A Disney Resort Remodels for Business Travelers (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/30/business/30DOLP.html?ex=1036645200&en=8b056a352216720c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE) - New York Times, 10/30/02

QuikQuote: The Tishman Hotel Corporation, a wholly owned unit of the Tishman Realty and Construction Company of New York that owns these hotels in partnership with MetLife, is spending $75 million to brush away just enough of that imagery to make the Swan and Dolphin hotels, which are operated by the Starwood Corporation, appeal to more business travelers and conventiongoers.
The task is delicate, in part because the Walt Disney Company owns the ground beneath the hotels and has a veto over any modifications and in part because the site of the two hotels within Disney World makes it imperative that Tishman not turn its back on the family market altogether.

Swan and Dolphin are not that cartoonish now, and I think they are going to price themselves right out of the market.
...........

re: Orlando hotel properties in general.... "In Orlando, you've actually got a lot of properties that should have been bulldozed," Mr. Taylor said. "We're underdemolished."

Not only in Orlando! Anaheim, Santa Monica.... just about anywhere. You can't expect to profit from the labor of future owners. My family was in the hotel business from 1963 until, well, this year in fact. Buying up distressed properties at a bargain rate and remodeling them to meet current code and standards is extremely costly, and if the sellers are pricing based on future value, they are asking to be paid for the buyer's planning and efforts. If a property is distressed, you sell it for what you can get from it now and move on, otherwise you are holding onto a degenerating asset. Unless a place has significant historical value that is worth holding onto, or is a family-run business with a steady customer base, you charge what the market will bear.

The Swan and Dolphin are currently my favorite resorts on property for the following reasons:

- I actually really like the whimsical decor and motif. Once I got used to those huge cement animals, I liked everything aesthetically about the two hotels.

- The location is ideal for visiting all of WDW. Walk to EPCOT or MGM (or take the boat if you're tired), short bus trips to other locations.

- You get almost all the Disney resort benefits (no room charging except at the Swan/Dolphin is the big exception). The cast members are better than at any other Westin/Sheraton I've visited, that's for sure.

- There are some great restaurants here that are much less known and therefore less crowded than elsewhere on property. Palio, Shula's, even the Dolphin Fountain!

- They offer inexpensive government rates or referrals from the Shades of Green, allowing me to stay in a $300 per night room for less than half that.

- I can earn Starwood Preferred Guest points. Since I have become a "point hound" in all my travels I find it hard to pay Disney deluxe prices and get nothing back at the end.

I will admit that over the years it seems like more and more of their guests are conventioners as opposed to families. It used to be that the Swan and Dolphin were full of Japanese tourists, but since that market has shrunk so much I guess they are catering to a new market. As long as convention-goers are willing to fill the hotels at the rates they charge, I guess they probably don't care about pricing themselves out of "normal family" range!

Originally posted by teri
Swan and Dolphin are not that cartoonish now, and I think they are going to price themselves right out of the market.I know they did for the company I work for. Every couple of years, we hold our big annual user conference in Orlando, and in the past, we have always had it at the Swan. Next year, we will be using an off-property resort for two reasons (that I was told, although this is probably not the whole picture):

- As a tech company, we needed a hotel that had state-of-the-art technology access in the convention area and in the meeting and hotel rooms. I believe the new hotel they chose is years ahead of the Swan in this respect

- Cost: Hands down the biggest difference. The amount of money we will save is apparently profoundly substantial. The Swan offered a better deal, but only after they found out we'd signed up with the other hotel already.

Too bad. I have no idea how much our conference runs, but we must easily spend in the seven figures for this when you take the entire dollar amount spent (that is, not just us, but our conference registrants).