News Disney plans to accelerate Parks investment to $60 billion over 10 years

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
*COULD* build 7 new lands.

Iger was dispelling the myth that some of the parks are too 'land locked' to add capacity.

There was not a promise of 7 new lands.

$60B for parks. A portion designated for new capacity (i.e., not just replacement). And $17B for WDW. That is what was promised.
I’ve seen others suggest $17bn for Florida, which isn’t necessarily WDW
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
*COULD* build 7 new lands.

Iger was dispelling the myth that some of the parks are too 'land locked' to add capacity.

There was not a promise of 7 new lands.

$60B for parks. A portion designated for new capacity (i.e., not just replacement). And $17B for WDW. That is what was promised.
Stop defending Iger the bull$hitter.

I know we are stuck with him, but he is just throwing out sound bites to see what sticks.

As for 17B for WDW, I will believe it IF I live long enough to see it.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
So here’s the question, what if shovels are in the ground at the start of FY 2025? D23 is August 9-11. FY 2025 starts October 1st 2024…

Would any of you admit excessive pessimism?

Some pessimism is warranted, but “sky is falling, Iger is evil” is laughable.

Yes, imagineering was gutted, but the job postings for Disney positions have been astronomical over the last several months.

Plus, theme park projects are considered “expedited design,” and someone will insert some quip about ridiculous construction timelines, but the industry builds and designs simultaneously, which means the timeline from ideation to completion becomes greatly reduced.

In other words, there doesn’t need to be much pre-development time as you might expect.

Yes, there’s a lot, but for the complexity and custom nature of the projects, ideation to completion timelines can be surprisingly short.

Probably not going to see a change in sentiment amongst these parts. The earliest a major substantial offering occurs now is 2027... probably exceedingly looking like 2028. By major, beyond Big Thunder, which is I think the type of substance that people want to see.

I'm sure plenty of other stuff will happen before then. Just not the big boundary expansion. My crystal ball says people will complain about it the entire way.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
Hell how about this instead of 7 New Lands give us 7 "NEW", NOT RESKINS, NOT RETHEMED, NOT BULLDOZED AND REPLACED, 7 NEW ATTRACTIONS!!! 1 E Ticket at least. And do it in 2 years!!! They BUILT MK IN 2 YEARS!!!!
There will be more reskins and rethemes as well as new attractions that add capacity.

We don't know if the new capacity will take the form of "a land." For example, Ratatouille added capacity without building a new 'land.' TSMM and Soarin' added capacity just by adding a new 'track.'

Iger was saying that there is enough space to for seven new lands in order to make the point none of the parks are not 'land locked' from expanding capacity.
 

monothingie

Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.
Premium Member
I'm not defending Iger. I'm opposing misunderstandings and outright lies.
Which is a very tough thing to do because everything that came out of his mouth was carefully crafted to be misunderstood, ambiguous, contradicting, confusing, etc.
 

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
There will be more reskins and rethemes as well as new attractions that add capacity.

We don't know if the new capacity will take the form of "a land." For example, Ratatouille added capacity without building a new 'land.' TSMM and Soarin' added capacity just by adding a new 'track.'

Iger was saying that there is enough space to for seven new lands in order to make the point none of the parks are not 'land locked' from expanding capacity.
No offense Penguin, but that doesnt Float with me, as everyone or most Adults alive today understand what Walt bought and a good idea of how much. It was the reason he did it because he was Landlocked in Cali. They have sold off some of it over the years and I do agree that some of the land is meant to be left as natural habitat, which I believe was part of Walts wishes. It does not excuse the fact that Capacity has not increased in any way shape or form to address the added Hotel spaces and overcrowding of the parks.
 

SpectreJordan

Well-Known Member
Almost makes you wonder where that energy was for most of the last 2 decades. But better late than never, I suppose.

If they pick the right stuff to build.
The movies & shows were doing good back then. Now they're depending on ol' reliable to make money.
Yeah seems like an odd number to me…

If I had to guess,

One at DCA, one at Disneyland, one at DisneySea, one at Animal Kingdom, two at Walt Disney Studios Paris, one at Shanghai?

That would make the most sense if they’re talking easy expansion pads and not replacements…

Or could mean they have 7 lands they want to . Like 7 different franchises..

Not sure
God, that'd be insane if DLR gets two additions & WDW only gets one...
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
It sounds like you just didn’t like Zootopia and are applying arbitrary logic to fit the narrative that’s it’s not good because you didn’t like it or popular because you don’t think it should be?

Give us the relevance that movie has maintained since it debuted.

Hint: It's a number less than one. Unless you're a furry, then it's off-the-charts.

Formulaic TV police drama expanded to fit a feature-length movie. Which is what it is when you take the fuzzy blinders off.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
The movies & shows were doing good back then. Now they're depending on ol' reliable to make money.

God, that'd be insane if DLR gets two additions & WDW only gets one...

Right??? Disneyland has SO MANY ANNUAL PASSHOLDERS, they don't deserve anything!! In fact, offerings should be cut back to teach those freeloaders a lesson. Look how well that has worked in Florida!
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
A portion of the $60 is designated for new capacity.
I know. And "new capacity" was worded very vaguely for a reason. A new resort is "new capacity". A new cruise ship is "new capacity". Adding a single ride is "new capacity", as long as it isn't on the footprint of a ride that already existed. Two of those are very, very attractive financially to Bob. One isn't. I will remain skeptical until there is actual expansion work being done in the parks and not platitudes and words spoken in financial meetings.
 

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
Give us the relevance that movie has maintained since it debuted.

Hint: It's a number less than one. Unless you're a furry, then it's off-the-charts.

Formulaic TV police drama expanded to fit a feature-length movie. Which is what it is when you take the fuzzy blinders off.
Not really wrong there. It was a enjoyable film but not a great one.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom