Originally Posted By DlandDug What I am saying is that for a period of some eight years before DCA opened there was talk and announcements of hotels, and since DCA opened there has been nary a word for six years. Obviously, anyone is welcome to draw their own conclusions.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>I'm wondering where you are getting this stuff about the hotel plans being scaled back after DCA opened.<< I am getting this "stuff" from the simple fact that for six years there has been no construction and no announcements. I anticipate that eventually new hotels will be built, but that will not paper over the fact that DCA's failure delayed their construction.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>No, Disney dropped those plans before DCA was announced.<< No, not at all. I have the initial brochure for DCA. It shows two new hotels (The Grand Californian and the Magic Kingdom), as well as the Disneyland Hotel and the Disneyland Pacific. All of this has been gone over in previous posts. So far no compelling argument has been advanced to suggest other than the obvious conclusion: DCA did not provided the climate that Disney expected for resort expansion.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<I disagree.>> <You mean you're almost always wrong about Disney stuff too? Sorry, I couldn't resist. You "teed up a gopher ball".> Good. Your comprehension is getting better then.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 If they had scaled back to planning just one new hotel in '99, back when they were still thinking DCA was going to be boffo box office, that indicates they had simply scaled back their plans for hotels, period, and DCA not meeting expectations was not what has led to there only being the one new one so far.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt I am still waiting for someone to explain what all this hotel business has to do with DCA being in "big trouble" or a "failure". Disney scaled back the big hotel plans before DCA was built. In terms of financial performance, we can all agree (I think) that DCA was a failure in that it did not attract the initial number of anticipated visitors. Missing the attendance benchmark resulted in the closure of some venues, revisions in marketing, and the redevelopment of some features of the park. A lot has changed in the six years since the place opened and we know that the park is starting to get some legs in terms of attendance. Some are saying that the park met the original 7 million goal in 2006. Whether the improving performance is due physical changes, new attractions, economic conditions, or otherwise is anyone’s guess. About whether or not DCA and the revitalized area around DL are driving increases in attendance and hotel demand... well, it seems almost too obvious to try to argue that it is not. All one has to do is look at the numbers since the beginning of this decade and consider what the economic picture for DL would look like had DCA, GCH, and DTD not been built. So, then, how does Disney view DCA's performance? Does company management view the park as a failure? It is not likely that this question can be answered in this forum, since Disney management has yet to express anything beyond disappointment in its financial performance. Any assertion that the place is a downright failure in Disney’s eyes, or that the future of the Disneyland Resort could turn out to be the company’s biggest PR headache this year is nothing more than speculation.
Originally Posted By jaybee The occupancy rates for all the Disney hotels has been very high. They have had the need to build more rooms for at least 4 years. The focus on the resort and it's future by senior leadership seems to be what drives these invest/rest cycles. Hopefully we are at the beginning of an "invest" cycle.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher >> But a truly fine, truly Disney-ized park would have cost a lot more, and therefore may also have been a failure. << After years of pro-and-con debates about DCA on this message board -- where some Disney fans have argued the park is perfectly fine and others have proclaimed it is a major dud -- and you still want to mention money and economics as a big reason DCA is DCA? You gotta be kidding me!!
Originally Posted By berol That's not what quite what he said. *puts a tornado pin on disneywatcher's lapel*
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <After years of pro-and-con debates about DCA on this message board -- where some Disney fans have argued the park is perfectly fine and others have proclaimed it is a major dud -- and you still want to mention money and economics as a big reason DCA is DCA?> I will continue to speak the truth, no matter what others say.
