Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Ok, what do you all think of Disney possibly adding a "boutique park" as the third gate? Personally, I'm not sure I like the idea, as it creates a definite class system and prices many people out of the experience. On the other hand, I can see it's potential for longer, more sophisticated attractions. I just don't know... How is SeaWorld doing with it's boutique park "Discovery Cove"? I've seen commercials for that lately, but is it profitable for them? Can Disney sustain a park like that?
Originally Posted By berol The class system is already there. Attendance seems to drop pretty drastically per foot away from Disneyland with how DL-focused SoCal is. A small, pricey park of e-tickets might be the only viable option, or maybe a low cost park of low cost attractions. hmm
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I'm sorry...I'm uneducated...what is a boutique park?" The term for a high-end theme park coined by blogger Al Lutz to describe the possible direction for Disney's blue sky "third" park project in Anaheim. The park would be smaller than usual, have a higher entrance fee, and basically be filled with only cutting edge E ticket type rides: <a href="http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al032707a.htm" target="_blank">http://www.miceage.com/allutz/ al032707a.htm</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I'm not really sure that I like it, especially as he described it. Sure, it's great to go when the crowds are low, but part of that it trip planning. It's a sad fact that a lot of people can go on a Tuesday in February, but if they really wanted to avoid the crowds, they might. The way he talks about building and moing rides just sounds dumb. The expense of moving an existing attraction on the scope of Splash, HM or POTC would almost be as much as building it in the first place. Simpler attractions like Dumbo or Mullholland Madness could be moved quite easily, but then few people would go to the park. Also, I think a lot of people (myself included) would really have no problem waiting until the attractions came to a normal park. It sounds like a very SoCal idea, in all the wrong ways. I don't know how Discoery Cove is doing financially, but it really does not appeal to me at all. If I'm going to spend that much money, why not just go a little farther south, east, or west, and see the real thing. I assume the Disney version, whatever it may be, will most likely have a similar effect on me. And this is coming from someone who went to Hong Kong to see HKDL. I probably would have gon anyway, but the fact that the park was there sealed the deal instantly. If they think they can charge several hunderd dollars for a theme park, it better be themed to the top notch, not have any crowds, and still have enough attractions to keep you busy all day long even without the long waits.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Since when has there ever been a "boutique" audience for any Disney products? The Disney brand represents entertainment for the masses. Trying to narrow the scope and limit the number of guests who an entertainment venue will appeal to doesn't sound like a viable option. I think the whole "boutique" park concept is a red herring that won't make it off the drawing board to reality.
Originally Posted By berol Special events are priced on a boutique park level and beyond. I don't know if that audience can sustain a park. People that can afford a GCH vacation oughta be able to afford going.
Originally Posted By Sweeper Let's see, pay 5 times as much for fewer rides while people kiss my butt and talk to me as if they really care. Sounds like a cult. No thanks.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 Are the theme parks really doing so poorly financially that they can't afford all new, highly immersive E-ticket rides anymore?? I'm sorry, but I just don't think that's the case. This seems like a really sneaky way to cut quality at the "regular" parks, and then charge more money at the new park just to give you an experience you used to be able to get at Disneyland for the regular price.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt “Sure, it's great to go when the crowds are low, but part of that it trip planning.†The idea as Al describes sounds far-fetched to me so I am taking his report with a huge grain of Morton's salt. With that said, assuming it is true, my assumption is that such a project is conceived as a way to attract vacationing tourists willing to spend top dollar for a higher end experience. Given Disney's interest in developing more hotels and timeshares in the area, this would make sense. These would likely be the same sort of folks who take Disney Caribbean cruises followed by several nights stay at the Grand Floridian. "Since when has there ever been a "boutique" audience for any Disney products?" I would say pretty much since Disneyland opened. Despite Walt Disney saying Disneyland is your land, the place regularly attracts the sort of people who have the income to afford it. Disney claims to offer a premium experience, and as a result, you pay for it dearly at the front gate. With the exception of perhaps the AP's a visit to any Disney property for a family is an expensive proposition. “Are the theme parks really doing so poorly financially that they can't afford all new, highly immersive E-ticket rides anymore??†There has been a lot of discussion about this point here over the years. My conclusion is that the theme park industry cannot rely on building expensive new attractions as a way to drive attendance long-term. The trend seems to be in looking at other ways to draw customers in improve the experience without the costs and operational expense of elaborate new rides. I think proof of this is the 50th Anniversary, which dramatically increased attendance AND guest spending, yet it was largely just a marketing promotion.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "My conclusion is that the theme park industry cannot rely on building expensive new attractions as a way to drive attendance long-term." I have to wonder if part of this problem is that they no longer charge for individual attractions. In the old days, you could open a Pirates ride and then charge more for it than Peter Pan. But now, they all cost the same - the price at the gate. As much as I like the one price model, I can't help but wonder if it's hurt the theme park industry in the long run, quality-wise. "The trend seems to be in looking at other ways to draw customers in improve the experience without the costs and operational expense of elaborate new rides." But that really isn't a sustainable way to do business. At some point, people are going to realize that there's nothing really new or special there any more and all they're selling are hollow promotions.
Originally Posted By Socrates "The idea as Al describes sounds far-fetched to me so I am taking his report with a huge grain of Morton's salt." Earlier I was reading the "ABC to Force Commercials on Viewers" thread in Disney Business. Hans, do you now have a sponsor? Socrates "The unexamined life is not worth living."
Originally Posted By ni_teach Sea World in Florida built Discovery Cove, which is their version of a Boutique Adventure. It's a park where you get to swim with the Dolphins. It also costs: $279 per person, but that does include meals and other things such as: # 30 minute Dolphin-swim session # Snorkeling with thousands of tropical fish in the Coral Reef. # Wading with the rays in the Ray Lagoon. # Hand-feeding birds in the free flight Aviary. # Relaxing in the Resort Pool and swimming along the Tropical River. # Continental breakfast, sumptuous lunch, plus all snacks and beverages throughout the day. # Snorkel gear, swim vest or wet suit, towels, lockers, sunscreen, beach chairs. # All day self-parking. # Complimentary photo portrait of you and your party as you enter Discovery Cove. Now here is the question? Is what you see above worth the high price tag? <a href="http://www.discoverycove.com/florida.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.discoverycove.com/f lorida.aspx</a>
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "Are the theme parks really doing so poorly financially that they can't afford all new, highly immersive E-ticket rides anymore?? I'm sorry, but I just don't think that's the case. This seems like a really sneaky way to cut quality at the "regular" parks, and then charge more money at the new park just to give you an experience you used to be able to get at Disneyland for the regular price." Actually, that's a great point and pretty much how I feel about it.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Don't forget that Discovery Cove prices also include a ticket to Sea World Orlando or Busch Gardens Tampa. There are tons of perks involved with that park, and I would honestly be surprised if Disney attempted to do it, and was then able to maintain it over time. It just seems like something where it would start out fantastic, but over time little things would get cut (free drinks, free food, sunscreen, towels...of course those are examples from DC) and it would eventually be pretty close to the normal theme parks, and not worth the extra cost.
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle I hate this idea. To me, the beauty of DL is that the average family can come and afford a trip to the park. People are going to want to try all the "cutting edge e-tickets" at an upscale park, but they either won't be able to afford it, or they will go broke trying. I can see the upper crust at the boutique park looking down their noses at DL and DCA. "Oh, we don't go to THOSE parks!" Nothing about this idea sounds good.
Originally Posted By Ursula Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I like the idea, if it is what I think it is. DL and DCA would stay the same. A third park would be built, offering up more intimate and "special" events along a Disney vein ala how Discovery Cove has dolphins. I would imagine a dinner with Cinderella, etc.? I would pay to go. Not every day, mind you, but I would pay as long as A/P's were not offered so that each person would have their own special day. It wouldn't be special now, if I could go ever day.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj If you want an example of what a "boutique" Disney park might look like, check out the "Pirate themed adventure" artwork in this year's annual report. The company has described that particular piece of concept art as being an idea for a small, intricately themed park that would attract a smaller number of guests. A park like this would presumably invite guests into a highly interactive environment that involves a little bit more than just waiting in line for rides that cycle on a recurring basis. Guests would be more active participants in the story being told instead of just passive viewers of a series of show scenes. The Al Lutz description of a park where E-ticket rides would be inaugurated and later transferred to the other parks after they got their use in the "boutique" park is way off the mark. The experience of the boutique park would not be something that translates to the standard theme park itinerary/attraction lineup.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Also, the "boutique" park concept is something under consideration as part of DVC expansion to locations outside of DLR or WDW. Some ideas for DVC include building small-scale "boutique" parks alongside the resorts as an incentive for guests to choose those sorts of resorts over comptetitors in the same area. It's similar to some concepts used in Las Vegas where hotels have mini-theme parks at their doorstep. Those parks don't have a full days worth of activities, but enough to keep guests on the property instead of venturing to other venues.
