Originally Posted By fkurucz Not surprising at all. Commercial Real Estate is the next shoe to drop in the big real estate bust. Too many malls and other commercial properties where built during the bubble.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< it makes no sense to spend nearly a quarter billion on a dead mall. >>> But that's the point: the $210 million defaulted debt will likely be sold to the highest bidder, who may end up paying only a fraction of that and end up owning the whole thing.
Originally Posted By Schmitty Good Vibes >>>Disney needs to stay away and focus on their resort properties.<<< My point is that it should become a part of their resort property. I've stated my issues: Transportation needs, and attractions and hotels. The last two can be handled by WDI if they are allowed to, but the transportation thing is a huge problem.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << But that's the point: the $210 million defaulted debt will likely be sold to the highest bidder, who may end up paying only a fraction of that and end up owning the whole thing. >> No. The point is that it's a failed mall. How many failed commercial real estate properties have you ever seen resurrected in your community? It's not about the price -- it's about the concept altogether. Ventures like this don't make money at any price.
Originally Posted By Manfried It may be a failed mall, but it is a prime piece of real estate for something other than a mall. If Disney can get it for a good price, it would make sense. Long term sense for them to acquire the property.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 If it could be had relatively cheap, I agree. If and when a third park comes online in the strawberry field, that becomes prime location. And with DLR hotel occupancy rates typically excellent, if nothing else there's a case to be made for another hotel property there, perhaps two (say, a high-end property right across from the third gate and of the sort that DLR currently lacks - like DLP's DLH - and a "value" Disney-owned property of the sort that WDW has but DLR doesn't. I'm not sure just how large Gardenwalk is, but perhaps there would be room for two such properties, plus a waterpark? If you put that over there, there's a reason to come across Harbor, even before the third gate is built.
Originally Posted By knoxvelour Disney should snatch up as much property around the reosrt as they can, especially if it can be had at bargain prices. They might not have much use for it now, but at some point in the future they'll be kicking themselves for not grabbing it when they had the chance.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< No. The point is that it's a failed mall. How many failed commercial real estate properties have you ever seen resurrected in your community? >>> I've been fortunate to not live in an area that's gone through a real estate bust in the last 30 years. But I would imagine that a great many projects that were boarded up half-complete in the Southwest during the 80's S&L debacle eventually got put to some profitable use. <<< It's not about the price -- it's about the concept altogether. Ventures like this don't make money at any price. >>> I have to disagree. If they were to put Gardenwalk up for a sheriff's auction and I was the only bidder and got the whole place for $1, I bet that I could turn it into a profitable venture. With all of the real estate and construction costs wiped off the board, I could dramatically undercut market rents and make it profitable for both me and the tenants. <<< It may be a failed mall, but it is a prime piece of real estate for something other than a mall. If Disney can get it for a good price, it would make sense. Long term sense for them to acquire the property. >>> That's really where I was going with it. Depending on how cheap the highest bid would be, it's possible that it would make sense for Disney to buy it for the land alone. The existing structures could be used for their originally-intended purposes for some period of time, perhaps on 5- or 10-year lease terms, with the thinking that at some point there would be the option to tear it down and turn it into something else. It all depends on the price. I'll say it again: I think there is a price that's low but greater than $0 where it would make sense for Disney to buy it in the long run. Whether it's obtainable for that price, and whether Disney wants to spend the money on it at this point in time, are entirely separate matters.
Originally Posted By Manfried Poor concept in a not so great location. Oddly enough, the restaurants seem to do all right. But as for the rest of the place...tourists and visitors to the area don't really come to shop at a lackluster mall. And they really don't want to just go to the movies. And the parking is difficult too.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<And the parking is difficult too.>> Not for Disney. You do realize, that the huge parking lot (which used to be the Grand Hotel) on the north side of Disney Way is owned by Disney, right? If Disney purchased GardenWalk, there would be plenty of parking available, provided they didn't use it for the parks. Besides, wasn't Disney planning on building a parking garage on this site? If they purchased GardenWalk, they would most certainly need to build the garage. And owning GardenWalk would necessitate the construction of a larger garage, like Mickey & Friends. Otherwise, I could see Disney doing it on the cheap and building a smaller garage that they will outgrow in less than five years. Seems to me that purchasing GardenWalk would be a very good thing for the Mouse. If they can get it on a fire sale, they should go for it.
Originally Posted By Moon Waffle I don't find the location of GW to be so bad...it's on the way from the hotel we always stay at and we always walk to/from the park no matter what. What I find is that there is nothing really interesting that draws me to it. I don't go on my Disney vacations to spend time at a mall visiting stores and restaurants that I can see other places. I want to be surrounded by all things Disney. GW feels like something I would seek out on a non-Disney vacation. Disney buying this property and adding their "touch" would certainly change that. But I'm not sure the resort is big enough to support another DTD, if you will. Regardless, Disney should buy it. In the long term it could become any number of things.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It may be a failed mall, but it is a prime piece of real estate for something other than a mall. If Disney can get it for a good price, it would make sense. Long term sense for them to acquire the property." Well if that's the case then they should have bought the property before the GW developers did. They had the option and passed. In fact some DLR plans from the mid nineties show a parking garage on that spot.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Well if that's the case then they should have bought the property before the GW developers did. They had the option and passed. >>> But that may have been during the ramp-up of the real estate speculation bubble, and certainly without the current improvements, and without it being available at a default price.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt But what about the strawberry fields? Weren't those purchased at around the same time that the GW property was still undeveloped? What is that land worth today compared to when Disney bought it?
Originally Posted By Ohana ^^ perhaps thats true, and who knows what theyre thinking at any given moment, but GW is definitely closer than the strawberry fields and more usable for absorbing into the overall resort.
Originally Posted By believe didn't Disney buy the undeveloped strawberry field for a record $88 millon dollars - or there abouts? And they really haven't used it yet. It's just sitting there the past few years. $210m almost sounds like a bargain for GW. At least they can make use of it, even for just the parking lot, which would have a positive cash flow.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << $210m almost sounds like a bargain for GW. At least they can make use of it, even for just the parking lot, which would have a positive cash flow. >> Except it's not just a parking lot. It's a business. It has higher tax assessments than a parking lot. There are greater operating expenses to maintain the building than a parking lot. There are greater operating expenses to maintain the mall business operations than a parking lot.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 But they might not have to pay $210m. As SuperDry said, "But that's the point: the $210 million defaulted debt will likely be sold to the highest bidder, who may end up paying only a fraction of that and end up owning the whole thing." Also, couldn't they theoretically buy it and close everything down, till they figured out what they wanted to do with it? If they thought some or all of the businesses could be run profitably, they could keep them running - and pay whatever taxes necessary - and as the landlord close the rest when the leases ran out? I'm not sure of CA law here or how long the leases run, or if they're void if the property is sold... It just seems to me that if Disney could get its hands on that chunk of land for relatively cheap, as SuperDry suggests, it might be a good idea.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Only if they could turn the kind of profit that Disney deems worth the investment.
