Originally Posted By ChiMike I don't think it's breaking news as much as another thing interesting to discuss. Especially with the idea yesterday that WDW is too big...... <a href="http://www.screamscape.com/html/walt_disney_world_resort.htm" target="_blank">http://www.screamscape.com/htm...sort.htm</a> ???? - Four Seasons Resort - (6/27/11) While I haven’t been able to come up with anything official, the general story going around about the on-site Four Seasons Resort Hotel once planned for Walt Disney World is that the project stalled out to the point that it will likely never see the light of day. All work anyone has seen take place in the general area so far is for Disney’s Golden Oak residential project, which is alive and well of course.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Well, the Four Seasons would be an independent operator so I don't see how the "too big" concept applies here. If Disney were building and operating it themselves and then pulled out that argument might hold some water.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Thats wholly incorrect Skipper. While the Four Seasons is an independent operator, the infrastructure to support it will still be coordinated through Disney and Reedy Creek. Four Seasons might help subsidize it, but on the same hand, they might also take away guests Disney Deluxe Resorts might have otherwise had. Disney allowed Four Seasons, and I am sure was counting on multiple revenue streams from it. They were doing so, with little regard to "how big" the property already was. There was no hotel there. There was a golf course. A golf course that was obviously no longer needed (2 to 1). Again, too big.
Originally Posted By MousDad 2 questions. Who stalled it - Disney or 4 Seasons? And is Golden Oak really all that alive and well?
Originally Posted By leemac <<Who stalled it - Disney or 4 Seasons?>> WDW Co. can't stall it - they sold the land (nearly 300 acres) for the hotel. The Four Seasons amenities were meant to be a selling point for Golden Oak (residents would have been able to use the facilities).
Originally Posted By dshyates So now Disney is building a ultra-high end community with no amenities?
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer How is this surprising when we have dead Flamingos (Crossings) and a stalled Hyperion Wharf? Disney has no idea what to do, when the answer is simple: improve the parks. That is a surefire way for people to use and enjoy, and COME BACK to a product.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper As I understand it, the Four Season was going to be marketed to folks who would never stay at a Disney hotel, not matter how nice (and including the Grand). The Four Seasons wasn't anticipated to impact the resort hotels in any meaningful way. Of course the infrastructure would be coordinated through Reedy Creek. Why wouldn't it? They are the governing authority after all.
Originally Posted By ChiMike But my point is: 1) There is an additional burden now placed on Reedy Creek and Disney to service and maintain not only the common areas created for the Four Seasons to exist, but also the additional strain it puts on other Disney facilities. Then, you have the onsite benefits also given to Four Seasons.... For example, the guests at the Four Seasons would qualify for extra hours. The guests at the Four Seasons also might at one time hop on Disney transportation. Using your theory of FS only bringing 'additional/new' guests, then that is more demand for the friendship launches. While FS might subsidize this, it is still additional operational strain. 2. You're smart enough to get that someone is going to comparison shop between the Grand, Yacht Club, maybe even Contemporary, and Four Seasons. Hmm, wonder how Starwood has felt about Four Seasons? I realize what an upgrade the Four Seasons is in contrast to all of those other properties, but where is that money going now - BEFORE the Four Seasons? My guess would be Disney. I don't think anyone can sell the notion that the FS would be utilized by just guests who otherwise would not visit a theme park in Orlando. There are better Four Season resorts in better areas of the world for some non-Disney traveler. A part of me thinks Disney saw what was occurring at Bonnet Creek and they wanted to get theirs.
Originally Posted By leemac <<There is an additional burden now placed on Reedy Creek and Disney to service and maintain not only the common areas created for the Four Seasons to exist, but also the additional strain it puts on other Disney facilities.>> Third parties paid rates towards the upkeep of RCID's costs. RCID isn't out of pocket over these expenses.
Originally Posted By ChiMike I know, I've said subsidize a few times. That's not the point. The point is they keep allowing the property to grow. "TOO BIG" RCID isn't the only cost, just one example. I would guess that the third party setup is a profit center. Nevertheless, RCID now has a larger jurisdiction or common area to oversee. You can chose the terminology. However, that in conjunction with the opportunity cost for Disney to me says that the property continues to sprawl out of a realistic or sustainable scale. ..And here we are with a stalled Four Seasons project. I would expect the covenants to be pretty lopsided in favor of Disney.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper If you were staying at the Four Seasons would you get on a bus with a bunch of tourists from All Star? My guess is that they will have their own, dedicated transportation. I really think we would need to hear something further from Disney or Four Seasons before we can make any sensible argument one way or the other.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^ I agree Wahoo. Four Seasons would have their own bus. But that bus would be another vehicle using Disney roads. That bus wouldn't be the only transportation Four Season guests use. They would use the monorail to get to MK. They would use the boats to possibly head between EPCOT and MGM. The point is, the article was very clear about why the resort is too big, too spread out. This cash grab on Disney's part lends itself to the problem, it doesn't help it. Then, back to my point #2, it also takes more guests away from the Deluxe Resorts, which then leads Disney to cut back on more quality.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I would still contend that Four Seasons will not take people in any significant numbers away from the Deluxe resorts. I think these are the "gated community" types who wouldn't want the "little people" to be able to intrude on their little slice of heaven. I don't think Disney roads, by and large, are particularly overcrowded. It does get congested at peak times around the DTD, Epcot, Studios area but the resort is slated to be in a very quiet corner of the property. I am loathe to get into the Would Would Walt Do debates but I think Walt bought this much property for this very reason. Where leaders since him have failed has been in the planning and land management arenas.
Originally Posted By Bolna Wouldn't it be typical for this kind of deal that the property Disney has sold would revert back to Disney (speaking untechnical, there might be different ways to achieve that) if it wasn't used for the intended purpose within a certain time-frame?
Originally Posted By SeventyOne <I would still contend that Four Seasons will not take people in any significant numbers away from the Deluxe resorts.> Haven't heard a lot about this since 2009, but at the time, this was the argument. The Four Seasons was meant to compete with Ritz and the JW, not the Grand or the Poly. BTW, the last word I heard on this was park managers being told it was dead or on life support...that was just before Christmas 2009. I'm surprised TDO has kept a lid on they story so long.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>>Wouldn't it be typical for this kind of deal that the property Disney has sold would revert back to Disney (speaking untechnical, there might be different ways to achieve that) if it wasn't used for the intended purpose within a certain time-frame?<<<< Ironic, if they want to sell it... again. LOL
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>The Four Seasons was meant to compete with Ritz and the JW, not the Grand or the Poly.<< Do not buy it. Not for a second. The Ritz and JW are not on property. Their guests are not treated with on property benefits. Now, I'm sure that was the internal thinking to help justify how Disney could engage in this cash-grab. However, in reality it would have most certainly effected the Grand and perhaps the Yacht Club.
Originally Posted By DlandDug This will almost certainly have an impact on Golden Oak. As was mentioned above, one of the amenities offered buyers in this luxury development was use of the Four Seasons. If the hotel doesn't happen, Disney will have to offer some kind of make good. Unlimited use of Stormalong Bay just. Won't. Cut. It. In the end, this looks like another colossal outlay of cash with no sure return on the investment. What is it with TDO? Did they renege on a deal with the devil???
