A Spirited Perfect Ten

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Quoting from the article:

The Walt Disney Co. is seriously considering a $1 billion-plus expansion of the Disneyland Resort with new attractions, an additional parking structure with at least 5,000 slots, and improvements to streets surrounding the massive theme park complex.​

And later:

Disney officials said they don’t know potential rides, themed lands and other details yet, but said construction would begin no later than the end of 2017 and be wrapped up no later than in 2024. But the company now owns the Star Wars, Marvel and Pixar franchises and has plenty of new options.​

Let's see, that's eight fiscal years.

Over the previous eight fiscal years, domestic Parks & Resorts capital expenditures totaled $10.8 billion.

Um, I think they are going to spend more than $1 billion at Disneyland over those eight years regardless of what the City of Anaheim does.

Gotta like it when a megacorporation that's going to see $9 billion in net profit in 2015 tries to milk a municipality with a total operating budget of $1.7 billion.

The city has gotten along without that tax revenue since 1996, why rock the boat now? It benefits everyone to keep the tax exception in place.

Disney packaging this "expansion" as "contingent" is hilarious though.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

The city has gotten along without that tax revenue since 1996, why rock the boat now? It benefits everyone to keep the tax exception in place.

Disney packaging this "expansion" as "contingent" is hilarious though.

Actually Anaheim is working on some expensive infrastructure upgrades. They could use the money.

 

[BrianLo]

View attachment 98457

*1023*

Post-inception

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Actually Anaheim is working on some expensive infrastructure upgrades. They could use the money.

The Anaheim streetcar specifically comes to mind. A $300 million dollar project which would primarily serve the resort area and connect it to ARTIC station which Disney has pushed Anaheim City Council on for years. Seems like a natural deal outside of the "we're going to threaten to not spend money we're still going to spend if you establish an amusements tax". As Po4 has pointed out, it's not exatcly like $300 million is a lot of money to TWDC.

Map of proposed route:

http://ocregister.com/articles/streetcar-516117-anaheim-project.html
http://voiceofoc.org/2013/08/reports-show-disneys-heavy-hand-in-citys-streetcar-design/
http://www.planetizen.com/node/71958

 

[ParentsOf4]

@ParentsOf4 you have the 82-89 attendance stats perchance?

Sorry, it took so long to reply. I didn't see your post till today.

 

[TalkingHead]

Quoting from the article:

The Walt Disney Co. is seriously considering a $1 billion-plus expansion of the Disneyland Resort with new attractions, an additional parking structure with at least 5,000 slots, and improvements to streets surrounding the massive theme park complex.​

And later:

Disney officials said they don’t know potential rides, themed lands and other details yet, but said construction would begin no later than the end of 2017 and be wrapped up no later than in 2024. But the company now owns the Star Wars, Marvel and Pixar franchises and has plenty of new options.​

Let's see, that's eight fiscal years.

Over the previous eight fiscal years, domestic Parks & Resorts capital expenditures totaled $10.8 billion.

Um, I think they are going to spend more than $1 billion at Disneyland over those eight years regardless of what the City of Anaheim does.

Gotta like it when a megacorporation that's going to see $9 billion in net profit in 2015 tries to milk a municipality with a total operating budget of $1.7 billion.

Gotta love that good neighbor Disney.

 

[asianway]

Sorry, it took so long to reply. I didn't see your post till today.

View attachment 98460

Thanks! All those people in 83 must've been hitting the MK hard

 

[brb1006]

Looks like Selfie Sticks will finally get banned from Walt Disney World starting June 30th.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Thanks! All those people in 83 must've been hitting the MK hard

To be clear, the 1983 number is for fiscal year 1983, which started in October 1982, the opening of Epcot.

I don't have theme park specific numbers but I suspect MK's attendance went down in 1983.

Peak MK's attendance prior to the opening of Epcot was 14.071 million in 1978.

 

[Omnispace]

Tim Delaney/Eddie Sotto Space Pavilion
View attachment 98429

Looks like they would have kept the Horizons building too.

The rendering is of the original Space Pavilion, from a time before Horizons was completely developed. The small building in the front is not Horizons but an example of how a good design doesn't go to waste. It definitely looks like it inspired the angular design of Horizons' architecture.

The Space Pavilion that George McGinnis was involved in reused the Horizons building as well as some of the elements within it like the Omnimax theaters.

Eddie is credited for initiating the main concept behind Mission Space though he left Disney before it was developed.

 

[Phil12]

It looks like a large beer keg.

 

[GoofGoof]

Not much of a friend if he didnt consult with the guy who gave him the guest pass. Even if it was a gift, I would still ask what I can/cant do with it if I decided not to use it, or perhaps just give it back.

Yep. If his friend really did put the pass up for auction without his knowledge it's a big time d move. He should have 1 less friend. There's also a good chance that he knew exactly where the pass was going and is just hoping that he can claim ignorance and get off with a warning.

 

[GoofGoof]

It looks like a large beer keg.

Well it was going to EPCOT...natural fit

 

[lazyboy97o]

Eddie is credited for initiating the main concept behind Mission Space though he left Disney before it was developed.

The pitch is briefly chronicled in Marty Sklar's memoir. Eddie also talked about the project a bit in his threads.

 

[fosse76]

Why couldn't they? It's their club. If you break the rules, you're out.

Even if you don't know about this particular guy, just reading the article should throw up some red flags. Disney doesn't just go about suspending club memberships. There's a history here.

Because of the costs associated with membership. I'd be surprised if it weren't a very explicit contract that cannot simply be amended unilaterally by Disney whenever they wish. This isn't a membership to Sam's Club. Plus Disney can't just do whatever they want, they still have to abide by the law.

I don't know anything about the plaintiff, but as I said before: Disney's response sounds like the typical corporate response to a lawsuit. I would take anything they say with a grain of salt until trial when they actually have to prove it.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Because of the costs associated with membership. I'd be surprised if it weren't a very explicit contract that cannot simply be amended unilaterally by Disney whenever they wish. This isn't a membership to Sam's Club. Plus Disney can't just do whatever they want, they still have to abide by the law.

I don't know anything about the plaintiff, but as I said before: Disney's response sounds like the typical corporate response to a lawsuit. I would take anything they say with a grain of salt until trial when they actually have to prove it.

I understand what you're saying, but there's nothing to amend. The membership agreement lays out the rules as well as punishment for violating them (suspension, revocation). When the member violates the rules, Disney then has the right to suspend or revoke membership based on the agreed upon terms. Doesn't matter how much the membership cost. My AP costs $779 and Disney can revoke it if they wish, same as they can revoke a one day ticket that cost $99. It's their park, their club, their rules. They are under no obligation to keep you around if you break the rules.

This guy is famous with other club members for the stunts he's pulled. Disney has relented in the past with him and finally cut him off, within their rights to do so. This case won't get very far.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

The rendering is of the original Space Pavilion, from a time before Horizons was completely developed. The small building in the front is not Horizons but an example of how a good design doesn't go to waste. It definitely looks like it inspired the angular design of Horizons' architecture.

The Space Pavilion that George McGinnis was involved in reused the Horizons building as well as some of the elements within it like the Omnimax theaters.

Eddie is credited for initiating the main concept behind Mission Space though he left Disney before it was developed.

That's not exactly right, it's a bit more complicated.
The original space pavilion that was developed for EPCOT Center in the early eighties with Ray Bradbury where guests would explore the universe in a giant spaceship theater, which Delaney and Sotto went back to for their proposal in the late nineties.

Future World's layout changed so many times during the development of EPCOT Center so it's possible what you're saying is true, but doesn't really jive with what folks like @marni1971 have reported over the years with Horizons' development. There's also this. (Lower right hand corner)

Speaking to the rendering. That image is a digital illustration. You can tell by the manner in which Delaney renders the light reflecting off the spaceship and the water. It's very much a particular "look" which can only be achieved with a computer. Also, Delaney couldn't have painted that when Horizons was being developed given the limitations of software in the early eighties and the overwhelming preference at WDI towards richly detailed oil paintings.

 

[fosse76]

I understand what you're saying, but there's nothing to amend. The membership agreement lays out the rules as well as punishment for violating them (suspension, revocation). When the member violates the rules, Disney then has the right to suspend or revoke membership based on the agreed upon terms. Doesn't matter how much the membership cost. My AP costs $779 and Disney can revoke it if they wish, same as they can revoke a one day ticket that cost $99. It's their park, their club, their rules. They are under no obligation to keep you around if you break the rules.

This guy is famous with other club members for the stunts he's pulled. Disney has relented in the past with him and finally cut him off, within their rights to do so. This case won't get very far.

Actually, they can't just revoke an Annual Pass. They have to have a reason (of course, it doesn't have to be a good one, just a legal one). Otherwise you can sue. The article alludes to some type of due process prior to revocation which was not adhered to by Disney. Whether or not that is true remains to be seen. However, I wouldn't be so quick to defend Disney based on their response, as if it's the truth. if you ever look at a defendant's answers to interrogatories (particularly corporations), the responses are almost always "we deny the allegation in paragraph x. When they make an affirmative defense (as Disney did), it's often exaggerated or completely untrue. And that's why we have a civil court system.

I have no idea if the plaintiff is in the wrong or if Disney is overreaching and overreacting. But based on the article I'm willing to give both the parties the benefit of the doubt.

 

[BrerJon]

Tim Delaney/Eddie Sotto Space Pavilion
View attachment 98429

Sigh. Why is decent stuff like this never actually built? What kind of narrow-minded loser comes into a meeting and says 'looks too ambitious, let's cut the budget by 90% and build something that looks really crappy instead!'

 

[Phil12]

Because of the costs associated with membership. I'd be surprised if it weren't a very explicit contract that cannot simply be amended unilaterally by Disney whenever they wish. This isn't a membership to Sam's Club. Plus Disney can't just do whatever they want, they still have to abide by the law.

I don't know anything about the plaintiff, but as I said before: Disney's response sounds like the typical corporate response to a lawsuit. I would take anything they say with a grain of salt until trial when they actually have to prove it.

Bu..bu..but, we're told constantly that Disney in Walmarting the parks...