Originally Posted By dshyates I may be wrong, but I think the GardenWalk management put too much faith in Disney when negotiating the new hotels and should have gone with another hotel chain. I think Disney purposely stalled keeping other hotel chains out of considerations and played a hand in forcing the failure of the project.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I may be wrong, but I think the GardenWalk management put too much faith in Disney when negotiating the new hotels and should have gone with another hotel chain. >> If you go back a decade, the GardenWalk folks tried for years to lure other hotel chains into their development scheme. There's a reason why this project took so long to get off the ground and why it is in bankruptcy -- it's a bad business model. There weren't any other hotel chains even interested. That Disney even considered being part of the project is amazing when you think about what a bad business idea this was.
Originally Posted By dshyates I don't see how it is that much different than DtD less than a block to its west. Which has been quite popular. Even with pedestrain chains like House of Blues, Rainforest Cafe, and AMC Theaters.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt It's totally different. DtD is wedged between two of the most attended theme parks in the world, an 11,000 car parking garage, and three hotels.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Not to mention that DtD actually has something in it worth seeing or doing.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I don't see how it is that much different than DtD less than a block to its west. Which has been quite popular. >> I think the "popularity" of DtD is overstated. I don't find it to be all that engaging or interesting. I'm not intrigued by any of the retail shops or restaurants there. The only reason I go there is because it happens to be at the stop for the tram to get me back to my car, or it's required that I walk through DtD to get back to my room at the DLH. If it wasn't for that, I wouldn't set a foot in the place. I haven't ever set a foot at GardenWalk. There's no reason to go there.
Originally Posted By TP2000 I like McCormick & Schmicks. Iwasn't that impressed with Roy's. I still think there is long term value in Disney scoopping up this failed mall. It may not make much sense in 2010, or in 2013, but in 2020 and 2030 and 2040 it's going to be a no-brainer for Disney to own this land.
Originally Posted By believe >>>>>I think the "popularity" of DtD is overstated.<<<<< I totally agree, but the fact is, the place is popular. And the main reason why it is populuar is ..... location, location, location. At this time, GW is a lousy location. All it'll take to make it popular is to make it a destination. 1. Have theme park parking there to force people to go thru it (like City Walk) 2. Have a convenient AND fun mode of transportation to get between DtD and GW to make it fun to visit. For example, if they had a free peoplemover at the esplanade going there, people will hop on just to go for the free attraction/ride. Once they are there, they might walk around and buy stuff. It has to be a special ride like a people mover - buses and trams won't work.
Originally Posted By believe >>>>>but in 2020 and 2030 and 2040 it's going to be a no-brainer for Disney to own this land.<<<<< Exactly, but by then, the price might be much higher than it is now. If it is worth for someone else to buy it, why wouldn't it be for Disney? If someone else can profit from owning it, why can't Disney? GW is going to be auctioned off. Who knows how much it'll sell for. Could be $210M, could be $50M, could be $300M. No one knows until the after the auction. Disney has at least got to try. By the way, anyone know how much it originally cost to build GW and buy the land in the first place?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Well, it looks like those hotels are set to begin construction at Garden Walk shortly. Interesting that the two new properties will only add a total of 866 rooms. Again, I really can't see Disney being even remotely interested in this project. <a href="http://ocresort.freedomblogging.com/2010/03/05/gardenwalk-hotels-to-procede-despite-mall-woes/36481/" target="_blank">http://ocresort.freedombloggin...s/36481/</a> I guess the good news is that these will be luxury properties, something that is rare in motel laden Anaheim.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Thanks for that link, Dr. Hans.... Thought this was an interesting quote. <Anaheim GW II, LLC, the equity partners who financed GardenWalk mall, adjacent to Disneyland, have defaulted on a $210-million loan, as the mall has struggled to attract and keep tenants. That property is set to go to auction Tuesday. But developers of the hotels said they don’t anticipate those current financial difficulties affecting the long-term success of the property, and they plan to proceed. The two hotel buildings, to go up on the 300 block of West Katella Avenue, would add 866 rooms and generate an estimated 3,000 construction jobs and 1,300 steady jobs.> like...wow.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Kind of crazy isn't it? Again, I think the retail aspect of the project wouldn't have failed so miserably if the hotels had been built out from the start. However, I do question the room count. Are 866 rooms enough to generate a sizable amount of foot traffic? There are almost a 1,000 rooms just at the DLH alone.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Not yet, but the economy is clearly rebounding<< I wish I shared your optimism.
Originally Posted By fkurucz **Tue 3/16/2010 3:36p << At least with AGW, they can collect rent, collect parking fees, from day one with zero expenditure. >> Well, except for the property taxes on developed land, payroll/administrative costs, insurance costs, facilities maintenance, utilities expenses, and the overhead of running a retail shopping mall.*** Bingo. There's tons of fixed and variable costs associated with running a shopping center.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>With Garden Walk, it's built already. They don't have to wait 2 years to get something built and earn income. It's there already. << That assumes rents collected will cover costs. Apparently they don't, which is why the current owner is delinquent. Of course Disney could pay cash for the place, but there are still opportunity costs to reckon with. The fact the Disney hasn't "snapped up" this property probably shows that they have done their due diligence and have found it wanting. I wouldn't be surprised if NO ONE wants this property. At least not at the price the creditors need to cover the loans. Given the huge bath they would have to take to unload it it likely they creditors will just hang on to it until a stronger market returns, which could be a while.
