One Beeeeelion Dollars!

Originally Posted By ChurroMonster

I love how certain individuals are crowing that this decision to invest a lot of money into DCA somehow means the park is a failure. I think the amount of money being allocated says that they think the place is worthy of such investment because it is already popular and profitable but could be much more popular and much more profitable if certain aspects of the park are improved.

DCA has proven that a second gate in Anaheim could be successful--something nobody actually knew until it was built. We will never know if a park like WestCot or DisneySea would have been a better investment for the company. Would the attendance have been higher with a better park? Probably. Would the park be as profitable? Who knows? What we do know is that the company sees a lot of potential for DCA to make them a lot of money and have therefor committed a huge some of money to bring that idea to fruition.

A failed park would simply be closed. A park with a few big flaws and a lot of really good things gets a billion dollars. We all win.

 

Originally Posted By TP2000

Where's Cynthia Harriss when you need her?

 

Originally Posted By gurgitoy2

"I love how certain individuals are crowing that this decision to invest a lot of money into DCA somehow means the park is a failure."

Oh, I don't know, it doesn't exactly scream success either. Maybe the park has not been a total failure (because it's still open) but if it was really pulling it's weight, they would never have approved such a large budget. I just think it was not meeting expectations, not exactly an earth shattering failure (as some would have you believe), but nowhere near the levels of Disneyland next door.

If DCA were truly successful and an equal second gate, then I think this new billion would have been put towards park #3.

 

Originally Posted By WorldDisney

C'mon, EVERYBODY knows DCA has had problems since day one. Yes, I know people like the park the way it is and that's fine, but the vast majority out there DON'T or, at the very least, hasn't even bothered going inside to see what its really like. I STILL know people who hasn't bothered to venture into DCA, but goes to DL regualarly. Again, I'm just happy there are FINALLY people who recognized DCA shortcomings a long time ago and is finally in a place to do something about it. DCA can ONLY go up at this point .

DCA has been a failure of a park for a long time now. Will these additions change the perception and more importantly, the attendance of the place? I certainly HOPE so and I am optimistic what they have planned will be GOOOOOD!! I wasn't so optimistic under the old regieme. Like Disneywatcher has said (he mightve mentioned this once or twice before ), it doesn't matter HOW much money you throw at a problem, it doesn't mean it will be solved (i.e. Iraq!!!!!!), especially when people's taste are counterproductive to their guests, but I think most of these people are in tuned to what DCA CAN be and hopefully they can bring it out .

Yeah, DCA has sucked for *some* for a long, long time, but hopefully it will change the minds of those who gave it a pass in a few years time. This hater is positive that can happen .

 

Originally Posted By danyoung

>Combine that with the Abilene Paradox, and I bet people like Eisner and Braverman not only didn't rate DCA as being a piece of junk, they thought it was a masterpiece!<

I don't know what the Abilene Paradox is, but from everything I've read, the powers that be were totally shocked that DCA wasn't an instant hit right out of the gate. Remember, they had NO annual pass option for this park, thinking that the regular paying customers were going to swamp the place. It was only after a few weeks of very small crowds that Disney decided to add it on FOR FREE to the DL AP. And then there were all of the summer giveaways of free passes to DCA. They were doing anything they could think of to build up attendance. If it had truly been successful, they would not have needed to take these drastic measures.

And there's simply no way at this time that Disney is going to plow under a failing property. The time has come to invest some more money in a well designed campaign to improve the quality of the park. I'm loving this direction, and the fact that they're really taking some time now to decide exactly how to spend the money.

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">http://blueskydisney.blogspot.
com/</a>

>>Now, this won't be a long alert since what I'm reporting has been covered to a degree by Al over at Miceage when he spilled the beans Tuesday on some of what I was intending on reporting Wednesday. I would've posted it earlier, but have been waiting to hear from a couple of my sources. Still, I feel it's probably better to give a few of the details that I've received about what the Walt Disney Company has been up to for the last couple weeks.

I can't give all the details but the budget has been approved. Projects have been approved. Plans are now being finalized.

The Board approved a budget for the expansion/makeover of Disney's California Adventure. Let's just say it's a great deal of money and the figures my sources gave me are close to what Al mentions. Let's be clear that this is far more than what would have been approved under old management. More than it had when it was originally built and greatly more than Eisner would have ever given an underling like Pressler to play with. This will definitely be a "Bob Weiss" park. Two of Bob's most famous creations were never built...

Disney's America and Disney-MGM Studios Paris... both plans crash and burned in the mid 90's. The end of this decade will find the park across the Esplanade a worthy sister park. A park that from what I've heard will rival the best parks WDI has designed(yes, even Tokyo DisneySea some say). We'll start to see things pick up come fall. By the beginning of the year the hive of activity around DCA will be hard to miss. Many of the people asking when is it going to get started will finally notice that it already has...<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.thedisneyblog.com/tdb/" target="_blank">http://www.thedisneyblog.com/t
db/</a>

>>Word is making the Disney blog circuit that the Walt Disney Company board of directors have chosen which vision to follow when it comes to fixing Disneyland's second gate, California Adventure. Very few details have emerged, but the number I'm hearing tossed around is $1.1 Billion (give or take 10%). This is just for the park itself, a separate budget is included for hotels and vacation club expansion and for continual improvements over at the original theme park, Disneyland.

This is good news. $1 billion is about 30% more than was originally spent on the theme park in the first place. Which proves, if you're going to do something, it makes more sense to do it with quality the first time around instead of trying to cut corners or short change your customers. There are a lot of challenges ahead for those looking to fix the flaws. Line of site issues, a general theme that does nothing to inspire, and a lack of a main street type area to name a few. Bob Weiss, an Imagineer who had a hand in the original concepts for Disney-MGM Studios and Disney's America, has been brought back into the fold to oversee the relaunch project. <<

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

Back on an earlier thread when this large amount of money was rumored, I predicted that long-time DCA-bashers would claim this "proved" that DCA was a failure. Longtime DCA fans would say this "proved" DCA has been a success in turning Anaheim from one park into a multi-day destination that they now felt comfortable spending that kind of money on. That there would be grist for anyone's mill, however they wanted to see it.

And even if these additions are universally loved, we'll STILL be arguing in 2015 over whether DCA sucked in 2001 or not.

I was right about the first, and I bet I'm right about the second.

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

<< Back on an earlier thread when this large amount of money was rumored, I predicted that long-time DCA-bashers would claim this "proved" that DCA was a failure. Longtime DCA fans would say this "proved" DCA has been a success in turning Anaheim from one park into a multi-day destination that they now felt comfortable spending that kind of money on. That there would be grist for anyone's mill, however they wanted to see it. >>

The logic here on both counts is faulty, and neither group would be right. The capital expenditures on DCA have nothing to do with previous success or failure, but reflect the business plan all along of building small and expanding over time.

If you look at Disney's expenditures on parks throughout history, spending anywhere from $500M to $1.5B a year is pretty much par for the course. $1B spread out over 5 years isn't that big of a deal in comparison. The only thing that has changed between 2001 and 2007 is that there aren't any large new park investments on the drawing board. Disney's single largest captial expenditure on the plate right now is the cruise line expansion. All any of this proposed spending on DCA reflects is that there is a large amount of cash flow available in the next several years and a decision has been made to use the money to expand current parks rather than build new ones. Considering that DCA has shown rising attendance with minimal investment thus far, it wouldn't take a whole lot of business sense to figure that further developing the park might translate into greater growth for Anaheim.

The whole premise of building small with lots of room for expansion seems to be validated here. In hindsight, how bad would things have been business-wise for Disney if they had spent gobs of money on DCA and then suffered the global travel slump and recession following 9/11? The losses could have been enormous and there might not have been $1B to spend in 2008 and beyond on anything at all.

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

<The logic here on both counts is faulty, and neither group would be right. The capital expenditures on DCA have nothing to do with previous success or failure, but reflect the business plan all along of building small and expanding over time. >

Well, this is what I've always said. I've said they followed the MGM model, but rather too closely, considering that it was a second gate rather than a third, and not sufficiently taking into account the different demographics between WDW (mostly tourists) and DLR (mostly super-demanding SoCal locals).

Still, they decided to open fairly light and add more later, and now that they've a). got the money to work with, and b). convinced that Anaheim is a good investment, they're going to do it.

 

Originally Posted By WorldDisney

<<Back on an earlier thread when this large amount of money was rumored, I predicted that long-time DCA-bashers would claim this "proved" that DCA was a failure. Longtime DCA fans would say this "proved" DCA has been a success in turning Anaheim from one park into a multi-day destination that they now felt comfortable spending that kind of money on. That there would be grist for anyone's mill, however they wanted to see it.>>

Let the battle begin my son ;D

 

Originally Posted By Dabob2

Let's not and say we did. I brought that up only to point out how ridiculous it is to re-fight it all again and again, actually.

 

Originally Posted By WorldDisney

<<And there's simply no way at this time that Disney is going to plow under a failing property. The time has come to invest some more money in a well designed campaign to improve the quality of the park. I'm loving this direction, and the fact that they're really taking some time now to decide exactly how to spend the money.>>

Couldn't agree more! And I think we shouldn't miss the big picture here, love or hate the park, EVERYONE seems to be excited about this news!!!! Ultimately that's all that matters. I have news for people, I think the park sucks lol. I didn't think it will ever get beyound the KBF mixed in with Universal Studios image and apparently many felt that way. NOW my perception is changing, I think DCA can be a GREAT park, not simply an adequate one. If all the bitter folks were saying 'they can throw 3 billion, it will still suck!' then well, that's different. But that isn't happening....yet lol. Right now everyone seems to be excited about it, even me .

And personally I didn't think DCA needed THAT much money to be fixed, but obviously somebody did. It IS nuts when you consider its only $100 million off as costing TWICE as much to renovate the thing than to build it and not to mention the hundreds of millions they sunk in it already. WOW!!!

Pressler and Company who actually thought DCA would be some huge hit out the gate sure are eating crow today lol.

 

Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt

"After Epcot opened, it continued to have additions, but not a billion dollar's worth."

In 1982 when EPCOT opened it had a $1,000,000,000 price tag. What would that be in today's dollars?

Point is, EPCOT was a complete experiece and, for the most part, built out from the get-go. DCA, on the other hand, was a much smaller investment and not a fully fleshed out experience when it opened. If these rumors are true, it sounds like Disney is ready willing to make the park a complete experience.

 

Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror

>>>A failed park would simply be closed.<<<

The failed park just a few hundred feet away from Disneyland, their flagship theme park.

Right.

 

Originally Posted By danyoung

>The whole premise of building small with lots of room for expansion seems to be validated here.<

Your argument seems to be assuming that DCA was a success right from the start. There are very few Disney employees left, from Iger on down, who would agree with that. While not a complete failure, it has vastly underperformed from the day it opened. Its reliance on shopping and fine dining was stunningly short-sighted. We don't go to a theme park primarily to eat or to shop, although those elements do factor into a great park. We come to a park for the rides and attractions, and DCA to this day is short on those.

 

Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt

Disney isn't known for wasting money these days, at least on purpose. And, if the board has decided to invest $1 billion in DCA, I can't help but think that they have at the very least convinced themselves what they think the original problem was and will see to it that it doesn't happen again."

So what happens when the dust settles and this project is finshed and attendance and guest spending don't increase accordingly?

 

Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt

"The whole premise of building small with lots of room for expansion seems to be validated here."

Exactly.

 

Originally Posted By WorldDisney

<<The only thing that has changed between 2001 and 2007 is that there aren't any large new park investments on the drawing board. Disney's single largest captial expenditure on the plate right now is the cruise line expansion. All any of this proposed spending on DCA reflects is that there is a large amount of cash flow available in the next several years and a decision has been made to use the money to expand current parks rather than build new ones.>>

And this is something they SHOULD have been doing all along!! Instead of building one crappy park after another, they should've been spending their time with the parks that WERE underperforming like DCA, DAK and etc and build them right instead of drawing up plans for a 1/3rd day park in India somewhere.

Listen, I LOVE these parks and excited to hear when they are building a new one, but OBVIOUSLY they overextended themselves with all the building and then not giving them the proper attention once they were built. But I guess a lot of that was due to the fact they thought the last three parks would have no problems hitting their attendance marks and none of them did, so they start scattering with quick fixes and characters shows. Didn't work.

The problems that DCA, WDS and HKDL has is that that NONE of them opened up waaay too light, but had no second plan, which seems ridiculous to me. All of these parks should've been breaking ground for the next thing at opening, but instead TOT wasn't suppose to even arrive at DCA until 5 YEARS later!! What were the morons thinking? HKDL had the lightest MK park since opening since the freaking original 50 years ago, but they haven't added anything of signifigance since opening. IASW is still a year away and that isn't exactly a huge draw. I just don't get the people who approved these parks???

Now, we are stuck with them, but it looks like somebody caught on building the next 'sure thing' isn't a sure thing anymore, they can focus on these parks now!!

 

Originally Posted By WorldDisney

<<Let's not and say we did. I brought that up only to point out how ridiculous it is to re-fight it all again and again, actually.>>

I was just joking Dabob .