-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
DLR 3rd gate possibilities
- Thread starter Tank Man
- Start date
josephinelcajon
Member
Yes I am very new and Have not been to any of the parks in quite some time. The first paragraph is as I said what I would do IF the Angeles left. I thought I read their contract was done and they wanted a new stadium? https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2019-08-14/angels-have-a-third-option-in-their-stadium-search I would never expect them to move the parking structure regardless of the Angeles leaving. But if Disney did get that property making the east parking lot of the stadium the transportation hub would greatly benefit everyone even the convention center. From my recollection Disney started buying up the hotels and a church to the East. They had a few left to go and one of which absolutely said no way they would not move. To my understanding this stalled the plans. This was years ago like 2005-2007ish I think?
I was told by a Queen Mary employee late last year that Disney wanted to take over again. And was close to making a deal. This time completing what they started years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Disney I am very glad at least someone has and they will refurb her! I had no idea Carnival made the deal! I was told the current management company was constantly running the repairs way over budget. I thought one of the new ships was going to be dedicated to the west coast and I now see at least the first one the Wish will go to the East Coast again. :-(
My apologies if I made it sound like any of it was happening. I took the information I had from the Los Angeles Times and a Employee on the Queen Mary and tried to say what I would do and what my thoughts of what Disney is doing. You have a front row seat and even then Disney has gone all the way to pulling building permits and then nothing happens. We are all guessing and sometimes I think Disney is too. When they bought property in Florida look how sneaky they were then!
RollerCoaster
Well-Known Member
You can only say they're not leaving if they sign a new lease. If they don't sign a new lease then leaving remains a possibility.
The city agreed to a one-year lease extension that keeps the team playing through 2020 in January. The lease extension doesn't invalidate the existing lease that runs through 2029, but it also doesn't mean that the team has to stay either. They have three options on the table.
The Grand Inquisitor
Well-Known Member
If Disney does build a third park it should be a Fox themed park or a Disney Sea type park.
planodisney
Well-Known Member
They’ll never build a Fox park and I don’t think the OLC would allow a TDS anywhere else.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Let's revive the Port Disney project with the proposed DisneySea park....
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
Let me rephrase the Angels situation
They currently have the lease through 2029.
There is a window to make a new lease that expires at the end of 2019.
Right now, there is nowhere for the team to move to, and the MLB basically won't approve a move, as having two LA area teams is important to its TV rights, both in North America and Internationally.
Of course, the window could be expanded if both sides agree.
The Angels want a new Stadium, or at least the current stadium upgraded. To make that happen, the team wants to develop the parking lot area to get enough money to build the new Stadium, similar to the recent Anaheim Ducks deal.
If a deal can't be made, then the Angels will play in the current stadium through 2029 while it explores other places to play, somewhere where they can promise a new Stadium for the 2030 season.
And then the city can look for alternative uses for the Stadium land. Maybe a developer that will build a large mixed use complex of retail, restaurants and housing, or maybe Disney would look into making an offer a decade from now.
But both the Mayor and the Angels know a deal has to be done this year, for many reasons, including scoring political points.
But if the Angels don't say they are not returning in 2020 by December 31st, the current lease is not breakable, due to major penalties if they do. So 10 more years of the team, or longer if a new deal is made.
They currently have the lease through 2029.
There is a window to make a new lease that expires at the end of 2019.
Right now, there is nowhere for the team to move to, and the MLB basically won't approve a move, as having two LA area teams is important to its TV rights, both in North America and Internationally.
Of course, the window could be expanded if both sides agree.
The Angels want a new Stadium, or at least the current stadium upgraded. To make that happen, the team wants to develop the parking lot area to get enough money to build the new Stadium, similar to the recent Anaheim Ducks deal.
If a deal can't be made, then the Angels will play in the current stadium through 2029 while it explores other places to play, somewhere where they can promise a new Stadium for the 2030 season.
And then the city can look for alternative uses for the Stadium land. Maybe a developer that will build a large mixed use complex of retail, restaurants and housing, or maybe Disney would look into making an offer a decade from now.
But both the Mayor and the Angels know a deal has to be done this year, for many reasons, including scoring political points.
But if the Angels don't say they are not returning in 2020 by December 31st, the current lease is not breakable, due to major penalties if they do. So 10 more years of the team, or longer if a new deal is made.
GrizzlyAdams
Active Member
Before a third gate is built or considered is it possibly Universal will find some land somewhere in Southern CA and build a second park eating up and creating theme park revenue like FL...while Disney execs focus on international markets
RollerCoaster
Well-Known Member
Did you miss the fact that the team opted-out of their lease that ran through 2029 in October 2018, which effectively permits the team to leave after the 2019 season? The team separately negotiated a one-year lease for 2020. Leaving is very much still on the table.
RollerCoaster
Well-Known Member
Orlando and Southern California are very different markets. The business model that Universal uses in Orlando doesn't really apply to Southern California. I don't see the point in Universal building a one-off, stand-alone theme park away from their namesake park in Hollywood.
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
socalifornian
Well-Known Member
There’s a giant golf course next to Universal. Both the studio and theme park could benefit from that land between the ~500 scripted shows being produced and rising attendance. While not all of those shows are made here, Hollywoods already been forced to use abandoned industrial buildings for years now because the traditional lots are generally at capacity. The dream would be both divisions splitting the costs in half, that’s just not reality.
Right now they’re focused on shifting stages away from the parks lower lot, and moving them to a different part of the studio. It made Nintendo possible for now, with other plans for behind Mummy
RollerCoaster
Well-Known Member
No Darkbeer the lease was not reinstated. In fact your own source clearly states this fact since it explains the city negotiated a one year lease only keeping the team through 2020.
GrizzlyAdams
Active Member
They may be different markets (whatever that means, vacationers vs pass Holders, etc), but it doesn’t mean that So Ca couldn’t support and grow another theme park. So yes it’s possible that Universal could do it or Disney... millennials are the biggest generation in US history and they’re only starting to have kids... plus the nerd demographic in these generations and their love of entertainment, gaming and theme parks is only growing... as FL has proved. Meanwhile CA has only marginally attempted to capture that growth.
Last edited:
Darkbeer1
Well-Known Member
Angels lease talks: Here is the Anaheim mayor's wish list
What does Anaheim want in a stadium deal? And what about the Angels?
www.latimes.com
>>In January, after the Angels had opted out of their Angel Stadium lease, the council reinstated the lease and extended the opt-out window. The reinstatement means the Angels can stay until 2029 even without a new deal, and the Angels’ ability to control that land until then could cost the city at least $100 million in market value, Moreno said.<<
Angels have a third option in their stadium search
Anaheim can't kick the Los Angeles Angels out of their stadium next year if the two sides fail to agree on a new lease, effectively reducing the city’s leverage.
www.latimes.com
RescueTheDay
Well-Known Member
S
Seems like a weak move by the city, by giving up all their negotiating power.Angels lease talks: Here is the Anaheim mayor's wish list
What does Anaheim want in a stadium deal? And what about the Angels?
>>In January, after the Angels had opted out of their Angel Stadium lease, the council reinstated the lease and extended the opt-out window. The reinstatement means the Angels can stay until 2029 even without a new deal, and the Angels’ ability to control that land until then could cost the city at least $100 million in market value, Moreno said.<<
Angels have a third option in their stadium search
Anaheim can't kick the Los Angeles Angels out of their stadium next year if the two sides fail to agree on a new lease, effectively reducing the city’s leverage.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
I'd venture to guess the 3rd gate is as dead as can be at this point, right?
RescueTheDay
Well-Known Member
They gave up a great deal of it. They can pressure all they want, but the team is in no rush to make such a deal anymore. Just Anaheim being Anaheim...
The Grand Inquisitor
Well-Known Member
I wish Disney had built Westcot instead of California Adventure. My dream for a third gate would be a park that was half of Westcot's ideas that could feature IP like Tron and Figment while the other half of the park would be Fox where it could focus on Avatar, Night at the Museum, and other Fox IP like Ice Age or Alien.