Disney buys 1000 acres of land

[GhostHost1000]

Expanding the existing parks costs much less than building a 5th one. My money is on them continuing to do that until they have no other choice but to build a full fledged 5th gate.

I think we will see a boutique park (eg Discovery Cove) long before a 5th gate.

I agree with all of that except the boutique park. I do however thing at some point a 5th although much more expensive would be a gain for them to keep families on property spending money for longer periods. Not sure where that tipping point is though.

 

[jt04]

Future World should be the priority over a 5th gate IMO. Needs an overhaul and new mission statement.

 

[jt04]

Expanding the existing parks costs much less than building a 5th one. My money is on them continuing to do that until they have no other choice but to build a full fledged 5th gate.

I think we will see a boutique park (eg Discovery Cove) long before a 5th gate.

I could see them converting Typhoon Lagoon into a new resort and then building a new water park on the scale of VB.

I'm giddy today. Sorry.

 

[Stripes]

Well, even for things like expanding park footprints, like they did for DHS, it would be helpful to convert contiguous land. A lot of what is designated for development is in a patchwork and many places have already expanded to the limit of their little patch.

See here: https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/maps-of-the-reedy-creek-2010-2020-plan.935133/#post-7935692

Also, I found this article: https://www.orlandoweekly.com/Blogs...s-so-they-can-destroy-wetlands-closer-to-park

Which says that 3000 acres previously was for a 575 acre offset. So, updating the ratio to 1:5.2. If this holds for a new offset, then that's 420 acres that can be converted.

Just a FYI, it's not a consistent ratio. Although, I think it'd be more than fair to estimate it based on a prior purchase. The actual amount of offset allowed depends on a massive number of factors. The mitigation video that was posted earlier should explain it better than I could.

 

[Rodan75]

Expanding the existing parks costs much less than building a 5th one. My money is on them continuing to do that until they have no other choice but to build a full fledged 5th gate.

I think we will see a boutique park (eg Discovery Cove) long before a 5th gate.

I just don't see their financial justification to expand the existing parks (beyond revitalizing Epcot) much beyond what has been announced in any meaningful way in regard to attraction count. If their goal is to sell more resort stays and DVC units, then a 5th gate makes more sense as it captures another 'day'.

 

[Stripes]

Not to get pedantic, but they have 1.49 Billion outstanding shares. $23 million is 1.5 cents spent per outstanding share. A drop in the proverbial bucket for DIS.

Disney doesn't spend any money if they don't have to. Regardless of the transaction value, it shows a clear motive and intent.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Future World should be the priority over a 5th gate IMO. Needs an overhaul and new mission statement.

in progress... sorta... just slow

 

[danlb_2000]

understood. I'm referring to the potential offset.

I thought there was already land within the current WDW footprint that was allocated for development of another Theme Park that was developable already so that there would be no offset needed.

There are a couple area that have enough developable land for another park, but those are dwindling and they get used for other things.

 

[danlb_2000]

I just don't see their financial justification to expand the existing parks (beyond revitalizing Epcot) much beyond what has been announced in any meaningful way in regard to attraction count. If their goal is to sell more resort stays and DVC units, then a 5th gate makes more sense as it captures another 'day'.

As you said earlier, they need to do something to soak up crowds and it's cheaper to add more to existing park then to build a whole new one.

 

[Franklin47disneyguy]

Attendence is rising every no mather what theu add to excisting parks. A new park is a reason for a return visit not just one new ride to epcot for example.

 

[GhostHost1000]

regardless of where they expand they need to expand and get started NOW - it takes them too long to do it even when they announce it and the parks aren't getting any less crowded and we all know SWL will bring in a whole new set of fans onsite

 

[Monorail_Red_77]

How about lets get rid of the PR fluff and truly expand all four parks. If you close down 14 acres of a park, rebuild on top of it and re-open it. You have not expanded 14 acres, I'm sorry. All you have done is made some people happy and some people sad. I could go on, but I'm gonna save some room in this tread for more comments. LOL

 

[Rodan75]

As you said earlier, they need to do something to soak up crowds and it's cheaper to add more to existing park then to build a whole new one.

That is the conventional wisdom from our perspective, and I agree with it. But I'm not sure that Disney does and I could see their financial justification as well. If they can keep the other parks at their existing levels of attendance (which means rehabbing and re-energizing the existing attraction counts), they can build a new park that would get what another 15-20k guests per day at a new peak day rate of $150. No land or expansion (outside of Star Wars or Marvel) is going to drive that many more guests. That seems like a easy cost justification for a new park.

And I wonder what the bean counters are thinking at this point. These new land builds seem pretty pricey and require much of the same land development that would have been needed for a park. Shanghai looks like a bargain at this point.

 

[GhostHost1000]

How about lets get rid of the PR fluff and truly expand all four parks. If you close down 14 acres of a park, rebuild on top of it and re-open it. You have not expanded 14 acres, I'm sorry. All you have done is made some people happy and some people sad. I could go on, but I'm gonna save some room in this tread for more comments. LOL

this - they aren't adding new rides if they close or just redo existing ones

the parks need people eaters... more attractions, lands, space, shows, etc.

 

[BoarderPhreak]

Supposedly this is for water management, yet the properties can be developed... And Disney got it for cheap. Win-win. Though it's on the wrong side of the road.

 

[peter11435]

Supposedly this is for water management, yet the properties can be developed... And Disney got it for cheap. Win-win. Though it's on the wrong side of the road.

The property can’t be developed if they are using it to offset development at WDW.

In other words it cannot be for water management and still be developed.

 

[MisterPenguin]

The anti-5th-gate downer:

1. A 5th gate won't solve MK's overcrowding. The current 3 other gates aren't pulling the crowds from there, so, a new one won't either unless you build it with 30 rides, and that ain't ever gonna happen. A 5th gate will cannibalize the other 3 first.​

​

2. So, WDW has to first beef up the other three gates so that they're as popular as the MK. Which isn't going to be easy. MK has 27 rides. The other 3 have about 9 each. It'll take years for that to happen.​

This doesn't mean WDW can't get the land ready. But, it makes no business sense to build a 5th gate before ramping up the other 3.

 

[Dunston]

Whatever they're doing, I have insider info that it will be super epic

 

[Rodan75]

The anti-5th-gate downer:

1. A 5th gate won't solve MK's overcrowding. The current 3 other gates aren't pulling the crowds from there, so, a new one won't either unless you build it with 30 rides, and that ain't ever gonna happen. A 5th gate will cannibalize the other 3 first.​

​

2. So, WDW has to first beef up the other three gates so that they're as popular as the MK. Which isn't going to be easy. MK has 27 rides. The other 3 have about 9 each. It'll take years for that to happen.​

This doesn't mean WDW can get the land ready. But, it makes no business sense to build a 5th gate before ramping up the other 3.

While I think that is a good point, by 2021 each of the 3 smaller gates will have at least 1 new headliner (FoP, SW:GE and GoTG) to keep attendance up. MK will either need to build more people eaters or put a hard cap on attendance, since the crowds have become overwhelmingly bad. But that doesn't take away a business justification for a 5th gate. Of course we are probably talking about something that happens in the back half of the 2020's.

 

[BoarderPhreak]

The property can’t be developed if they are using it to offset development at WDW.

In other words it cannot be for water management and still be developed.

Well, yeah. They can use it for either (not both). That's a win-win for them.