Rumor Disney resort of some kind in Texas?

[Bocabear]

The fact that Disney keeps pushing lightning lane and timeshares, and that their “expansions” in Florida tend to be replacements indicates to me that they are sensing a ceiling to how much they can squeeze out of WDW. A mushy ceiling, granted, they’ll keep squeezing forever. It’s not like they are going to abandon their crown investment. And yes, DL and the CA audience has proven worthy of genuine expansion which will happen over the next few decades.

But they know that Wall Street expects bigger revenue streams to be added.

Now it used to make more sense to open a new park internationally roughly every 10 years than open a new domestic resort. But, given the turbulence in world events and world economies, I think it makes plenty of sense for new domestic opportunities to be developed.

But at what scale? They’ll never build another WDW-sized resort ever again. Possibly a Shanghai style resort, but also unlikely. If it’s still castle park in style, it would be Hong Kong in scale.

Could it theoretically be even smaller and yet avoid seeming like it’s half baked?

How would it feel to go to a park that’s just ONE land, a shopping district and a hotel, but the land is lush and immersive? The quality associated with the Disney brand would still be there, but let’s say the ticket price was half of what DL/WDW’s are. Could work.

(That’s the other thing that Disney has to grapple with: Fewer and fewer Americans are able to afford a DL/WDW trip. Since the parks are so close to capacity already, lowering prices isn’t the answer. But building a smaller less expensive park could do the job.)

I have to think a park with one land (no matter how well done and immersive) and a hotel and shopping would be sad...it would also sort of be like the original HK Disneyland format...underbuild the park, just mostly restaurants and shops....and it was not the success they anticipated... I have to imagine that anything smaller and less than what we have all come to know was Disney Theme Parks would be generally disappointing to most...A Disney theme park with no Pirates, No Haunted Mansion, no Space Mountain or Peter Pan is just not a Disney Theme Park....and while it may become a small regional draw for some time, in the end they would always be compared to the Real Disney Parks and probably suffer from underwhelming attendance.

 

[britain]

I have to think a park with one land (no matter how well done and immersive) and a hotel and shopping would be sad...it would also sort of be like the original HK Disneyland format...underbuild the park, just mostly restaurants and shops....and it was not the success they anticipated... I have to imagine that anything smaller and less than what we have all come to know was Disney Theme Parks would be generally disappointing to most...A Disney theme park with no Pirates, No Haunted Mansion, no Space Mountain or Peter Pan is just not a Disney Theme Park....and while it may become a small regional draw for some time, in the end they would always be compared to the Real Disney Parks and probably suffer from underwhelming attendance.

One land is probably too restrictive. But I can easily imagine a three-land park: Adventureland (but think more Shanghai, a body of water with pirates, lost boys, lions, and mine trains all along the shoreline) Fantasyland (I’d experiment with putting the whole land inside the castle for permanent magical night and AC - this way they ‘could’ crow about having Disney’s largest castle, even though it would actually be their smallest Fantasyland) and a Marvel-heavy Tomorrowland (getting as close to the Mississippi as possible for you East Coasters!).

It would never compare to DL or WDW in size or attendance, just in quality and in IP.

 

[Bocabear]

That doesn't sounds like any sort of Disney park I would want to travel to Texas to see...so yeah...regional for sure....but why water down the brand? They can barely afford to add attractions to their proven successful parks as it is without budget cuts and cancellations...Why would they invest a couple billion dollars in a regional park that will not be a worldwide draw?

 

[britain]

That doesn't sounds like any sort of Disney park I would want to travel to Texas to see...so yeah...regional for sure....but why water down the brand? They can barely afford to add attractions to their proven successful parks as it is without budget cuts and cancellations...Why would they invest a couple billion dollars in a regional park that will not be a worldwide draw?

To each his own I guess. I live in Utah and a park like this would definitely pull me - It’s the variations on familiar themes that interest me. WDW is too far, too expensive, and frankly it has too many of the inferior versions of lots of attractions. DL is superior in many ways, but it is also very expensive, crowded, and CA is no fun to navigate.

So I’d definitely like a “Greatest Hits Remixed” park, even if it’s only half an album, so to speak.

 

[UNCgolf]

To each his own I guess. I live in Utah and a park like this would definitely pull me - It’s the variations on familiar themes that interest me. WDW is too far, too expensive, and frankly it has too many of the inferior versions of lots of attractions. DL is superior in many ways, but it is also very expensive, crowded, and CA is no fun to navigate.

So I’d definitely like a “Greatest Hits Remixed” park, even if it’s only half an album, so to speak.

Are there really that many inferior versions at WDW?

Maybe if you include Disneyland Paris and Tokyo, but just comparing DL to WDW, are there any major differences beyond Pirates and maybe BTMRR?

 

[GravityFalls]

I think Disney's already on the hook to build two new parks. A third park in Paris, their agreement with the French government is for three parks or forfeit the land for that park (if the park isn't built by a specific date) and a second in Shanghai (it was part of the master plan presented to the government, but I'm not 100% sure it's written into a contract).

On top of that they have Disneyland Forward, the Disney Adventure World project, and new lands for WDW.

I'd love to see a Texas park, but it's a lot to take on.

 

[britain]

Are there really that many inferior versions at WDW?

Maybe if you include Disneyland Paris and Tokyo, but just comparing DL to WDW, are there any major differences beyond Pirates and maybe BTMRR?

Everything is better at DL (except for Peoplemover). Little charming things, big aesthetic choices (see castle paint jobs).

New Orleans Square, Fantasyland, I’ll go on and on.

Not that I want to open this can of worms.

 

[Andrew C]

Everything is better at DL (except for Peoplemover). Little charming things, big aesthetic choices (see castle paint jobs).

New Orleans Square, Fantasyland, I’ll go on and on.

Not that I want to open this can of worms.

Except Tomorrowland. And when fantasmic is going and one side of the park is a nightmare.

 

[britain]

Except Tomorrowland. And when fantasmic is going and one side of the park is a nightmare.

Agreed, hence the need for a less attended park with the greatest hits.

 

[UNCgolf]

Everything is better at DL (except for Peoplemover). Little charming things, big aesthetic choices (see castle paint jobs).

New Orleans Square, Fantasyland, I’ll go on and on.

Not that I want to open this can of worms.

You original comment specified attractions; that's all I was asking about.

I don't think there are significant differences in most of the attractions shared between the two parks, and in at least one instance the Magic Kingdom had the superior version in Splash Mountain. The castle is also much better at WDW, other than the current paint job... and Carousel of Progress is at WDW, which is one of the best attractions at either park.

I'd agree that Disneyland is generally superior to the Magic Kingdom, though. It was EPCOT that put WDW ahead of Disneyland Resort, but most of what made EPCOT such a singular achievement is gone.

 

[Comped]

A third park in Paris, their agreement with the French government is for three parks or forfeit the land for that park (if the park isn't built by a specific date)

I had been told there were four parks plus a couple of water parks eventually required based on visitor numbers, but I'm not sure if the agreement's been revised since the pandemic to cool that down. Park 3 in Paris will likely come before DLP gets anything new though, unfortunately.

 

[DarkMetroid567]

I had been told there were four parks plus a couple of water parks eventually required based on visitor numbers, but I'm not sure if the agreement's been revised since the pandemic to cool that down. Park 3 in Paris will likely come before DLP gets anything new though, unfortunately.

Genuinely surreal that a third park can happen when both parks feel like they could use so much. But to me, it’s hard to see why any resorts need more than 2 parks.

Are there any 2+ park resorts besides WDW? Obviously Universal will become one upon Epic opening, but whether the resort sticks the landing attendance-wise will be an interesting question.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Some harsh critiques here say no one really visits Austin or Dallas. While it is no Orlando or Anaheim. There are still plenty of people who visit those areas.

Before Disney built theme parks at them Anaheim was orange groves and Orlando was a swamp, neither had any visitors, they were both in areas that would be easy for visitors to get to though. Wherever Disney builds will become a travel destination.

I think it has to be a fully fledged park though, Disney has tried to start with smaller parks both in Paris and Hong Kong and both struggled until they expanded and made it worth the time and expense of getting there, if Disney builds a legitimate park I think it will create all the visitors it needs though.

 

[coffeefan]

Before Disney built theme parks at them Anaheim was orange groves and Orlando was a swamp, neither had any visitors, they were both in areas that would be easy for visitors to get to though. Wherever Disney builds will become a travel destination.

I think it has to be a fully fledged park though, Disney has tried to start with smaller parks both in Paris and Hong Kong and both struggled until they expanded and made it worth the time and expense of getting there, if Disney builds a legitimate park I think it will create all the visitors it needs though.

California and Florida are tourist states however, as there is Miami, SF, LA, Tampa, coastal towns etc. Texas is not the same draw. I know there are visitors, but I imagine it's more business rather than pleasure type compared to the other states. It's just not the same. Tokyo and Paris are also tourist cities.
Going into Texas means Disney is changing their business model and taking an unnecessarily high risk for a low reward.

 

[celluloid]

Before Disney built theme parks at them Anaheim was orange groves and Orlando was a swamp, neither had any visitors, they were both in areas that would be easy for visitors to get to though. Wherever Disney builds will become a travel destination.

I think it has to be a fully fledged park though, Disney has tried to start with smaller parks both in Paris and Hong Kong and both struggled until they expanded and made it worth the time and expense of getting there, if Disney builds a legitimate park I think it will create all the visitors it needs though.

Truth be told. I think the plan is to try this big enough to see what sticks. And if it is "too good" it evolves from there.

 

[britain]

Before Disney built theme parks at them Anaheim was orange groves and Orlando was a swamp, neither had any visitors, they were both in areas that would be easy for visitors to get to though. Wherever Disney builds will become a travel destination.

I think it has to be a fully fledged park though, Disney has tried to start with smaller parks both in Paris and Hong Kong and both struggled until they expanded and made it worth the time and expense of getting there, if Disney builds a legitimate park I think it will create all the visitors it needs though.

Correction: Paris was fully decked out with plenty of attractions when it opened. Hence the reluctance of management to add anything to it for the past two decades.

Or were you referring to Paris’ studio park? THAT was underbaked.

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

Isn't WDW facing declining attendance issues? Why on earth would Disney invest in another location? At least finish WDW before you move on to another US park..

 

[Bocabear]

EXACTLY! none of the parks are built out as they should be...Starting another half-baked park at another locations would be crazy...and would cannibalize off their own audience... Finish the parks as they stand....heck, forget beyond Thunder Mountain, and start with what is there... Tomorrowland is in terrible shape...use the Speedway area for something that feels futuristic...Flesh out the lands that are already in existence....THEN think about Beyond Thunder Mountain....

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Correction: Paris was fully decked out with plenty of attractions when it opened. Hence the reluctance of management to add anything to it for the past two decades.

Or were you referring to Paris’ studio park? THAT was underbaked.

DLP opened the Indy coaster about 1.5 years after opening and opened Space Mtn about 3 years after opening, prior to SM it never pulled enough guests to make a profit.

Isn't WDW facing declining attendance issues? Why on earth would Disney invest in another location? At least finish WDW before you move on to another US park..

WDW is but MK isn’t, that’s the problem for Disney, whether it’s EP, AK, HS, DCA, the Studio Park, etc they’ve never come up with a park idea that can draw guests like their castle parks do, even Tokyo DisneySea fails to attract as many guests as Tokyo Disneyland.

People love castle parks, it’s why I argue a 5th park at WDW won’t help with MK overcrowding and a 3rd park in CA won’t help with DL overcrowding, it’ll just pull guests from the secondary parks, everyone is still going to visit the castle park first because it’s the primary draw.

 

[Bocabear]

DLP opened the Indy coaster about 1.5 years after opening and opened Space Mtn about 3 years after opening, prior to SM it never pulled enough guests to make a profit.


WDW is but MK isn’t, that’s the problem for Disney, whether it’s EP, AK, HS, DCA, the Studio Park, etc they’ve never come up with a park idea that can draw guests like their castle parks do, even Tokyo DisneySea fails to attract as many guests as Tokyo Disneyland.

People love castle parks, it’s why I argue a 5th park at WDW won’t help with MK overcrowding and a 3rd park in CA won’t help with DL overcrowding, it’ll just pull guests from the secondary parks, everyone is still going to visit the castle park first because it’s the primary draw.

EXACTLY....which is why a mini park built in TX would be such a bad idea... No one really wants a scaled back version of what we already have...especially a scaled back, incomplete version that is a standalone. If they want to do something completely unique that they brand...Like a Standalone Water Park Resort (Great Wolf Lodge), that might work... but in the end I feel like that would pull more attendance from WDW and DLR....for a lesser experience overall.