel is cosidered 'magical'. We're talking about freakin Paris, considered already one of the most magical, beautiful, romantic cities in the world....with much cheaper hotel rooms . THAT'S the magic people want to stay in, not in a bunch overpriced themed hotels with nothing around except an overexpensive DTD to eat at night. Yeah, hindsight is 20/20, but why Disney didn't seem to catch this earlier is a little strange, but I think they just assumed people would eat up the idea of staying in a Disney hotel since it's so popular in America. But again, when your general locations are typical cities like Orlando and Anaheim, it spices things up a bit. Not quite as necessary for a place like Paris .
Originally Posted By Park Hopper I think what Hans was trying to say – and please correct me if I’m wrong – is that had Disney spent enough on DCA to make it a beautiful and exciting park, they may have fallen into the same trap they did in Paris. Personally I don’t think that would have happened but then I don’t have the numbers or business models or projections to back that opinion up. All I have is my common sense and that doesn’t appear to be worth much on these boards… or in the Disney decision-making process for that matter.
Originally Posted By woody DLP was overbuilt with hotels. That's why it didn't work. DLP is now stuck with a cheap Studios park. Why are they compounding a problem with money losing ventures?
Originally Posted By paulyahoo << Many Europeans and British are finding it cheaper to fly to Florida for vacation rather than visit France. >> Not all European countries are covered by the visa waiver agreement. There're at least several dozen million people in Eastern Europe who can visit DLP, but not American parks.
Originally Posted By woody "Not all European countries are covered by the visa waiver agreement. There're at least several dozen million people in Eastern Europe who can visit DLP, but not American parks." Pity, but I suppose they don't make enough of a difference to DLP's attendance.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>>I think what Hans was trying to say – and please correct me if I’m wrong – is that had Disney spent enough on DCA to make it a beautiful and exciting park, they may have fallen into the same trap they did in Paris.<<< Whether that's the point or not, it would still be a fallacious assumption. Given that DCA spent slightly over half on their park as DLP did on theirs, and given that supporting infrastructure STILL only brought the whole price tag to slightly over a third of what the entire DLP RESORT (with hotels, etc) cost, it's reasonable to assume that spending another 300 million on the actual PARK would have accomplished the following: 1) given the park more than one signature, unique attraction to crow about and market; 2) diversified the park's offerings and perceptions by the public and potential critics; 3) Distinguished the park as a COMPLEMENT of satisfactory proportions to its mega-sister next door; 4) Squashed comparisons to Knott's or Universal by simply providing MORE all around. 5) Given a greater value for the ticket price. All of this would have given marketing much more to work with, and first impressions could have been much stronger. Now, they WILL have to spend five (or ten) times as much to get people back through those gates. Had they simply brought the park closer to a full day's offerings upon opening, hotels would still be full, people would be staying longer, spending more, etc. To get ANYTHING accomplished, you've got to have people buying TICKETS to the principal draw in the first place. DCA has never accomplished that with any ferocity.
Originally Posted By paulyahoo << Pity, but I suppose they don't make enough of a difference to DLP's attendance. >> In fact, EuroDisney is trying to reach these new markets. I never saw total numbers, but I know for sure about busloads of people from Poland and planeloads of children from Moscow during school breaks.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> ... it's reasonable to assume that spending another 300 million on the actual PARK would have accomplished the following << I'm not convinced. Since opening, they've added TOT, bugsland, millionaire and various shows. None have really 'rounded' the park's offerings enough to make a significant bump in attendance. I do agree that it should have opened with at least one more 'signature' attraction. But ultimately the park's negative reputation was formed around the lack of charm and detail found over in DL. Paradise pier is jarring when compared with anything in the other park, and presumeably this is one of the areas which was built out pretty much as planned, so it's no "accident", or evidence of slashed budgets compromising the "vision" - just a lack of taste.
Originally Posted By DisneyFreak96 <<I do agree that it should have opened with at least one more 'signature' attraction. But ultimately the park's negative reputation was formed around the lack of charm and detail found over in DL.>> Agree with that. On stressful days when I'm loaded with homework I've actually driven three hours to be able to study in a quiet place at Coke Corner, Main Street or NOS. (I play the CD for my French class on the way there to utilize that time too!) I don't need to be busy going on all the attractions, for me ambience is over half of my love for Disneyland. There is a reason I don't study at DCA, even when I have extra time. It just doesn't have a 'feel'.
Originally Posted By arstogas >>>I'm not convinced. Since opening, they've added TOT, bugsland, millionaire and various shows. None have really 'rounded' the park's offerings enough to make a significant bump in attendance.<<< But that's NOT the same as integrating better value on opening day. Those attractions you mention were bandaids, though Tower was always planned. The fact remains the original plans for the park were modest to begin with, and THOSE were scaled back, and back, and back, until the most rudimentary infrastructure and features, were left. These things added AFTER the fact scream "tacked-on filler".
Originally Posted By Darkbeer From AL Lutz latest update.... <a href="http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al092005a.htm" target="_blank">http://www.miceage.com/allutz/ al092005a.htm</a> >>Summer is over, and September is traditionally one of the slowest months of the year for Disneyland. But this year is unlike any other, and the crowds just keep coming and the attendance estimates keep falling by the wayside. Of course we're only talking about Disneyland when we mention crowds and huge attendance, as California Adventure (DCA) is barely able to break the 10,000 mark on weekends. This past Saturday (9/17), the original attendance estimate for Disneyland of 47,000 was blown out of the water as just over 61,000 people actually showed up. (DCA struggled to pull in 11,000 on the same day). This summer with plenty of park-hopping tourists in Anaheim, if Disneyland saw a daily attendance in the 60K range, DCA could pull in at least 15K or 16K. But with day-tripping locals making up a bigger share of the September crowds, it's caused DCA attendance to suffer even more. But with California Screamin' still down for an indefinite period of time, and no Electrical Parade scheduled until Christmas, it's probably for the best.<<
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "How about a scenario where they don't overspend and yet still build a park that people want to visit? Do you think Disney is capable of building such a place?" In Southern California? My instincts say not likely. The cost of capital is just too high and Imagineering seems to be be lacking the ability to create wonderful new attractions at a reasonable cost. Of course that's just my opinion.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "Actually, once they pay off all their depts, they will be making tons of money." And that is not likely to happen anytime soon.
Originally Posted By SJHYM I dont think its fair to blame Imagineering for the failures of late. My understanding is that unlike in the past Imagineering is being dictated to both in content, design and budget in ways that they have never had to before. I dont think you can blame them for doing the best they can under those circumstances. My friends in Imagineering tell me that most of their projects are dictated to them without much input.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt “DLP as a park is THE single most visited place in Europe. Someone can correct me if that's changed, but it has been that way almost from opening.†And DCA is the second most visited theme park in California. Nevertheless, there is constant conjecture being thrown about here about why the place isn’t drawing the kinds of numbers expected. Likewise, DLP has rarely lived up to its original projects, and even worse it has seldom made money. There are probably at least a hundred different reasons why, but I think it’s pretty obvious that they overspent on both the park and the hotels. “The business model for the DLP Resort NEVER assumed that the park would cover enormous debts incurred for the HOTELS and infrastructure built to contain an entire "resort" community of enterprises. Disney has NEVER built along those models.†This is most likely true, however the park has never been a gold mine for guest spending either. The Disney model of siphoning cash from souvenir sales and in park food service – a primary source of revenue in the U.S. - has not proven to be a big success for DLP. This information is well documented.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I think what Hans was trying to say – and please correct me if I’m wrong – is that had Disney spent enough on DCA to make it a beautiful and exciting park, they may have fallen into the same trap they did in Paris." Precisely. Building beautiful well designed parks in the Disney tradition is no guarantee that the the place will be a financial success.
