PDA

View Full Version : The Future of California Adventure...



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

jeffthechef
11-28-2006, 01:39 PM
I saw an interesting article on Miceage.com concerning CA. They are toying with the idea of opening up the park by tearing out the gates and fences and making it openly accessible to all. Only the rides would require a ticket- either a pass or an individual. The park would end up being an extension of Downtown Disney. The shops and restaurants within the park would be run by private businesses, just like DTD. Further, so called "dead rides" would be removed to make room for more stores and restaurants.

They go on to say that John Lasseter has agreed with some of the proposals, but is against the idea of an open air park. It seems to me that they are essentially giving up on any ideas at re-theming the place. This is disappointing in that they are seemingly ready to throw in the towel. If CA becomes a big box version of DTD, there will be no hope of ever capturing the magic that makes Disneyland so grand. Instead, it will unfortunately become even more of a money pit.

This is a link to the full story:

http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al112806a.htm

Darkbeer
11-28-2006, 02:45 PM
Based on what I read, the current "plan" is a combination of Tony's ideas, such as adding hotel/DVC to help pay for the expansions and "placemaking".

And I understand why to many folks, Tony's ideas made sense. And it is a Financial/Business decision.

First off, you have new competition for the Convention Center crowd, from the new restaurants such as Morton's and RuthChris opening near the Convention Center on Harbor, and the new Anaheim Garden Walk.

Building a new entrance on Katella across from the Convention Center (maybe a pedestrian Bridge to help "grab" people straight to Disney property, and then allow other companies to pay the costs of building new shops and restaurants, and then collect rent on a monthly basis.

You keep the few attractions that had a large capital outlay, and sell tickets (and now you can offer an all day ride pass at a lower price than a one day Disneyland ticket without the "fallout"). Allowing the multi-day ParkHoppers to also ride will help drive folks into the new shopping/dining operations.

You could take the Hyperion, build a true lobby with bathrooms and concessions, and then offer full length shows, some movie premieres, and rent out the facility to folks who want to host things like concerts, awards ceremonies, dance and cheer competitions, etc. You could convert most of the Hollywood Backlot area to help in the rental to corporations, etc. by adding more food and beverage (including alcohol) to the area, and keep things like the old Millionaire building to allow for trade show displays, etc.

I think you would keep Tower of Terror, Soarin', GRR (only because of its size and the attachment to the mountain - though hopefully would get some plussing), Screamin' and Toy Story Midway Mania. Everything else can go.

Add another new entrance on the west end (take out Mulholland Madness), this will allow folks from the Hotels easy access, plus those made to park in Simba (which I presume would be converted to a Parking Structure to make up for the lost of Timon).

I would add a few restaurants in the area (to allow views of the lake) with a few shops thrown in to try and get folks waiting for lunch/dinner to come in and spend.

With the current business model of offering discounted 3 day or More ParkHoppers and low cost AP's, plus the fact that very few DCA only tickets are sold, the conversion is tempting to those looking at the numbers.

Also, you would cut back on the amount of CM's you need to operate the area, as most employees in the area would work for the individual stores and restaurants (Though I presume that Disney would still operate a couple of the stores and restaurants currently in the park.)

Build the Hotel and DVC locations over in the Timon Lot/Farm area, and the new entrance to the south would take over the Wharf area.

Now with that said, it looks like they decided to NOT do it...

But of course, sounds like things change on a regular basis regarding what to do with DCA.....

jeffthechef
11-28-2006, 03:14 PM
Thanks, Darkbeer, you made an excellent point in bringing up the concept of competition. The original article did not mention the fact that Disney will need to do something do lure guests away from the Convention Center as well as the new promenade shops. You also raised another idea that sparked my memory, which is the lake area. Downtown Disney in Orlando is much larger than it's California sister. I could easily spend an afternoon or longer there, so this new version in Anaheim could work.

raediance
11-28-2006, 03:28 PM
Paradise Pier is one of my favorite places. It always reminds me of Coney Island or something, so the opening gates thing seems okay for that.
But there's something about it that just doesn't seem right... I don't know what it is.

dznyphreak
11-28-2006, 03:49 PM
I really hope this never goes through...it seems like giving up on millions of investment dollars just because it didn't turn out the way it should have. Leave it as a closed-gate park. Revamp it. Bring in some year-round nighttime entertainment. Make it a priority and those Imagineers can get it done. Opening it up will only lead to bad things happening...I can see vandalism, graffiti, and trash all over the place in DCA's future if it opens up. However, if it does open, I expect AP prices to drop significantly.

Bolivar
11-28-2006, 03:59 PM
DTD isn't full of vandalism or graffiti, I wouldn't expect it fill DCA either. Picture that you are in charge, you are fiscally responsible to shareholders. You, your company anyway, has already spent hundreds of millions of dollars to build a wonderful park that will attract visitors and generate revenue. It didn't. It just sucked up money. There are many theories about why this is, but in the end aren't you going to be a bit gun shy about investing hundreds of millions more? If they couldn't do it right the first time, why will they this time? I do think they could pull it off, but that is easy for me to say, it isn't my millions and I'm not responsible.

I can see why from a financial point of view this would be very tempting. I think it would generate more revenue and cut costs. All in the short term. In the long term I think they will be better off investing in DCA as a park. But again, that is easy for me to say.

dznyphreak
11-28-2006, 04:05 PM
I see your point, but I still think this would mar Disney's record. It would be the first theme park they lost. Admitting defeat sounds so un-Disney. I don't think Walt would have given up. He'd keep working to improve. Also, what would the new place be called? Would it go back to Disneyland Park? Or "Disneyland Park, Disney's California Failure Promenade, and the Downtown Disney District"?

Gone2Disneyland
11-28-2006, 04:27 PM
I don't think Walt would have given up. He'd keep working to improve.
Well, if you're going to bring Walt's name into this, it begs the notion "Would DCA have been a success when it opened if he were actually involved in its development"? Methinks this particular thread wouldn't exist if he had. :p

dznyphreak
11-28-2006, 04:29 PM
True. Very true. Put my point still stands. Giving up is in no way Walt-like.

Gone2Disneyland
11-28-2006, 04:49 PM
^ I agree with you. However, Tony's idea (from the MiceAge article) is very out of the box. I think Walt would appreciate that kind of thinking. That said, I think the Disney Co is thinking more long term on DCA remaining a park, from the fact they've broke ground on Midway Mania. And the point above about reduced AP rates (not that Disney would cave on that) sounds valid too. Of course, things could change in ten years.

Opus1guy
11-28-2006, 05:10 PM
Heck...Walt axed Mickey Mouse Club Circus and Holidayland pretty darn quick. He knew a stinker when he saw it...even if it was his own. And he wasn't at all afraid to admit a mistake. And he knew not to continue to throw money on a bad idea. He knew how to cut and run. It was one of his greatest traits and talents! He was the world's best editor!

So you have to look at the very core of the thing and ask yourself, "Is it worth saving?" "Can I save the original concept?" "Can I cannibalize or change it into something that will work?" "Should I start over from scratch?"

And then there's...

"Who came up with this boneheaded idea?" "Didn't you people learn anything from what I taught and left you?"

:)

chernabog664
11-28-2006, 07:31 PM
Sure, DCA could be better in places but I have a really good time there anyway. Personally, I don't want it to become an un-park.

futurecm21
11-28-2006, 07:38 PM
Wow! I myself cannot imagine the horror of what it would be like to completely open up DCA and kill a majority of their attractions. I think if Walt Disney had lived long enough he would have supported the idea of a second theme park, perhaps slightly different than what DCA is like now, but none the less I believe it would be there. I also have no doubt Walt would not simply give in and let the park be overun by the public. This takes away Disney's ability to control DCA. I agree that vandalism and graffiti would take control and deter guests even more. Let us hope and pray this is mainly a myth. If you only keep the Tower of Terror, California Screamin, and Grizzly River Run, I as a guest would no longer have any real reason to come the California and spend time at the DLR when I could get three times as much from my money at WDW. Think about it, the Magic Kingdom has everything I would have wanted from Disneyland Park, Animal Kingdom has everything and more from a Bugs Land, and Kali River Rapids is almost the same as Grizzly River Run. MGM Studios provides the Tower of Terror, and the only thing missing is a not so original high speed roller coaster. Hey if I wanted that I can go on the Rockin Roller Coaster, Space Mountain, Big Thunder Mountain, or Expedition Everest. I would urge the Walt Disney Company to be careful on their choices here. :( :mad: :rolleyes: :crying:

Darkbeer
11-28-2006, 08:48 PM
I also have no doubt Walt would not simply give in and let the park be overrun by the public. This takes away Disney's ability to control DCA. I agree that vandalism and graffiti would take control and deter guests even more.

Let us hope and pray this is mainly a myth. If you only keep the Tower of Terror, California Screamin, and Grizzly River Run, I as a guest would no longer have any real reason to come the California and spend time at the DLR when I could get three times as much from my money at WDW. Think about it, the Magic Kingdom has everything I would have wanted from Disneyland Park, Animal Kingdom has everything and more from a Bugs Land, and Kali River Rapids is almost the same as Grizzly River Run. MGM Studios provides the Tower of Terror, and the only thing missing is a not so original high speed roller coaster. Hey if I wanted that I can go on the Rockin Roller Coaster, Space Mountain, Big Thunder Mountain, or Expedition Everest. I would urge the Walt Disney Company to be careful on their choices here.

First off, Downtown Disney is well taken care of, and well patrolled, not just by Disney Security, but by the Anaheim Police Department. I have never seen graffiti there. If they expand DtD, then the Police Dept. will increase their patrols (paid for by the tax dollars ).

As for your choice of Anaheim vs WDW, Disney would MUCH prefer you to head to WDW, where they control the ENTIRE area, for the vast majority of Hotel Rooms and the entertainment/restaurant choices once you leave the park.

They don't have that option in Anaheim, the vast majority of guests are either locals or stay at a Non-Disney hotel.

Tony's plan was to try and draw MORE of the locals and non-Disney hotel guests (especially the Convention Center guests) to spend more time eating and drinking on Disney property, and turning the segment of the property with the worst problems into something that would bring in a good steady cash flow and profit. Plus since the old area would not be a "park", they could price the rides at a price closer to what Knott's (the closest competition) is charging for a day, and hopefully make it up on food and merchandise.

WaltDisneyJr.
11-28-2006, 09:18 PM
For me it's way too much public and not enough money being made. Plus I just like DCA as is.

chrisaustx
11-28-2006, 11:28 PM
My prediction is that Disney will end up putting a hotel, Disney Vacation Club Timeshares and more upscale restaurants in DCA and will utilize the wasted space. DCA was a failure from day one, everything about its concept failed. I would like to see most of the park demolished, and most of the old Westcot plans built. Soarin was a ride that was going to be in the Westcot park. If Disney tore out everything in DCA, and just kept Screamin, Soarin, and Tower of Terror, and rebuilt the rest of the park for several billion dollars with the old Westcot ideas, it would succeed. But due to the millions the park has lost over the past five years, I think a new hotel and a new Disney Vacation Club going into DCA would be the safe way to go, guaranteed income.
http://chrisaustx.smugmug.com

geoffa
11-29-2006, 01:40 AM
The thing I've never inderstood is why they can't make more use of the lake at Paradise Pier. Surely some nightime show could be developed that would pull in the crowds a la Fantasmic. I'm for the Hyperion development too. Trying to cram Hollywood into two streets was a strange idea from the start - maybe this should be extended. The Whoopi Goldberg thing could be totally done over, if not removed all together. The tortilla factory area is pretty stale - that definitely needs some work done on it. Leave GRR as it is. It's a brilliant ride. Bring in a Cirque de Soleil type show at DTD or in GCA. Above all loose the California influence and make it more of an "America" park.

danyoung
11-29-2006, 04:32 AM
Easy there, folks. Al made it clear that Lasseter has in no way given up on the separate park idea. He is interested in SOME of Tony's ideas, and is looking to incorporate them into his plan of rebuilding and retheming. It's all still up in the air, but for right now DCA still will exist as a separate gate, which I think is a good thing.

jeffthechef
11-29-2006, 08:55 AM
The thing I've never inderstood is why they can't make more use of the lake at Paradise Pier. Surely some nightime show could be developed that would pull in the crowds a la Fantasmic. I'm for the Hyperion development too. Trying to cram Hollywood into two streets was a strange idea from the start - maybe this should be extended. The Whoopi Goldberg thing could be totally done over, if not removed all together. The tortilla factory area is pretty stale - that definitely needs some work done on it. Leave GRR as it is. It's a brilliant ride. Bring in a Cirque de Soleil type show at DTD or in GCA. Above all loose the California influence and make it more of an "America" park.

Amen!

Also, if you check out the link listed at the top of my thread, go to the last page (pg. 5) and check out the confession from a former finance guy that oversaw the budgets for both DL and WDW. It is a true indicator of what is wrong with the corporate culture within the company (as well as the U.S. in general). Money is not being invested into the parks as it has given ways to various perks and bonuses. In the end, the guest is not getting the full attention of management.:crying:

Darkbeer
11-29-2006, 09:11 AM
And while I am an Amusement/Theme Park fan, the big question is...

Is DCA doing that poorly that the senior execs are looking to get "rid" of the park, and convert the area to mainly an extension of Downtown Disney?

Therefore, if the park is not making money at the present, will $700 million of additional investment bring back a reasonable return?

From strictly a Financial/Business viewpoint, Tony Baxter's plans make a lot of sense, especially short-term. You can get a lot of the costs to upgrade paid for by the companies that want to come in and place a shop or restaurant in the area, plus DVC hotels are paid for by the folks buying the 40 year plans in advance. Therefore, the major costs to Disney are redoing the entrance areas to help draw the convention crowd.

Plus how much of a labor savings will Disney gain in the elimination of things like DCA's entertainment and characters. Sounds like the only thing the "parks" will have to take care of are the few big attractions that remain, so you would have to staff those, plus the cost of maintenance.

And you should get a lot of revenue from selling either single ride tickets (say $5-$10) or a "one day" ride pass for Downtown Disney ($30 to $40). (A lot more than the current amount from one day DCA only tickets)

Most of the tickets could be sold via ATM like machines (such as ARCO's Pay Point that takes both cash and credit cards), and by then, Ticket Tag (The finger check system) should be in Anaheim, so you could have multiple turnstiles at each attraction, and just one CM to watch over all of them. Just scan your ticket or pass (And I presume Multi-Day Disneyland tickets and AP's would include the DtD rides).

So MAJOR cost savings, a lot of "external" money coming in to help pay for the upgrades/placemaking, and a chance to get more business away from the non-Disney restaurants and the Anaheim Garden Walk.

And how many folks really stay an extra day JUST for DCA. First off, most park guests do not stay at a Disney owned hotel, the majority are locals, followed by those who stay off-property at other hotels or with relatives.

And if DCA goes away, how many folks will just spend more time at Disneyland? And most of the merchandise sold at DCA can be bought at Disneyland and the World of Disney. For example pins, why do you need three locations for a new release of a pin (for example 500 for each location), just have 750 at Disneyland and 750 at the World of Disney. So I doubt Disney would lose much in Park Merchandise sells, but on the other hand, shops with different and unique things should add to DtD volume, and since the vast majority of leases have a certain gross percentage of sales going to the landlord, that would add to Disney bottom line.

But it looks like Disney will try and keep it a separate park...

So we shall see if Disney can turn the park around, since we know it is having serious problems (financially) at present.

olegc
11-29-2006, 10:14 AM
I wonder, if the "open park" concept came to fruition, whether the existing DTD shops and restaurants would suffer from lack of foot traffic. The folks from the convention center would more than likely not walk all the way to ESPN ZOne if they have several choices of food and entertainment just across the bridge.

What kind of compensation would the DLR Resort provide to those companies (Landry's Restaurants, Patina Group, etc.) if the foot traffic dies down significantly? or would it be in the same vein as the new model for open DCA - you pay for the build, you pay for the advertising - we just give you the land and the Disney name on the outside...

Hmmmm....

oregontraveler
11-29-2006, 10:35 AM
I agree that most foot traffic from the convention center would probably not
venture into the original DtD, but there would still be foot traffic from the
parking structure and hotels from that side. It would hardly be a ghost town.
I'm not sure what percentage of people use the Harbor side entrance, either on foot or by bus. And if they tend to patronize the DtD district.
Either way, its an interesting proposal and somethinig to sepeculate for years to come.

Darkbeer
11-29-2006, 10:50 AM
I wonder, if the "open park" concept came to fruition, whether the existing DTD shops and restaurants would suffer from lack of foot traffic. The folks from the convention center would more than likely not walk all the way to ESPN Zone if they have several choices of food and entertainment just across the bridge.



I would think the foot traffic would INCREASE on the West end. If they remove the Timon Lot, and forced to build a new parking structure in Simba (west of the Paradise Pier Hotel), you would have more folks walking thru the "old" section to get to the new section, plus you still would have the hotel guests walking both ways thru the current section.

Currently, the convention center folks either drive or take a bus, some do walk, It is surprising how much business the Lost Bar at the DLH gets from folks attending the Anaheim Convention Center.

And isn't it better to have a conventioneer eat and drink on Disney property, instead of the Anaheim Garden Walk or Morton's/RuthChris???

jeffthechef
11-29-2006, 11:22 AM
Something else just occured to me after reading all of the fine postings here. DCA was created originally to help absorb overflow crowds in DL. If the "park" concept did give way to a greater DTD, where would these crowds go? Before DCA, DL would get ridiculously crowded on summer days. I do not think that people would exit the park on these days just to go spend more money in DTD. I mean, let's face it, Disneyland Resort is already an expensive vacation. So, a second park is really a necessity. Perhaps John Lasseter recognizes this and that is why he is willing to continue investing. Without DCA, guests will eventually become frustrated with the crowds and come less frequently.

Bolivar
11-29-2006, 12:25 PM
That is something that has been in the back of my mind too. DCA is seen as a failure because they couldn't sell tickets for it and basically give it away with a DL ticket -- and the crowds continue to be light.

But, attendance at DL has been very good the last few years. The 50th is seen as a big success. I wonder how many people do stay a bit longer because there is DCA both as a destination and as a safety valve to DL crowds. How many people go to DL for a few days, have a great time and then come back again? How many of them would have become frustrated and not come back had the crowds been a lot bigger because many of them are over at DCA, especially during the busiest hours?

This may seem like a weird comment to some of you, but I don't really think of DCA as a separate park. I think of it as part of the DL experience. I don't go to DCA for a day, I hop back and forth. I wouldn't think, "I was going to go to DL for four days, but I'll allow a fifth for DCA." Instead it is part of the gestalt for which I schedule five days rather than four.

It does have an individual gate and separate finances so it is looked at in those terms, but imagine someone saying that Tomorrowland is a failure because it isn't generating revenue and "no one stays an extra day for Tomorrowland. Let's rip it out and make it open to the public with restaurant and shops and sell ride tickets for Space and Buzz."

Based on the original vision and goals of DCA it is a failure. But that doesn't mean it isn't still a success, even a financial success, given different measures. DL may have had a lot more visitors, sold a lot more APs and just generally had a better bottom line because of DCA. Unfortunately it isn't really possible to quantify that so no one knows.