Downtown Disney update

[GoofGoof]

I don't follow every individual's posting pattern but it seems to me that the "blast-Disney-for-being-greedy" folks are usually the same people as the "What-would-Walt-do" folks. The implication here seems to be that the money grubbers at Disney are so eager for the almighty dollar that they compromise their standards by putting corporate sponsors in the parks.

Okay then, let's play "What would Walt do?"

Amen. I didn't think my saying that it is a Disney tradition to sell naming rights was all that controversial of a statement. They have done it with most major attractions and Epcot in particular. This is one of Disney's core strengths in my opinion and they do it brilliantly. If you want to build out DTD why not get a corporate sponsor and profit from the naming rights. Obviously they would not go to Xfinity (Comcast) since they are the enemy, but I am sure there are plenty out there who would be glad to have their name on something at WDW.

 

[Tim_4]

Amen. I didn't think my saying that it is a Disney tradition to sell naming rights was all that controversial of a statement. They have done it with most major attractions and Epcot in particular. This is one of Disney's core strengths in my opinion and they do it brilliantly. If you want to build out DTD why not get a corporate sponsor and profit from the naming rights.

That's kind of the idea of the operating participants. Disney wouldn't sell the naming rights to "Downtown Disney" as a whole but the goal is to bring in participants (i.e. Landry's Restaurants, AMC, Wolfgang Puck, etc.) to be the ones who pay for whatever it is to be done to the different pads. For example, Disney is NOT footing the bill (at least not all of it) for Splitsville or the Rainforest Cafe refurb. The problem in attracting participants (or sponsors for that matter) is twofold.
1) Disney is very controlling (rightfully so, IMO)
2) It's expensive real estate.

Last I heard, they have a tenant lined up for Mannequins at the very least.

 

[Beholder]

I guess Disney is considered a primium brand and I suppose thats why they charge (I'm guessing) premium fees for tenants. If that causes some businesses to be slow in committing, I guess that's the price paid in these economic times. In the long run, perhaps the more "stable" companies will ultimately be around to flesh out DTD and PI. I have no idea, but that's my take on it.

 

[BrightImagine]

Correct question is "what would Walt and Roy do?"

 

[menamechris]

Correct question is "what would Walt and Roy do?"

They would probably be smart enough to realize that something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Alot of third party vendors have realized that even with the Disney named attached - it's just not worth it.

 

[lazyboy97o]

We wouldn't be getting a major Test Track refurb if GM wasn't paying for it. Corporate sponsorships are excellent ways to get new and fresh attractions without cutting into the budget for other projects.

In the case of Downtown Disney it would be more like closing Test Track hoping that doing so would attract General Motors into doing an upgrade. How and why is important in this case. The decision regarding Please Island was not about guest experience or satisfaction, just buying into Schussler's plan for more rental space, seeing nothing but dollar signs. The arrogance of those making the decision only made the problem worse. There was nothing set in stone when the clubs were closed. They were all closed on the misguided hope that vendors would come flocking to be at Downtown Disney instead of waiting to close each club until a replacement was found. Then, instead of just admitting the mistake and reopening the clubs, at least for a temporary basis, heels were dug in and what we got was torn apart buildings creating nothingness in the middle of a shopping area.

 

[zulemara]

That's kind of the idea of the operating participants. Disney wouldn't sell the naming rights to "Downtown Disney" as a whole but the goal is to bring in participants (i.e. Landry's Restaurants, AMC, Wolfgang Puck, etc.) to be the ones who pay for whatever it is to be done to the different pads. For example, Disney is NOT footing the bill (at least not all of it) for Splitsville or the Rainforest Cafe refurb. The problem in attracting participants (or sponsors for that matter) is twofold.
1) Disney is very controlling (rightfully so, IMO)
2) It's expensive real estate.

Last I heard, they have a tenant lined up for Mannequins at the very least.

That makes sense to me as I saw a bunch of managers go into the top floor of Mannequins. However, I have no idea what they could turn a place like that into other than a dance club, which it was designed to be. You said tenant and I'm assuming you can't release the name, but can you give us a category? Shop? Restaurant? Club? Something else?

 

[flynnibus]

Okay then, let's play "What would Walt do?"

Pepsi Presents Walt Disney's "It's a small world"
General Electric Presents "Progressland" and "The Carousel of Progress"
Ford Motor Company Presents: Ford's Magic Skyway
The State of Illinois Presents: Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln

"What would Walt do," indeed.

Here's a hint: We wouldn't be getting a major Test Track refurb if GM wasn't paying for it. Corporate sponsorships are excellent ways to get new and fresh attractions without cutting into the budget for other projects.

Complete mis-application of the facts.

The examples you cited... Walt partnered with those organizations so they would fund the visions he had all along with the notion he would take the attractions back to DL. He used the partnerships as a way of funding the stuff HE WANTED TO DO.

Today, the company could fund those things if they wanted - but they don't want to do it. They have settled into only doing things to appease the sponsors to ensure they sign up again. Now it's 'update to keep a sponsor', not Walt finding creative ways to fund his efforts. Walt's methods were creative financing. Today's efforts are 'whats the least we have to do to keep our gravy train running'.

Walt didn't have the resources initially to do these things on his own - so he used sponsors. TWDC today uses sponsors because they are too cheap to do it on their own.

 

[WDW1974]

Hyperion WHOOPS!

That project is dead and gone.

Why would you say that? Because Disney dropped the name? Because Disney has not only left the PI signage up (no doubt confusing many guests, both newbies, as well as returnees who either didn't know what it was or didn't know it was closed) BUT they are also using it on marketing, maps, publications, etc. PI may be dead, but the site exists again.

 

[WDW1974]

Somethings are planned. I've heard many many plans the past few years and tbh aside from a few things that look definate infrastructure wise, I don't know what will finally be done for entertainment.

No worries, Martin.

They don't either.

They haven't had a real plan or vision for that plot of land since the 21st century began ... and we're only a dozen years in now. But that 'leadership team' is certainly smarter than anyone here who simply posts on Disney fan discussion boards, right?

 

[John]

Why would you say that? Because Disney dropped the name? Because Disney has not only left the PI signage up (no doubt confusing many guests, both newbies, as well as returnees who either didn't know what it was or didn't know it was closed) BUT they are also using it on marketing, maps, publications, etc. PI may be dead, but the site exists again.

This is one of the things that ticks me off about the whole situation, Disney has no intention of using the name PI under any circumstances. In the real world when a buisness closes the first thing that is done is a scrim is put over the signage or removed alll together. Its been tossed about that there are some legalities that make them keep the signs up but for those guest you have mentioned it has to be more then a head scratcher.

To me the signs are actually symbolic of the fact that they really have no idea what they are doing with the place. Honestly in the many years I have been more then the casual fan I cant think of a issue where Disney has
come across more inept. They are probably there...I just cant think of one.

I mean this has turned to a hysterical level, In the halls of TDO/Burbank it must be a dont ask/dont tell policy. Yes, we know they have been working on it....but really....four years and you can not come up with a comprehensive plan? As 74 says....its been much longer in reality. This is also telling of the many layers of management. As much as we claim that Disney is a buisness, is it ran as a typical buisness? Has the sub-divison of P&R grown to such a monolith that it is unmanageable? I am sure in the big picture DTD/PI dosnt register to high on the priority list but the money that has been left on the table for so many years has to be staggering.

 

[jt04]

This is one of the things that ticks me off about the whole situation, Disney has no intention of using the name PI under any circumstances. In the real world when a buisness closes the first thing that is done is a scrim is put over the signage or removed alll together. Its been tossed about that there are some legalities that make them keep the signs up but for those guest you have mentioned it has to be more then a head scratcher.

To me the signs are actually symbolic of the fact that they really have no idea what they are doing with the place. Honestly in the many years I have been more then the casual fan I cant think of a issue where Disney has
come across more inept. They are probably there...I just cant think of one.

I mean this has turned to a hysterical level, In the halls of TDO/Burbank it must be a dont ask/dont tell policy. Yes, we know they have been working on it....but really....four years and you can not come up with a comprehensive plan? As 74 says....its been much longer in reality. This is also telling of the many layers of management. As much as we claim that Disney is a buisness, is it ran as a typical buisness? Has the sub-divison of P&R grown to such a monolith that it is unmanageable? I am sure in the big picture DTD/PI dosnt register to high on the priority list but the money that has been left on the table for so many years has to be staggering.

Meh.

Patience will pay off in the long run. Just as long as the trends continue. Anyone know when Splitsville opens?

 

[asianway]

No worries, Martin.

They don't either.

They haven't had a real plan or vision for that plot of land since the 21st century began ... and we're only a dozen years in now. But that 'leadership team' is certainly smarter than anyone here who simply posts on Disney fan discussion boards, right?

The smartest ones are the prospective lessees who understand WDPR has done much to damage the brand, and That the asking prices for rents no longer mirror the reality of the value associated with that partnership..,

 

[jt04]

The smartest ones are the prospective lessees who understand WDPR has done much to damage the brand, and That the asking prices for rents no longer mirror the reality of the value associated with that partnership..,

Proof please.

 

[Jim Handy]

JT, thought you were leaving this thread?

 

[Vernonpush]

Keep it civil!

 

[COProgressFan]

The smartest ones are the prospective lessees who understand WDPR has done much to damage the brand, and That the asking prices for rents no longer mirror the reality of the value associated with that partnership..,

This is exactly the case. Being associated with Disney certain carries much less cache than it once did. Why open at Disney, giving in to its operational and financial demands, when you can just open up on 192 or I drive or anywhere else with a lot less restrictions?

And I don't know what jt means asking for "proof" of this. Do you want a list of 3rd party tenants who considered their options and passed on Disney's terms?

 

[Beholder]

Even though PI was never on my radar (missed the years it was at it's peak), just by reading the comments posted thus far it's fairly obvious that DTD/TDO, whoever, has let this ship sail without direction for too long. I understand a volatile economy and an ever changing market creates uncertainty, but it takes leadership with a vision. The vision may not be everyone's cup of tea, but decisions must be made, risks taken. Disney should stop following a perceived trend and get back to CREATING the trend. It's what they do best. I don't pretend to understand the dynamics of business or brand synergy or whatever, but that's how I feel about it.

 

[Thurp]

Last I heard, they have a tenant lined up for Mannequins at the very least.

Well, that explains why there was some infrastructure work (to use Martin's word) being performed in there early this week. I thought it was odd that they would suddenly start working in that building with no plans. I'd love for the club to come back, but that's my own personal bias.

 

[John]

Keep it civil!

Your right......my apoligies. Seems some people can get the better of others.