Originally Posted By MPierce >> But did you realize the entire mall zone just outside hotel plaza blvd is actually "on property"? (the grocery store, the el torito, the waffle house, the perkins restaurant, and whatever else is still there) I don't think this is any different, just people here are noticing it (noone else will). << I agree, most people may not notice this at first. However. as I stated before, my real concern is this is just the start of out of control expansion. To me when you join forces with another company it's to gain a larger share of the market, and or greater name recognition. With the Four Seasons I can see it, not with the rest of the project.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << Like someone said on another Disney site I frequent, it's like thc company is actively trying to make another Harbor and Katella in a place where Walt said 'we have enough land for all the dreams we can possibly imagine.' >> And yet when you look at the original Disney World plan that Walt Disney stood in front of so many years ago, it was an incredibly dense and urban development compared to what exists there even today.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << I understand your opinion that the theme parks make no profit and the hotels don't and they are a terrible business for Disney to be in ... but it's patently absurd, no matter how you spin the numbers. >> If it was so absurd, I think that you would find all the entertainment companies that wanted to emulate Disney back in the 90s still in the theme park business. They've all pretty much sold out of the concept, except for Universal, which is desperately trying to unload the Universal Studios parks if they can get someone to pay for the debt that goes along with those assets.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Now? Rates are lower than ever. I stayed at DAK Lodge Christmas week for $129 a night and, no, that wasn't even a cast rate. That would have been around $99.<< How do you get rates like that? Every time I check either the Disney or other websites (like Expedia) I never see rates that good. Is there a secret 800 number to call? For instance, I just checked DAK Lodge for early May, and the are quoting 215 a night at Disney and 265 on Expedia.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<And yet when you look at the original Disney World plan that Walt Disney stood in front of so many years ago, it was an incredibly dense and urban development compared to what exists there even today.>> Walt's original plan included substantial greenbelts too. It's also likely safe to say that plans would have changed if he lived to ... I'm not sure after buying 30,000 acres Walt would have had built resorts right up to the property lines. <<If it was so absurd, I think that you would find all the entertainment companies that wanted to emulate Disney back in the 90s still in the theme park business. They've all pretty much sold out of the concept, except for Universal, which is desperately trying to unload the Universal Studios parks if they can get someone to pay for the debt that goes along with those assets.>> Emulate Disney? No one with any business sense thought they could compete. Disney and its parks are a uinque business because of the huge media company that owns them and provides them with creative content to keep them humming. Universal isn't even a legit comparison as it only owns parks in Florida, California and Osaka. And the Cal park is first and foremost a working movie and television production facility, not a theme park perse. I don't doubt for a second that as a rule theme parks aren't a good business, but Disney parks are a GREAT business. No one has the capability to take advantage of synergy likes TWDC does ... take this weekend's ESPN festivities at Disney-MGM Studios for instance. Or turning TSI into Pirate's Lair in time for the third PoC movie to debut in May etc ... one division drives the next drives the next. It's a very well-oiled machine.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<How do you get rates like that? Every time I check either the Disney or other websites (like Expedia) I never see rates that good. Is there a secret 800 number to call?>> Not that I know of. Although I'm sure Disney has 800 numbers for TA's. I never check Expedia or any other site for Disney resorts. I used to call often and now rely on a travel agent friend, who specializes in Disney travel, to do so. <<For instance, I just checked DAK Lodge for early May, and the are quoting 215 a night at Disney and 265 on Expedia.>> Those rates are likely rack rate. I believe there are AP and Fla resident rates for that period. Often times, there are generic discounts for everyone. Sometimes you have to be flexible with dates and resorts. If you just have to arrive on May 8th and must stay in a savanna view room at AKL, you might wind up paying rack. But if you can arrive on May 10th and take a pool view, you might save 40%. You have to keep calling and be persistent. I know the Mousesavers site puts up discounts as soon as they're announced. I'll just repeat that I haven't paid rack for a WDW resort since 1998 and doubt that I ever would again unless they greatly improve their product and service. But I also don't pay retail for anything else, with the exception of fine dining, so I can't imagine why I would for hotels in an overbuilt market.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj It's nice when you are in the minority of folks that can just take off of work anytime and arrange a vacation around the best deals you can find. I think that represents about 10% of the WDW vacation demographic. The families with children who negotiate around the schedule for Mom and Dad's work, the kids school vacations, and plan these things far in advance aren't as likely to take advantage of all those pop-up rates and discounts. Those are pretty much left to single travelers, retirees, and locals.
Originally Posted By kennect Well then fortunately I am in the category of Spirit...I CAN plan my trips around good deals and there are good deals to be had if you how to find them...In the last few years I haven't visited WDW that much so I really don't know how things are today...But I remember one deal I came across some years ago...Top view at the Yacht Club, 99.00 dollars a night...That deal was offered in a local newspaper ad Disney ran here...That was sweet...Mousesavers, as Spirit mentioned, is probably the best place to start when looking for a deal...But don't stop there, I am sure there are better deals being offered if you can just find them.... As far as the Beltway project goes I have no problem with it as long as Disney is in control of the overall design...I feel sure they will do their best to make it as nice as possible...Not only will it bring people to WDW but it will also serve folks that are traveling the turnpike...Not everyone that will stop there be a Disney customer...
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "Universal isn't even a legit comparison as it only owns parks in Florida, California and Osaka." Don't forget Port Adventura in Spain, which is a very cool park indeed.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo I'm not sure now. I don't think so because the Universal characters are still there.
Originally Posted By irishfan According to everyones favourite online reference page, (Wikipedia), NBC sold it in 2004 to Caixia Banking group and the Universal name has been dropped.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 ^^That is true. Although Universal is building a major resort in Singapore.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj ^^ My understanding is that it is a licensing agreement and GE isn't footing the bill in Singapore. GE will not have any ownership interest in the park. So, I think it is more accurate to say that Genting Group of Malaysia (a casino firm) will be building a Universal Studios park in Singapore.
Originally Posted By danyoung I'd just like to say that in general I'd rather see Disney spending its money on bringing their existing properties up to true Walt Disney spec. Outside of that I don't really have a problem with either of these projects, as long as the sightline doesn't impinge upon any of the prime park areas. I'm not a golfer, so I won't miss the Eagle Pines Course (although I'm sure Pete Dye, the course designer, is pretty pissed!). I don't think I'll soon be a customer of a Four Seasons type of resort. But if Disney thinks there's a market for it, go for it. As to the other project, I think there's quite a large market of folks that can't even afford the values, but would jump at a value-added property like a Super 8 or Red Roof in a well designed Disney-type environment. How many times do you read about people that just go back to their rooms to sleep and then zip right back into the parks? This is the market that is currently going off property to Kissimmee or US192. If Disney can grab a chunk of that, even if they have to share with outside providers, then it's a win win. Just don't let me see a Super 8 tower sign as I'm driving into Epcot, & I'm fine.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj ^^ I agree. Reading between the lines, I see the Four Seasons taking over the Eagle Pines golf courses as a good sign. WDW overbuilt the property with golf course in the 90s when Tiger Woods led a surge in interest in the sport. Now, there just isn't the demand for those facilities. I'm glad to see Disney looking at some of its expansion projects that are costly to maintain and finding other folks to invest in those properties. It means more attention can be focused on areas of the property that are more relevant to the core business.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<It means more attention can be focused on areas of the property that are more relevant to the core business.>> I always thought the resorts were part of the core business. Silly me. Too bad they built over 30,000 rooms and counting only to figure out they aren't ... and to assume that WDW will now pay attention to the sorry state of the MK, Disney-MGM and parts of Epcot would be wrong too. Jim Hill, who I don't have much faith in, had an interesting column a few days ago ... basically his point was Team Disney views WDW as a MATURE product ... meaning they don't need to make major additions ... just add a few Jack Sparrow AA figures and more character experiences and everything will be cool. It's so sad to see what's become of WDW and realize it's all due to some very poor management, listening to consultants, and making decisions based on faulty assumptions and the desire to squeeze every nickel out of every guest to Central Florida. As to that old Texan's comment about not having a problem with a Disney-designed Super 8 or Red Roof, I truly think he's lost what little sanity he had left. There simply isn't ANY NEED WHATSOEVER for this project other than ABJECT GREED. PERIOD. This is a waste of land and resources. Sometimes letting land sit empty and natural really is preferable to putting a Super WalMart (or this Disney abomination equivalent) on it. Maybe when Disney realize that some guests can't even afford the $40-70 a night these places, which will won't even be run by them, perhaps they'll open their version of a slum-type place with Mickey soaps. It's incredible to me that people would defend this. But than again it's 2007 and most WDW guests never knew the place when it was an amazingly run, high quality and, dare I say it, mostly upscale resort. I guess I should be glad I can afford to visit the other Disney resorts and make the best out of my future WDW visits.
Originally Posted By danyoung >As to that old Texan's comment about not having a problem with a Disney-designed Super 8 or Red Roof, I truly think he's lost what little sanity he had left.< Always a distinct possibility, and more so with every passing year. . . >There simply isn't ANY NEED WHATSOEVER for this project other than ABJECT GREED. PERIOD.< Absolutely. Disney has rooms that are going at cut rate discounts now, so they obviously don't NEED more rooms. But look at the percentage of the average crowd that stay on property vs. off property. Disney is specifically targeting those off property folks, the crowd that wouldn't stay anywhere but the cheapest property. Disney will NEVER get them to stay at even a value resort for $75/night when they can stay on 192 for $50/night. But if Disney can go into business with these cheaper resorts and build a central area that'd be fun for the guests to stay in and also let Disney get their hands on a portion of this money, well, what's not to like? As I said, the money should be going to fixing the MK, but until Lasseter directs his all seeing eye east, that just ain't gonna happen.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << But than again it's 2007 and most WDW guests never knew the place when it was an amazingly run, high quality and, dare I say it, mostly upscale resort. >> You mean the upscale resort that featured overflowing toilets, mold-infested hotel rooms, and a front desk that couldn't manage to get rooms ready in time for check-in? I've been visiting WDW for over 30 years, and those are the sorts of things I remember from my stays on Disney property. None of them bothered me all that much then, and to be perfectly honest, the hotels are run much better today than they were 20 years ago in comparison. I think it is pretty snobbish to reflect back on WDW's past as being more "upscale," when that has never been the case. It was certainly less accessible due to the scarcity of rooms available, but not upscale. The Disney magic should be accessible to everyone, and if you think it should be restricted only to those who have the coin for upscale establishments I think you have a serious misunderstanding of the target audience for Disney entertainment during the past 80 or so years.
