Rumor Disney resort of some kind in Texas?

[celluloid]

Everyone’s too focused on the physical parks to see how Disney is actually moving into Texas and other regional markets. Via cruise ships. That’s the far better strategy.

I really also think there’s a huge misunderstanding of the product Universal is offering. It’s a small regional children’s park. Even a water park would be more meaningful to overlapping with their destination resorts customer base.

Some are underselling it a little bit. It is the beginning and a prototype.

It is like a little larger than a Legoland. It will be of more substantial investment than a waterpark while holding its own as Frisco's growth and Texas and surrounding areas are huge and why it was chosen. It is going to be 97 acres and have a hotel. It is no EPIC Universe, nor should it be. It is also nothing to sneeze at. It will begin with an onsite hotel with 300 rooms.
It is not about overlapping. It is about complimenting. There can be a potential of millions who to go Universal Orlando or Hollywood every couple to few years for a major trip, while visiting this one every year a day or less drive from their home for a short weekend getaway or day of fun. They will happily drop a 120 dollar annual pass to have something like this in their backyard.
Frisco market is a huge market not just because the surrounding cites in Texas, but because it is a day drive to millions and millions of others in a market underserved for such places.

A 300 room onsite hotel, 97 acres that also includes a Krusty Krab to eat at and high caliber character meets. That alone is going to have quite a draw.

For reference on how much you can pack in. Disneyland is only 85 acres and DCA is 72 acres.

 

[britain]

If only for the way it could relieve strain on CA and FL, I’d support this. Let alone the potentially unique offerings.

 

[DarkMetroid567]

Some are underselling it a little bit. It is the beginning and a prototype.

It is like a little larger than a Legoland. It will be of more substantial investment than a waterpark while holding its own as Frisco's growth and Texas and surrounding areas are huge and why it was chosen. It is going to be 97 acres and have a hotel. It is no EPIC Universe, nor should it be. It is also nothing to sneeze at. It will begin with an onsite hotel with 300 rooms.
It is not about overlapping. It is about complimenting. There can be a potential of millions who to go Universal Orlando or Hollywood every couple to few years for a major trip, while visiting this one every year a day or less drive from their home for a short weekend getaway or day of fun. They will happily drop a 120 dollar annual pass to have something like this in their backyard.
Frisco market is a huge market not just because the surrounding cites in Texas, but because it is a day drive to millions and millions of others in a market underserved for such places.

It’s going to be hard to see how they thread the needle here. $120 for an annual pass is far too cheap and makes it hard to justify the investment, but the park also can’t be too much more than a regional/locals park, because a high-quality park would inherently take people away from Orlando and jeopardize Epic’s future.

 

[larryz]

Glendale is chock full of plans...

 

[larryz]

I would wager that they really wouldn’t want to create a castle park in the middle of America for fear of diminishing the exclusivity of their two current US resorts. so I think they would consider some new kind of park or mini park.

However, gone are the days where Disney could just put their name on something pretty & elegant and it have a strong pull. If it is not going to be America’s Disneyland 3.0, it would need to have top-tier IP to anchor it.

And honestly, none of their IP are impeccable anymore.

Maybe an Avengers park makes most sense?

Maybe that “multiple planet” Star Wars park idea?

I dunno. I think their best bet really would be Disneyland 3.0, but I don’t think they are actually bold enough to do that.

Considering Encanto, Coco and The Three Caballeros, Disney has a strong IP tie-in to a good-sized chunk of the Texas demographic. Plus, didn't Route 66 go thru Amarillo?

Do I smell some Cars Land opportunities in Texas???

 

[britain]

Considering Encanto, Coco and The Three Caballeros, Disney has a strong IP tie-in to a good-sized chunk of the Texas demographic. Plus, didn't Route 66 go thru Amarillo?

Do I smell some Cars Land opportunities in Texas???

Have we not learned from California Adventure?

Ya DON’T build a theme park about Texas IN Texas.

 

[larryz]

Have we not learned from California Adventure?

Ya DON’T build a theme park about Texas IN Texas.

Uh, none of those IPs I cited have anything to do with Texas. Not directly, anyway.

 

[coffeefan]

Some are underselling it a little bit. It is the beginning and a prototype.

It is like a little larger than a Legoland. It will be of more substantial investment than a waterpark while holding its own as Frisco's growth and Texas and surrounding areas are huge and why it was chosen. It is going to be 97 acres and have a hotel. It is no EPIC Universe, nor should it be. It is also nothing to sneeze at. It will begin with an onsite hotel with 300 rooms.
It is not about overlapping. It is about complimenting. There can be a potential of millions who to go Universal Orlando or Hollywood every couple to few years for a major trip, while visiting this one every year a day or less drive from their home for a short weekend getaway or day of fun. They will happily drop a 120 dollar annual pass to have something like this in their backyard.
Frisco market is a huge market not just because the surrounding cites in Texas, but because it is a day drive to millions and millions of others in a market underserved for such places.

A 300 room onsite hotel, 97 acres that also includes a Krusty Krab to eat at and high caliber character meets. That alone is going to have quite a draw.

For reference on how much you can pack in. Disneyland is only 85 acres and DCA is 72 acres.

But will the Mini Universal Texas park negatively affect the more lucrative FL or CA parks? I think Disney will monitor what impact it has before considering it. Some families may be content enough with a mini Texas park and reduce or eliminate plans to visit the FL/CA parks.

 

[Comped]

Would be nice if someone showed off the old plans Eisner made his execs made for their 3rd domestic park... Or the $300 million mini-parks.

Maybe they're being looked at again. Or perhaps this is regional entertainment looking at the old Disney Entertainment Complex proposal from 1984.

 

[celluloid]

But will the Mini Universal Texas park negatively affect the more lucrative FL or CA parks? I think Disney will monitor what impact it has before considering it. Some families may be content enough with a mini Texas park and reduce or eliminate plans to visit the FL/CA parks.

This research has been done for this very thing. It could happen, but that is not the way any tourism has worked yet when it is done well.

 

[Disgruntled Walt]

I like to think that Pandora is Beastly Kingdom

That's what they WANT you to think. But I will never accept that.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Everyone’s too focused on the physical parks to see how Disney is actually moving into Texas and other regional markets. Via cruise ships. That’s the far better strategy.

This would be another major advantage to a park nearer the Houston area, most people I know that travel to FL for a Disney cruise out of Port Canaveral will also spend a few days at WDW, along with tickets, hotel, and bus transportation to the port, they would have the same bundling ability ($$$) with the Galveston Port.

If only for the way it could relieve strain on CA and FL, I’d support this. Let alone the potentially unique offerings.

This is the primary reason I say Disney needs a third US castle park, people are worried it would poach from DL and WDW but I see that as one of the main reasons to build it, DL and WDW are both overcrowded and the guest experience suffers as a result , the experience at both would greatly benefit from losing a couple million guests a year to a third park.

 

[coffeefan]

This research has been done for this very thing. It could happen, but that is not the way any tourism has worked yet when it is done well.

It'll be interesting to see how Universal does with the concept. It is better for them to take the risks and for Disney to watch. There's also the risk that Mini C-quality park may affect the quality perceptions of the primary parks.

 

[celluloid]

It'll be interesting to see how Universal does with the concept. It is better for them to take the risks and for Disney to watch. There's also the risk that Mini C-quality park may affect the quality perceptions of the primary parks.

That is an ineresting definite statment and reads as wishful thinking. I do not think it is going to be so low it diminishes the brand of the larger destinations.
I think relatively, this will be a backyard destination central to more people than DL or WDW had, and on a starting scale that is safe.
This is not a clone.
Thisnis going tk offer something stronger Than what Six Flags and Sea World habe offered other parts of Texas for decades.
I think people are not realizing how desnley populated Frisco's surroundjng areas are and it's year round climate situation.
The loads and day drivers will keep this place going if it is a fun time with what itnis got. To offer in both daily and events.

 

[BrianLo]

Some are underselling it a little bit. It is the beginning and a prototype.

It is like a little larger than a Legoland. It will be of more substantial investment than a waterpark while holding its own as Frisco's growth and Texas and surrounding areas are huge and why it was chosen. It is going to be 97 acres and have a hotel. It is no EPIC Universe, nor should it be. It is also nothing to sneeze at. It will begin with an onsite hotel with 300 rooms.
It is not about overlapping. It is about complimenting. There can be a potential of millions who to go Universal Orlando or Hollywood every couple to few years for a major trip, while visiting this one every year a day or less drive from their home for a short weekend getaway or day of fun. They will happily drop a 120 dollar annual pass to have something like this in their backyard.
Frisco market is a huge market not just because the surrounding cites in Texas, but because it is a day drive to millions and millions of others in a market underserved for such places.

A 300 room onsite hotel, 97 acres that also includes a Krusty Krab to eat at and high caliber character meets. That alone is going to have quite a draw.

For reference on how much you can pack in. Disneyland is only 85 acres and DCA is 72 acres.

No, this is exactly what I mean. The project is being completely mis-interpreted.

The park is 32 acres. The total land parcel acquired is 97 acres. They are spending 10% of what it is costing to build Epic on this project. It’s also a fraction of Volcano Bay.

It’s tiny and will largely consist of experiences aimed at the pre and early elementary years. The demographic that visits Universal is not the same. It’s really made for Grade 1 field trips and birthday parties serving the local Texas markets. The hotel addition I’m curious to see if that will make sense.

I’m not putting it down, but this is not an alternative or a stepping stone to one of their destination resorts, it’s largely a different product entirely, aimed at a different market segment. When people see what is built and actually want to travel to it beyond the immediate vicinity, I’ll eat my hat.

But unless you all are traveling multiple state lines to see Sesame Places, this park isn’t for you. It’s more Sesame Place than Legoland.

 

[britain]

No, this is exactly what I mean. The project is being completely mis-interpreted.

The park is 32 acres. The total land parcel acquired is 97 acres. They are spending 10% of what it is costing to build Epic on this project. It’s also a fraction of Volcano Bay.

It’s tiny and will largely consist of experiences aimed at the pre and early elementary years. The demographic that visits Universal is not the same. It’s really made for Grade 1 field trips and birthday parties serving the local Texas markets. The hotel addition I’m curious to see if that will make sense.

I’m not putting it down, but this is not an alternative or a stepping stone to one of their destination resorts, it’s largely a different product entirely, aimed at a different market segment. When people see what is built and actually want to travel to it beyond the immediate vicinity, I’ll eat my hat.

But unless you all are traveling multiple state lines to see Sesame Places, this park isn’t for you. It’s more Sesame Place than Legoland.

Somewhere there’s a spreadsheet showing that there’s money being left on the table if Uni only used their Dreamworks license within a typical Uni park that skews towards teens and adults. Some families with young children would like the Panda, Shrek, and other attractions, but might think that they’d be wasting their money & time ignoring all the extreme & scary stuff they paid for. Makes sense to appeal directly to that audience with their own smaller park in the middle of the country.

But I don’t know if there’s a comparable audience problem for Disney to justify a differentiating park.

 

[Coaster Lover]

But will the Mini Universal Texas park negatively affect the more lucrative FL or CA parks? I think Disney will monitor what impact it has before considering it. Some families may be content enough with a mini Texas park and reduce or eliminate plans to visit the FL/CA parks.

I dunno... I see Uni's TX park as more of a feeder park for the Orlando/Hollywood parks. I always felt that the Orlando/Hollywood parks struggled to cater to the under 42" height range (something Disney does well) where as Uni's TX park will cater almost exclusively to the under 42" age group (with next to nothing for the older kids). The park in TX won't detract from the other two parks because it serves a different demographic. The same concept doesn't work as well with Disney because their parks already do a pretty good job catering to the under 42" crowd.

 

[DisneyHead123]

No, this is exactly what I mean. The project is being completely mis-interpreted.

The park is 32 acres. The total land parcel acquired is 97 acres. They are spending 10% of what it is costing to build Epic on this project. It’s also a fraction of Volcano Bay.

It’s tiny and will largely consist of experiences aimed at the pre and early elementary years. The demographic that visits Universal is not the same. It’s really made for Grade 1 field trips and birthday parties serving the local Texas markets. The hotel addition I’m curious to see if that will make sense.

I’m not putting it down, but this is not an alternative or a stepping stone to one of their destination resorts, it’s largely a different product entirely, aimed at a different market segment. When people see what is built and actually want to travel to it beyond the immediate vicinity, I’ll eat my hat.

But unless you all are traveling multiple state lines to see Sesame Places, this park isn’t for you. It’s more Sesame Place than Legoland.

My thinking is this though - Universal is a big a*# corporation. If they’re going to spend the time and money to start up something like this, I would imagine it is, at a minimum, a trial of something that could potentially be expanded if successful. Local entrepreneurs might put in the effort to create an amusement center that is largely for local families and field trips. I don’t see Universal doing that.

 

[celluloid]

No, this is exactly what I mean. The project is being completely mis-interpreted.

The park is 32 acres. The total land parcel acquired is 97 acres. They are spending 10% of what it is costing to build Epic on this project. It’s also a fraction of Volcano Bay.

It’s tiny and will largely consist of experiences aimed at the pre and early elementary years. The demographic that visits Universal is not the same. It’s really made for Grade 1 field trips and birthday parties serving the local Texas markets. The hotel addition I’m curious to see if that will make sense.

I’m not putting it down, but this is not an alternative or a stepping stone to one of their destination resorts, it’s largely a different product entirely, aimed at a different market segment. When people see what is built and actually want to travel to it beyond the immediate vicinity, I’ll eat my hat.

But unless you all are traveling multiple state lines to see Sesame Places, this park isn’t for you. It’s more Sesame Place than Legoland.

Not sure what you mean by a fraction of Volcano Bay. Your last paragraph is such a silly goose thing. They dont need all of us traveling multiple state lines(although many fans will, or mke it a stopn while they are in Texas)
Minions, SpongeBob, DreamWorks and Jurassic Park without the winter climates that smaller markets like Sesame Place face. Do you prefer baseball cap or berets?
There are 30 million plus people surrounding it plus millions of visitors to the area. Enough will likely support it and hotel stays.
Think how Legoland Florida, Busch Gardens and to some degree places like Lowry Park Zoo and Clearwater Aquarium still do well. They don't have to be huge. They're appeal is not as broad, but location location location.

As for the under 40 inch crowd. That is
being addresed for studios right now with future plans. Surveys have gone out recently asking of there's e ough for young children and what is considered a family thrill. There is some course correction going in there.

In no way is it the caliber nor trying to be unless something really wild happens with its success.

But to think this is a Sesame Place or less than a Legoland is also not sincere.

 

[BrianLo]

I dunno... I see Uni's TX park as more of a feeder park for the Orlando/Hollywood parks. I always felt that the Orlando/Hollywood parks struggled to cater to the under 42" height range (something Disney does well) where as Uni's TX park will cater almost exclusively to the under 42" age group (with next to nothing for the older kids). The park in TX won't detract from the other two parks because it serves a different demographic. The same concept doesn't work as well with Disney because their parks already do a pretty good job catering to the under 42" crowd.

For the record I have no actual issues with the product. It looks like a really nice offering.

It’s the fan base running away with thinking this is a stepping stone or even the same miniature product as a Universal destination resort that is setting it up for failure.

The signature attraction at this product would be lucky to be considered a C ticket. I think people got that Disney Quest was not comparable and never would be to one of their parks. It was more an adjacent offering, like this will be. It is a test, of course.

A feeder, sure. Something you’ll want to alternate against a destination? No, because your family either isn’t the target demo for the destination or the kids park.