Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan And the other thing is that Michael Jackson is in a way such a tragic figure. Massively gifted performer, troubled and unusual personal life to say the least, who suddenly died too young. Like the King of Rock and Roll, Michael filled a void in the lives of some fans, they felt a connection and a bond with him, and a few generations grew up with his music. I just don't see how Neverland wouldn't become a tourist destination, and eventually somewhat restored, in the near future.
Originally Posted By EdisYoda Well, it's reported (on MSNBC.com) that Michael's body may be sent to Neverland for viewing by his fans prior to the funeral.
Originally Posted By wonderingalice Yes, but is there a room inside that features wall-to-wall, floor-to-ceiling green shag carpet?? Inquiring minds...
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb I hope this never happens. Los Olivos doesn't have the infrastructure to support Graceland West. And any attempt to do so would ruin a lovely little town. As for DLR being remote, even in 55 you didn't need to travel on a two lane mountain road to get there.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Posts 11 and 25 here cover the reasons why Nverland Ranch will never be a Graceland West. Santa Barbara County would never permit it. They have no desire to disrupt what remains of their rural life there.
Originally Posted By Dave >>>Practically speaking, it's in the middle of nowhere. It is 260 miles north of Disneyland,<<< But you wouldnt have second thoughts about making the trek up to the Fess Parker Winery now would you?
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb The winery is already set up to handle tourists and doesn't draw a fraction of the traffic Neverland would. The North County wineries and Solvang both help the local economy by bringing the kind of tourist traffic the area can handle, even the Chumash Casino doesn't over-tax local resources. But Neverland would be disasterous to the local ecology as well as the small town atmosphere. I see it's distance from LA as the least important factor in the whole idea.
Originally Posted By juicer What about the indian casinos that are located in the country? They seem to attract ten of thousands of people daily.
Originally Posted By schnebs Chumash Casino (which Autopia Deb mentioned in her post) is the Santa Barbara area's largest casino and gets a fair amount of traffic, but it's on the same highway used to go from 101 to Solvang (it's just a few miles down the road from Solvang)and it's easy to access by car. Neverland Ranch isn't as easily accessible by road - if it got enough traffic to justify opening it, I doubt the roads there could handle it. Graceland has an advantage over Neverland. While Graceland was on the outskirts of Memphis when Elvis bought it and lived in it, development since then (especially after Elvis' death) has put the mansion in a reasonably accessible and built up area. That doesn't describe the area around Neverland Ranch, and making the area more tourist-friendly would both be expensive and would be fought bitterly by the other residents of the area (and these folks have got the money to fight it).
Originally Posted By juicer I heard there have been private parties being held at Neverland. Can anyone confirm?
Originally Posted By Schmitty Good Vibes (Bump) I saw in this morning's news that the family wants to take a shot at this.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb That would be incredibly selfish. Last I heard the property has been fixed up to the point that it's no longer moldering. And there were some private parties held there after Jackson's death, but I think they were memorial events (or possibly it was one party). Haven't heard anything about it being rented out for parties, but that idea sucks much less than a Neverland theme park.
Originally Posted By Mr F selfish? I think NOT opening up Neverland for MJ's millions of fans is selfish. As for the small neighboring town, I don't see how this would be a bad thing. It would bring lots of business and commerce into the town. Hotels, restaurant, etc, would all see increased business, and in this economy, that's a rare thing.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb Go to Los Olivos and ask them how they feel about hundreds or thousands of people invading their town putting extra stress on the area. Yes, the Jackson's would be selfish to open Neverland to the public. And any fan who thinks they have deserve this park is also selfish. Flame me if you want, but a theme park in this area is a *very* bad idea.
Originally Posted By Mr F I seriously don't think "Hundreds of Thousands" of fans are going to be pouring into Neverland everyday. I don't think even Disneyland get's hundreds of Thousands of guests everyday. Even is this WAS so, they could limit the number of tickets they issue per day. Points it, Neverland already has hundreds of fan visiting the front gates, I don't see how opening those gates to them is going to be anything bad. Los Olivos is not dead, nor has anything catastrophic happened to them because of the fans presence, so the town should stop being whiny little babies, and know what's good for them.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb I see you problem, you don't want to understand another person's point of view. If you did you would see I typed hundreds OR thousands. You want what you want and never mind about anyone else. Don't worry, the Jackson family will take every opportunity to diefy Michael and you can worship at every alter they erect.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Like Graceland, Neverland Ranch would be a much-visited attraction, probably much like Hearst Castle father north.> That's actually what it reminds me the most of. Both built by unfathomably rich people who thought they were building their dream estates, but somehow never found happiness there. Hearst certainly had his detractors while alive. Yet Hearst Castle continues to be a very popular attraction. I think if they were to open Neverland, it would be too. I could even see the state taking it over like HC and promoting the two together, given their relative proximity. But those are big if's. The town and county can essentially prevent it from happening, and my hunch is that they will, unless they get really desperate for money. The current infrastructure (especially roads) just can't handle it from what I've seen at present, and that in itself is enough to quash the idea if the town/county want it quashed.
