A Spirited Valentine ...

[Longhairbear]

I'm going somewhat off topic here, as Spirit's threads seem to go at times.
With all the WDW Pandora talk (Never saw the movie, or intend to.), Marvel comics being inserted everywhere ( I'm not a Marvel fan at all, prefer DC Comics.), and DVC at everywhere except California I have to bring up, why no new DVC in California? We don't go to WDW anymore. We go to DLR in CA.

 

[ford91exploder]

Iger who bought Marvel and LucasFilm Studios?

Iger likes mining the respective IP's for cash the revenue from LICENSING the IP dwarfs the movie revenue

 

[DDLand]

I'm going somewhat off topic here, as Spirit's threads seem to go at times.
With all the WDW Pandora talk (Never saw the movie, or intend to.), Marvel comics being inserted everywhere ( I'm not a Marvel fan at all, prefer DC Comics.), and DVC at everywhere except California I have to bring up, why no new DVC in California? We don't go to WDW anymore. We go to DLR in CA.

Primarily due to constraints on real estate. There's really not huge amounts of space at Disneyland Resort to build out DVC. Every new piece of infrastructure has to be carefully weighed against the opportunity cost of other uses.

DVC may be compelling if your hotel inventory is well built out and any additions will only drive down your pricing, but if your baseline pricing is at $300 a night it becomes much more compelling to add hotel inventory; which is what they've decided to do.

Long term, after they've mitigated the parking issues, dense development in the Timon Parking lot would make sense. Whether that's DVC or hotel who knows.

If I'm doing a little conjecture, I'd also guess there could be political negativity towards it too. DVC should create lower tax revenue long term for the Resort District versus hotel buildout. Though someone more in the know could comment on that, @ParentsOf4?

 

[jpeden]

A Major land is opening..

Based on a IP absolutely NO ONE cares about, and from the pictures looks like the arts and crafts project where you wrap dyed rattan and sisal around an armature, Not impressed so far.

This is a joke right? People who have seen it say it rivals Potter when it comes to immersiveness - it was not done on the cheap, and it looks like James Cameron pretty much maintained control over design. Also, it was one of the highest grossing movies ever - and the rides I think are sure to impress. This is cutting off your hand to spite your arm type stuff.

 

[TiggerDad]

Primarily due to constraints on real estate. There's really not huge amounts of space at Disneyland Resort to build out DVC. Every new piece of infrastructure has to be carefully weighed against the opportunity cost of other uses.

DVC may be compelling if your hotel inventory is well built out and any additions will only drive down your pricing, but if your baseline pricing is at $300 a night it becomes much more compelling to add hotel inventory; which is what they've decided to do.

Long term, after they've mitigated the parking issues, dense development in the Timon Parking lot would make sense. Whether that's DVC or hotel who knows.

If I'm doing a little conjecture, I'd also guess there could be political negativity towards it too. DVC should create lower tax revenue long term for the Resort District versus hotel buildout. Though someone more in the know could comment on that, @ParentsOf4?

Remember with DVC the goal is not to provide additional places for existing owners to use their points. It is to sell contracts to new buyers. Because the length of most trips to DLR is shorter than WDW, there is less interest in purchasing a timeshare in Anaheim. That, and most of the guests at DLR can drive there from their homes.

 

[rushtest4echo]

Remember with DVC the goal is not to provide additional places for existing owners to use their points. It is to sell contracts to new buyers. Because the length of most trips to DLR is shorter than WDW, there is less interest in purchasing a timeshare in Anaheim. That, and most of the guests at DLR can drive there from their homes.

And to think that Disney was actively bidding on apartment complexes and condos on Orangewood Ave during the late 90's because they thought they'd need that inventory for a DVC resort once DCA opened.

 

[Bolna]

Remember with DVC the goal is not to provide additional places for existing owners to use their points. It is to sell contracts to new buyers. Because the length of most trips to DLR is shorter than WDW, there is less interest in purchasing a timeshare in Anaheim. That, and most of the guests at DLR can drive there from their homes.

Considering that GCV is currently being sold by Disney at 185$ per point, while the new CCV property is going to be sold at 176$ per point and that GCV has the highest prices in resales as well (comparable to Poly and GFV), I am sure a new DVC property at DL would be highly profitable in sales.

 

[rushtest4echo]

Considering that GCV is currently being sold by Disney at 185$ per point, while the new CCV property is going to be sold at 176$ per point and that GCV has the highest prices in resales as well (comparable to Poly and GFV), I am sure a new DVC property at DL would be highly profitable in sales.

It's very high margin, but not overall contribution to the bottom line. If Disney was serious about getting DVC into DLR on a large scale, they would have ponied up the dough to buy out Gardenwalk and just built the (already permitted, zoned, and approved) hotel towers there.

 

[BubbaQuest]

Primarily due to constraints on real estate. There's really not huge amounts of space at Disneyland Resort to build out DVC. Every new piece of infrastructure has to be carefully weighed against the opportunity cost of other uses.

DVC may be compelling if your hotel inventory is well built out and any additions will only drive down your pricing, but if your baseline pricing is at $300 a night it becomes much more compelling to add hotel inventory; which is what they've decided to do.

Also keep in mind Disney has land use restrictions in Anaheim. There is a max on the total amount of land Disney can own in the resort district. I was surprised Disney did not go higher when expanding GCH, but not sure if there were already density restrictions on that land.

If I remember correctly, the Simba parking lot (next to PPH) is not including in the "hotel district" zoning. That's probably why the mysterious 4th Disney hotel will be going in the Downtown Disney parking lot since that was already part of the hotel district. Also keep in mind Disney is getting a huge tax break on that hotel (70% of Occupancy Tax). Once that is completed, it wouldn't surprise me if the some of the PPH or DLH rooms are converted to DVC.

However, I don't understand the DVC costs enough to know if a $300-$500/night room would ever become more profitable as DVC.

 

[homerdance]

I tend to agree...there is a lot going on only because there has been a lot of stagnation and deurbing going on for the last decade...I am hoping that Pandora hits it out of the park, but as far as what they are showing, it looks alot like Rivers Of Light... pretty but lacking any real substance... Hoping I am wrong but trying to manage my expectations...

I agree with this, along with a handful of posters who constantly derail every thread into UNI v. Dis, Year of a thousand cuts, and the 5th gate is opening soon.

 

[FigmentJedi]

Also, it was one of the highest grossing movies ever - and the rides I think are sure to impress. This is cutting off your hand to spite your arm type stuff.

And as we've gone over, despite all the money it made, it doesn't seem to have left any lasting legacy in the popular culture beyond Fern Gully jokes and bringing 3D back in a big way.

 

[ford91exploder]

This is a joke right? People who have seen it say it rivals Potter when it comes to immersiveness - it was not done on the cheap, and it looks like James Cameron pretty much maintained control over design. Also, it was one of the highest grossing movies ever - and the rides I think are sure to impress. This is cutting off your hand to spite your arm type stuff.

You mean the people who are paid in some manner to hype the land for Disney, Those people. I'm more interested in the average person's opinion not the person who is getting a 'free' Disney vacation to say how wonderful the land is.

I'm sick of the 'Highest Grossing' meme yes it was but it was because the movie TECH i.e. 3D that actually worked without giving viewers a headache that people came to see it. The movie in 2D is utterly unwatchable. Sorry the so called foliage really DOES look like rattan and sisal wrapped around an armature. Where are the bio-lumenescent plants which were so broadly hyped as a feature of the land.

The pictures released one would expect to show the BEST features. And if that's the best the land can do well I'm not missing much by not seeing the land.

 

[ford91exploder]

And as we've gone over, despite all the money it made, it doesn't seem to have left any lasting legacy in the popular culture beyond Fern Gully jokes and bringing 3D back in a big way.

^^^ THIS ^^^ it will be interesting to see if the first sequel does well at the box office.

 

[rushtest4echo]

Also keep in mind Disney has land use restrictions in Anaheim. There is a max on the total amount of land Disney can own in the resort district. I was surprised Disney did not go higher when expanding GCH, but not sure if there were already density restrictions on that land.

Disney crafted most of the height/density restrictions in Anaheim to prevent stuff from going higher ironically. Most of those bylaws have been modified or eschewed now though. But it was a major factor in preventing massive hotel towers from going up on Harbor back in the 90's and 2000's.

If I remember correctly, the Simba parking lot (next to PPH) is not including in the "hotel district" zoning. That's probably why the mysterious 4th Disney hotel will be going in the Downtown Disney parking lot since that was already part of the hotel district. Also keep in mind Disney is getting a huge tax break on that hotel (70% of Occupancy Tax). Once that is completed, it wouldn't surprise me if the some of the PPH or DLH rooms are converted to DVC.

However, I don't understand the DVC costs enough to know if a $300-$500/night room would ever become more profitable as DVC.

Disneyland hotels have been maxed as far as occupancy and pricing for at least a decade. Within this time frame, DVC doesn't make sense as long as they can continue to pull $300+ a night for their 400 sq ft rooms. DVC rooms are typically twice that size for a 1BR. So unless they can manage more than double the price for a DVC, it's not a good trade off as long as occupancy is solid. If local attendance falls as much as they're trying for (major push to rid the park of pASSholes), then demand for longer stays at the hotels will only increase once people (like me) see a reason to go back to Disneyland after the local scourge has been dealt with. I've actually seen a lot of talk from friends, family and other acquaintances that just won't do to Disneyland right now because of the parking, food, and queueing problems that all stem from the hardcore locals. Disneyland will be more hospitable for tourists once that's all been addressed. If that happens, I don't see much of a reason for DVC and it's high maintenance costs/lower per sq foot margins any time soon at DLR.

 

[truecoat]

You mean the people who are paid in some manner to hype the land for Disney, Those people. I'm more interested in the average person's opinion not the person who is getting a 'free' Disney vacation to say how wonderful the land is.

I'm sick of the 'Highest Grossing' meme yes it was but it was because the movie TECH i.e. 3D that actually worked without giving viewers a headache that people came to see it. The movie in 2D is utterly unwatchable. Sorry the so called foliage really DOES look like rattan and sisal wrapped around an armature. Where are the bio-lumenescent plants which were so broadly hyped as a feature of the land.

The pictures released one would expect to show the BEST features. And if that's the best the land can do well I'm not missing much by not seeing the land.

Actually, there were quite a few movies released before Avatar in 3-D using Digital 3-D or Cameron's Fusion Camera System. Why didn't they benefit? Up, Beowulf, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Monsters vs. Aliens, Final Destination, Ice Age, these and others were released in 3-D but didn't do the numbers Avatar did.

 

[ford91exploder]

Actually, there were quite a few movies released before Avatar in 3-D using Digital 3-D or Cameron's Fusion Camera System. Why didn't they benefit? Up, Beowulf, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Monsters vs. Aliens, Final Destination, Ice Age, these and others were released in 3-D but didn't do the numbers Avatar did.

You are forgetting the novelty factor, After Avatar the 3D tech was no longer new, And let's face it the Biolumenescent Forest was worth the price of admission (but only in 3D), - The movies you describe well at best they were what the movie industry used to call b-movies...

 

[FigmentJedi]

Actually, there were quite a few movies released before Avatar in 3-D using Digital 3-D or Cameron's Fusion Camera System. Why didn't they benefit? Up, Beowulf, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Monsters vs. Aliens, Final Destination, Ice Age, these and others were released in 3-D but didn't do the numbers Avatar did.

Digital 3D wasn't as widespread back then. It was only in the lead-up to Avatar that it started being installed in more and more theaters around the country because James was hyping the movie up as something that needed to be seen in 3D and who could argue with Titanic man?

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Actually, there were quite a few movies released before Avatar in 3-D using Digital 3-D or Cameron's Fusion Camera System. Why didn't they benefit? Up, Beowulf, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Monsters vs. Aliens, Final Destination, Ice Age, these and others were released in 3-D but didn't do the numbers Avatar did.

Because it doesn't fit in with the naysayers narrative?

 

[ford91exploder]

Disney crafted most of the height/density restrictions in Anaheim to prevent stuff from going higher ironically. Most of those bylaws have been modified or eschewed now though. But it was a major factor in preventing massive hotel towers from going up on Harbor back in the 90's and 2000's.



Disneyland hotels have been maxed as far as occupancy and pricing for at least a decade. Within this time frame, DVC doesn't make sense as long as they can continue to pull $300+ a night for their 400 sq ft rooms. DVC rooms are typically twice that size for a 1BR. So unless they can manage more than double the price for a DVC, it's not a good trade off as long as occupancy is solid. If local attendance falls as much as they're trying for (major push to rid the park of pASSholes), then demand for longer stays at the hotels will only increase once people (like me) see a reason to go back to Disneyland after the local scourge has been dealt with. I've actually seen a lot of talk from friends, family and other acquaintances that just won't do to Disneyland right now because of the parking, food, and queueing problems that all stem from the hardcore locals. Disneyland will be more hospitable for tourists once that's all been addressed. If that happens, I don't see much of a reason for DVC and it's high maintenance costs/lower per sq foot margins any time soon at DLR.

The "Local Scourge" is WHY Disneyland has retained much of the traditional 'Disney' quality.

 

[Angel Ariel]

^^^ THIS ^^^ it will be interesting to see if the first sequel does well at the box office.

Assuming the sequel ever comes out..didn't its release just get pushed back again?

 

[ford91exploder]

Because it doesn't fit in with the naysayers narrative?

Or that the movies described simply sucked...