PDA

View Full Version : Is Disney ready to make big thunder? - LA Times, 3/22/07



AVP
03-22-2007, 03:42 PM
Free registraion may be required to read this article:



Is Disney ready to make big thunder? (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-disney22mar22,0,5565918.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

Disney won't say what the latest plan is for Anaheim, but sources familiar with the planning process said Disney wants to mimic its Florida blueprint in Anaheim: add time-share units, bring its popular cruise line to the West Coast and zero in on high-end consumers with boutique hotels. New attractions for its lackluster California Adventure are in the works, and Disney is giving fresh consideration to its long-promised third theme park.

olegc
03-23-2007, 09:14 AM
I still don't think those suits in Burbank, or Florida, understand the market here in So Cal. Yes - the 50th was very successful - but it was because of the fact of the 50th. Very nostalgic for some, exciting for others, truly an "event" which is why people came.

it's obvious to see from the "success" of the Year of Million Dreams that the head of all things Theme Parks is not paying attention to years of data on the So Cal market. I read in this story that they still are trying to get people to use their entire week in So Cal at a disney property. Instead of going to places like the beach, hollywood, San Diego, etc.,,, It seems they consistently compare Anaheim with Orlando and trying to duplicate that success. Well, last I checked orlando was not within 30 minutes of the beach - the CALIFORNIA beach.

I know my summary here is quite short but i don't want to drag on in details.
I wish they would pay more attention to facts and details in the market. Will the time-shares work? probably (given the 95% occupancy at hotels). Cruise/park visit? sure. Third park? well, now you have me wondering whether that's such a good idea - unless they make DCA and DLAND one giant park and the third gate becomes a second one - and I doubt that will happen.

woody9six
03-23-2007, 01:15 PM
Seems like they are trying to pound the proverbial square peg into a round hole. Given the basics such as scarcity of available land, using Orlando as a blue print seems cost prohibitive. Even if they could get the land, look at what would be swallowed up in the process. Orlando seems like it is a very unique situation. One that the passage of time has made near impossible to duplicate.

pisces
03-24-2007, 08:30 AM
Would a Wescott take up that much land?

It seemed to me that all Epcot is, is an exhibition with restaurants.

I could be wrong, never having seen it in person.

Anaheim isn't the same as Orlando, but given that it's the number 2, or number 3 convention destination in the United States, they could have a little bit more lodging, shopping, and better dining.

Orlando isn't a convention destination the way Anaheim is. The whole city of Anaheim regularly sells out, and many (most?) of those conventioneers end up visiting the Parks.

There must be a way to maximize, and better utilize all that traffic.

cstephens
03-24-2007, 04:50 PM
It seemed to me that all Epcot is, is an exhibition with restaurants.

I could be wrong, never having seen it in person.

You'd know you were wrong if you had seen the place. World Showcase might be loosely described that way, but Futureworld definitely has rides and other attractions.

Finz729
04-17-2007, 08:38 AM
I definitely have to say that Epcot has always struggled against unfair press and opinion. Sometimes I find myself describing attactions there and have to admit I'm not doing them justice. You must go and experience, and then I promise 9 times out of 10 Epcot will rank as highly as the Magic Kingdom in your heart. I almost look forward to a day in Epcot over the Kingdom . . .almost. There's more adult fun to be had there (including beer in every country!!!)

I've never been to Disneyland . . . or California for that matter. I guess as Tony Baxter himself once said, "Disneyland in charming, but Disney World is spectacular." If I'm going to use vaca time, spend a small fortune, and get on a plane then I want to go somewhere spectacular. That said, every time I see a special on the Travel Channel showcasing a new addition or attraction in Annaheim, it makes me start considering taking a trip west for a change.

I think these plans could be a very good idea to bring us frozen midwesterners out to Cali. My only concern, as someone pointed out, is land. When you go to WDW, you are literally in a Disney World. If you stay in a Disney property, you take Disney transporation, and you eat 99.9% of your meals in Disney dining rooms. You get the maximum bang for your buck and your cloistered in a world of innocent fantasy.
And as a Disney fanatic, that's exactly what I want. When I'm there, the real world might as well fall into the sea. I don't even care. All I know is I feel happy and all problems literally disappear. I don't need to spend thousands on a therapist. I just need a week at the parks.
I'd say Disneyland is taking a step in the right direction, but what they really need is more attractions. Time shares may bring a few more travelers. The cruise line, I don't know . . . cruises can be more hassle than they're worth. Most of us want to drop our bags in the room and then just be swept away in the world of magic.
Can the California property ever pull off that illusion with such limited space? Or will they always be stuck somewhere between Six Flags and a real Vacation Destination? That may be an unfair comparison, but it is the perception of many people east of the Mississippi.
I'd like to think with the proven track record of Disney Imagineering, and a little help from Uncle Walt smiling down, maybe they can.

Finz up!

kranders
04-17-2007, 11:07 AM
Boy Finz!!
Seems like awful strong words from someone who's never been to Disneyland before. When I make a trip down to Disneyland it's anywhere from 3 days to 3 weeks. We always stay on property and even on the weeks long trips once my car is parked in the hotel lot I have never moved it until I'm ready to head home. I think that I feel fully immersed in the Disney experience when I'm there.
Try it...you might like it:p
I've been to both WDW and DL and I've heard quite a few others that prefer DL to WDW.

Bytebear
04-17-2007, 05:13 PM
Hey Finz,

I hope you get to Disneyland. I live about 20 minutes away, and I totally agree with you about the thereputic value of going to the park. The difference is, I can go 3 or 4 times a week, and often, in the summer, I do! I love hitting the park after work for a few hours, take a trip on Pirates, go around the train, watch the fireworks, and then head home.

I think WestCot could have worked instead of DCA, and I have no problem with the theme of California. Certainly we have enough to offer in terms of activities to make a park. After all MGM/Hollywood is all California, and can be a park unto itself.

I kinda wish they had gone with the Long Beach plan, but then who knows what that would have turned out to be. Other ideas are to do something down the coast, maybe take over Wild Rivers water park (hint hint).

California does have so much more to do than just Disneyland, that it has that advantage over Orlando, and not all of them are theme park related. Some people actually visit Southern California with *gasp* no intention of visiting a theme park at all.

Finz729
04-17-2007, 05:30 PM
First of all, I must apologize if it even seems a bit like I was bashing DL. I tend to get wordy and can put the wrong message across. In fact, when I read Bytebear's comment about just stopping in after work I became insanely jealous . . . even having never been there. I can only imagine how great that must be! And I will get there someday . . . hopefully soon.

I was just saying that since its a long flight from Chicago to LA and more expensive and would require more time, the more they can add to the experience, the more likely people like me will be to choose DL versus WDW (which is only a 2 hr flight.)
After a recent rerun of a Travel Channel special, I really want to come out to see California Adventure AND to ride the Indiana Jones ride. Two things you can't get in Orlando.

But above all, I will always concede that DL has one thing over WDW forever, no matter which is bigger or has more stuff. Disneyland is the only park Walt ever walked in. That's holy ground!


And what is this madness that people go to California and don't go to Disneyland?????? WHo are these people and what is their malfunction?!?!

That's a joke . . . by the way. Well, sort of. :D

By the way, did I mention I'm terribly bitter toward and jealous of anyone who lives in Southern California. I've lived through 31 Chicago winters now and still don't understand why!

Take care!

Bytebear
04-17-2007, 07:26 PM
No offense taken, and it's nice to see a WDW fan on the DL board. So, welcome! I have been wanting to go to WDW for a long time, and it's not the money, but the time. I need a good two weeks to get everything in I want to do, but I can never seem to coordinate that kind of trip. Actually, based on cost, we have been thinking about Disneyland Paris. Ideally, I want to be a globe hopper and visit all the parks. That is an eventual goal. But for now, I will stick with Disneyland.

MermaidHair
04-17-2007, 09:39 PM
Whenever I hear stories about DLR expansion I start thinking of what I personally would like to see. I have never been to WDW but from what I understand there are themed Disney hotels there that do not cost an arm and a leg. I keep hearing about "boutique Hotels" and that sounds expensive to me. If Disney is making grand plans for lodging, it would be great if they could think about us families who cannot afford to pay $250+ a night per room. I know, I know, it is wishful thinking because there is not as high ROI on something like that but wouldn't it be neat? Would anyone else be excited if Disney bought up a couple of the lower rated Harbor hotels and fixed them up, added some hidden Mickeys and Disney magic? I would be there in a heartbeat. I really would like to stay on property with my kids next time we take them but I would probably have to save for much longer to do that and, honestly, I would rather get my DL fix earlier!

Bytebear
04-17-2007, 09:59 PM
I have seen some of the "theme" hotels at WDW, and the low budget ones don't impress me. They look like cheap motels with oversized props glued to the sides. I would rather see Harbor hotels privately owned just for the price savings.

That said, I do like the idea of having a corner of DCA (say the Timon parking lot) turned into a world showcase hotel where the inner rooms look into the park and the lower floors house shops and restaurants. This way the hotel creates the park "berm" and you can avoid those awkward views onto the streets of Anaheim.

geoffa
04-18-2007, 03:05 AM
California does have so much more to do than just Disneyland, that it has that advantage over Orlando, and not all of them are theme park related. Some people actually visit Southern California with *gasp* no intention of visiting a theme park at all.

For me you've hit the nail on the head. Our first visit to So Cal was on an RV trip that started out in San Francisco via Death Valley, Vegas and Sedona. We loved the countryside - Santa Barbara is particularly wonderful memory. For us DL was a weekend diversion and whilst we mostly enjoyed it (save for the massive crowds of Residents' Day) we still prefer WDW for a Disney destination. We were terribly disappointed with Hollywood - the tinsel had certainly gone rusty - I believe many changes have taken place since our visit in 1995. California was beautiful from its vineyards to its coast
so if I were going to buy time share it wouldn't necessarily be for DLR alone.
As I am a DVC member anyway I have a wealth of places I can stay so expansion at DLR wouldn't be an enticing factor for me. As for DCA they'd do far better if they just built a connecting subway and made it a park-land off DL. If they are going to go for a third park then there are some very valuable lessons needing to be learned.

OH! And Florida has many more attractions than just WDW. NASA, Everglades, the Cays, Naples, Daytona, Miami to name a few.

geoffa
04-18-2007, 03:06 AM
California does have so much more to do than just Disneyland, that it has that advantage over Orlando, and not all of them are theme park related. Some people actually visit Southern California with *gasp* no intention of visiting a theme park at all.

For me you've hit the nail on the head. Our first visit to So Cal was on an RV trip that started out in San Francisco via Death Valley, Vegas and Sedona. We loved the countryside - Santa Barbara is particularly wonderful memory. For us DL was a weekend diversion and whilst we mostly enjoyed it (save for the massive crowds of Residents' Day) we still prefer WDW for a Disney destination. We were terribly disappointed with Hollywood - the tinsel had certainly gone rusty - I believe many changes have taken place since our visit in 1995. California was beautiful from its vineyards to its coast
so if I were going to buy time share it wouldn't necessarily be for DLR alone.
As I am a DVC member anyway I have a wealth of places I can stay so expansion at DLR wouldn't be an enticing factor for me. As for DCA they'd do far better if they just built a connecting subway and made it a park-land off DL. If they are going to go for a third park then there are some very valuable lessons needing to be learned.

OH! And Florida has many more attractions than just WDW. NASA, Everglades, the Cays, Naples, Daytona, Miami to name a few.

Finz729
04-18-2007, 05:35 AM
As for WDW lodging - something I can speak on from experience (not that I ever let the facts stand in my way of a good story!) There are basically 3 tiers of hotel in WDW.
Bytebear was exactly right about the cheapest tier. They are glorified Motel 6's with giant records and cell phones slapped on the sides. However, they are (from what I hear) clean and comfortable and most importantly affordable. They are also the furthest from the parks so you're looking at a long shuttle ride each way.
My wife and I stay in the middle-tier. We loved the Port Orleans Riverside. We also have stayed at the Coronado Springs. You can take virtual tours of all these at Disney.com. The rooms are small but comfortable (I'm sure designed that way to get you out and spending) and ammenities are very nice. All the 2nd tier hotels have nice sit-down restaurants, as well as food courts and lounges for us grown-olders (but not ups!)
We had the opportunity to stay at the Beach Club Hotel last spring, which is an upper tier resort. And yes, it's nice - 4 stars all the way - but so not neccessary. They have a beach around the pool, a play ground area, video rcade, ice cream parlors, spacious rooms, numerous restaurants, cast members to wait on you hand & foot. But I am very happy saving the few bucks to stay in the mid-range hotels. The one perk of going all out for the expensive hotels at WDW is that I believe most if not all of them are within walking distance of one park. The Beach Club connects to the back side of Epcot. You can walk right in between Paris and the UK.

On related note, that hotel that opens up into California Adventure looks really nice, but is it higher priced?

Mr.Abominable
04-18-2007, 09:05 AM
On related note, that hotel that opens up into California Adventure looks really nice, but is it higher priced?

The Grand California Hotel is very nice. It has a similar layout to the Wilderness Lodge though the decor is different(California Craft Movement). The rates lately have been around 400.00 per night.