Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[jt04]

When you we start? I take Visa (and a little equity).

Would love to do that. La Belle Epoque in Shanghai. You must be channeling your inner "Midnight in Paris" gene. Eugene Atget for real. I'll bring the Absinthe. I suggest you get on the blower and call that rich uncle (we'll do it right!).

BTW I thought of Galerie Vivienne when we were debating that arcade facade, but it was just too cruel to compare the two. GV is just too good.

I find it amazing we do not see people running to invest in such projects. For instance, wouldn't it be possible to find enough investors to build something like this as a first step to a long term plan? Essentially building a Main Street first with the idea of adding 'lands' as years pass. I would think building a Disneyland type park in small steps could work financially.

Just wondering if you have ever been approached to design something like this or heard of a similar proposal. All that would be required is enough relatively cheap land near a large population center or tourist center/corridor. Texas or other southeast states seem viable.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I've been doing this inside and outside of Disney for over 30 years, so I've heard an incredible amount of ideas and proposals. Some more modest, others more ambitious like the Paris Hotel in Vegas. There are quite a few themed shopping experiences out there but they vary in topic and scope. There is always room for more. I worked on a huge themed Mall/Resort in the Middle East just before Dubai's economy crashed and it had themed streets, etc. Another project over there was a ripoff of World Showcase. Not sure if it was completed, but it was pretty highly themed. I used to get approached to design things on "speculation", meaning you design it in advance to try and sell it, but only get paid if it goes through. You learn quickly that 9 out of 10 jobs don't. Out of that 1 in 10, the funding or whatever can still fail in the interim. People get the design and stiff you on final payments, etc. The business is a long shot on a tall bet. So, unless it looks "real" and the players seem to have the experience to pull it off, you are better off passing it on to someone else who wants to take the risk.

The process of really doing a development right is a long and tedious one, unless you are the developer and just want to self fund it. You do feasibility studies (how big is the market, repeat interest, potential per cap spend, etc.?) and have to go through a myriad of civic and environmental hoops to get the right to build something these days. Raising capital is another "hoop" and I've been approached to lend my name/connection to Disney to help them raise money (even without permission!). I prefer to take an existing mall that has been blessed by the residents, etc. but is a loser and reinvent it into a winner (as there is a civic motive to make it succeed) versus starting from scratch.

 

[jt04]

I've been doing this inside and outside of Disney for over 30 years, so I've heard an incredible amount of ideas and proposals. Some more modest, others more ambitious like the Paris Hotel in Vegas. There are quite a few themed shopping experiences out there but they vary in topic and scope. There is always room for more. I worked on a huge themed Mall/Resort in the Middle East just before Dubai's economy crashed and it had themed streets, etc. Another project over there was a ripoff of World Showcase. Not sure if it was completed, but it was pretty highly themed. I used to get approached to design things on "speculation", meaning you design it in advance to try and sell it, but only get paid if it goes through. You learn quickly that 9 out of 10 jobs don't. Out of that 1 in 10, the funding or whatever can still fail in the interim. People get the design and stiff you on final payments, etc. The business is a long shot on a tall bet. So, unless it looks "real" and the players seem to have the experience to pull it off, you are better off passing it on to someone else who wants to take the risk.

The process of really doing a development right is a long and tedious one, unless you are the developer and just want to self fund it. You do feasibility studies (how big is the market, repeat interest, potential per cap spend, etc.?) and have to go through a myriad of civic and environmental hoops to get the right to build something these days. Raising capital is another "hoop" and I've been approached to lend my name/connection to Disney to help them raise money (even without permission!). I prefer to take an existing mall that has been blessed by the residents, etc. but is a loser and reinvent it into a winner (as there is a civic motive to make it succeed) versus starting from scratch.

Interesting that you mention all the regulatory loops that have to be jumped through these days. It is a shame because I think we would see much more risk taking. I doubt something like WDW could even be built these days. And that is a tragedy.

I am sure you have heard of the Ark project in Kentucky. They have the states backing and I am pretty sure it will happen. It is rather ambitious. It seems like it will happen. And last I heard they will build in stages as I mentioned in the previous post. Nice to know this can still happen.

 

[ChrisFL]

I've been doing this inside and outside of Disney for over 30 years, so I've heard an incredible amount of ideas and proposals. Some more modest, others more ambitious like the Paris Hotel in Vegas. There are quite a few themed shopping experiences out there but they vary in topic and scope. There is always room for more. I worked on a huge themed Mall/Resort in the Middle East just before Dubai's economy crashed and it had themed streets, etc. Another project over there was a ripoff of World Showcase. Not sure if it was completed, but it was pretty highly themed. I used to get approached to design things on "speculation", meaning you design it in advance to try and sell it, but only get paid if it goes through. You learn quickly that 9 out of 10 jobs don't. Out of that 1 in 10, the funding or whatever can still fail in the interim. People get the design and stiff you on final payments, etc. The business is a long shot on a tall bet. So, unless it looks "real" and the players seem to have the experience to pull it off, you are better off passing it on to someone else who wants to take the risk.

When I get rich and want to fund my own theme park, you'll be the first person I call

 

[Longhairbear]

I've been doing this inside and outside of Disney for over 30 years, so I've heard an incredible amount of ideas and proposals. Some more modest, others more ambitious like the Paris Hotel in Vegas. There are quite a few themed shopping experiences out there but they vary in topic and scope. There is always room for more. I worked on a huge themed Mall/Resort in the Middle East just before Dubai's economy crashed and it had themed streets, etc. Another project over there was a ripoff of World Showcase. Not sure if it was completed, but it was pretty highly themed. I used to get approached to design things on "speculation", meaning you design it in advance to try and sell it, but only get paid if it goes through. You learn quickly that 9 out of 10 jobs don't. Out of that 1 in 10, the funding or whatever can still fail in the interim. People get the design and stiff you on final payments, etc. The business is a long shot on a tall bet. So, unless it looks "real" and the players seem to have the experience to pull it off, you are better off passing it on to someone else who wants to take the risk.

The process of really doing a development right is a long and tedious one, unless you are the developer and just want to self fund it. You do feasibility studies (how big is the market, repeat interest, potential per cap spend, etc.?) and have to go through a myriad of civic and environmental hoops to get the right to build something these days. Raising capital is another "hoop" and I've been approached to lend my name/connection to Disney to help them raise money (even without permission!). I prefer to take an existing mall that has been blessed by the residents, etc. but is a loser and reinvent it into a winner (as there is a civic motive to make it succeed) versus starting from scratch.

We need you here in Palm Springs. An empty mall in the middle of downtown is getting a makeover, or being replaced. Taxpayer funded too.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

We need you here in Palm Springs. An empty mall in the middle of downtown is getting a makeover, or being replaced. Taxpayer funded too.

I love the little Spanish style courtyard center in the old part of town.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I think Pixar could fill a 5th gate by now. And I bet it has been discussed. But a collection of C, D and E tickets sitting side by side at DHS has a very strong appeal. Especially in the hands of Lasseter et al.

Given the success of Carsland, I would think that the next big land project will aim for a similar level of detail. I actually just rode all of the rides in Carsland, and while they are fun rides (Mater was a lot more fun than one would have guessed given online comments, and Luigi's was easy to get a hang of), the icing on the cake is that just walking around Carsland is an attraction itself.

I don't think they will duplicate Carsland at DHS, if only because giving DCA this awesome and unique land means that you can only go to DCA to experience it. There are foreign travelers who will want to see Carsland, but also plan a trip to WDW at some point, so by keeping Carsland unique, it helps DLR.

I had a great experience years ago walking around Bedrock City in Arizona, a podunk little amusement park with a smattering of recreations of things from the Flintstones. In a couple years, Pixar will be coming out with "The Good Dinosaur", and because it is Pixar, and because kids don't ever tire of dinosaurs, I think this movie will be a big success (likely bigger than Cars) could be used as the starting point for a land.

The Good Dinosaur will be based around the concept of what if dinosaurs never became extinct and they lived peacefully among humans. As opposed to Radiator Springs, where there are no humans, the city in Good Dinosaur will be built to accomodate both humans and dinosaurs. Big cars for dinosaurs, restaurants with an oversized section for the larger dinosaurs, and a smaller section for the humans, a daycare center for both dinosaurs and baby humans . . . its an interesting concept, and not too far off from the Flintstones, though we aren't talking prehistoric times with the Good Dinosaur.

Imagine entering a restaurant and eating your food while watching these gigantic dinosaur heads and necks poking into the next "room" while they talk about their day at work, "Hey Marge, I think those humans are staring at us! Go back to eating your kelp Frank . . . "

Or riding a ride where your hang glider instructor is a pterodactyl and your are dangling underneath him, or imagine a water ride where you see a beach with a gigantic brontosaurus lifeguard is pulling a human out of the water?

Like Carsland, a Dinosaurland will be an instantly understood a place where dinosaurs and humans live, and the rides could have this great synergy with the environment.

Below is a picture of Bedrock City, very much below the sophistication of Disney attractions, but what is right about the place is that there is a lot of space (maybe too much!), but you don't feel crowded in like you do in some parts of Disneyland. Similarly in Carsland, the rockwork really gives you a feel that there is a lot of space (especially with the forced perspective paint job on the Cadillac Mountain Range), and I think this feel of openess enhances the guest experience.

Should they do a Dinosaurland, I think that this feeling of openess could be used to create a land which has that "wow" factor when you enter it.

New Iguanodon
Population: 1,214 dinosaurs, 223 humans.

 

[jt04]

Given the success of Carsland, I would think that the next big land project will aim for a similar level of detail. I actually just rode all of the rides in Carsland, and while they are fun rides (Mater was a lot more fun than one would have guessed given online comments, and Luigi's was easy to get a hang of), the icing on the cake is that just walking around Carsland is an attraction itself.

I don't think they will duplicate Carsland at DHS, if only because giving DCA this awesome and unique land means that you can only go to DCA to experience it. There are foreign travelers who will want to see Carsland, but also plan a trip to WDW at some point, so by keeping Carsland unique, it helps DLR.

I had a great experience years ago walking around Bedrock City in Arizona, a podunk little amusement park with a smattering of recreations of things from the Flintstones. In a couple years, Pixar will be coming out with "The Good Dinosaur", and because it is Pixar, and because kids don't ever tire of dinosaurs, I think this movie will be a big success (likely bigger than Cars) could be used as the starting point for a land.

The Good Dinosaur will be based around the concept of what if dinosaurs never became extinct and they lived peacefully among humans. As opposed to Radiator Springs, where there are no humans, the city in Good Dinosaur will be built to accomodate both humans and dinosaurs. Big cars for dinosaurs, restaurants with an oversized section for the larger dinosaurs, and a smaller section for the humans, a daycare center for both dinosaurs and baby humans . . . its an interesting concept, and not too far off from the Flintstones, though we aren't talking prehistoric times with the Good Dinosaur.

Imagine entering a restaurant and eating your food while watching these gigantic dinosaur heads and necks poking into the next "room" while they talk about their day at work, "Hey Marge, I think those humans are staring at us! Go back to eating your kelp Frank . . . "

Or riding a ride where your hang glider instructor is a pterodactyl and your are dangling underneath him, or imagine a water ride where you see a beach with a gigantic brontosaurus lifeguard is pulling a human out of the water?

Like Carsland, a Dinosaurland will be an instantly understood a place where dinosaurs and humans live, and the rides could have this great synergy with the environment.

Below is a picture of Bedrock City, very much below the sophistication of Disney attractions, but what is right about the place is that there is a lot of space (maybe too much!), but you don't feel crowded in like you do in some parts of Disneyland. Similarly in Carsland, the rockwork really gives you a feel that there is a lot of space (especially with the forced perspective paint job on the Cadillac Mountain Range), and I think this feel of openess enhances the guest experience.

Should they do a Dinosaurland, I think that this feeling of openess could be used to create a land which has that "wow" factor when you enter it.

New Iguanodon
Population: 1,214 dinosaurs, 223 humans.

Love it. And I'd love to see this concept overlayed at DAK. Replacing Dinorama and relocating the Nemo show to create the space. So your concept here jogged my memory and I thought of something interesting. Staggs deliberately made a point of visiting the Energy pavilion in Future World so connect some dots and it is easy to say......hmmmm.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

My take is that the studio does not care about uniqueness at DCA enough to keep it out of WDW. Carsland in DHS is a "no brainer" for them and the design is already done. Dinosaurs is an eternal concept so it has merit too (especially in DAK), but for the money I still would rather see an indoor/outdoor "World of Tron" somewhere (DL or Asia) with lots of technology and a big budget. Take me to Argon.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Interesting that you mention all the regulatory loops that have to be jumped through these days. It is a shame because I think we would see much more risk taking. I doubt something like WDW could even be built these days. And that is a tragedy.

I am sure you have heard of the Ark project in Kentucky. They have the states backing and I am pretty sure it will happen. It is rather ambitious. It seems like it will happen. And last I heard they will build in stages as I mentioned in the previous post. Nice to know this can still happen.

It's interesting that one family built the real one (over decades) in the Bible without funding or hardware stores, and today it takes millions and lots of regulation to just fake it. If it is built to specs found in Scripture, people will see that it is truly a massive rectangular barge type container that has engineering prowess, versus the storybook boats shown over the years.
http://news.yahoo.com/noahs-ark-ky-aims-prove-truth-bible-093543701.html

 

[jt04]

It's interesting that one family built the real one (over decades) in the Bible without funding or hardware stores, and today it takes millions and lots of regulation to just fake it. If it is built to specs found in Scripture, people will see that it is truly a massive rectangular barge type container that has engineering prowess, versus the storybook boats shown over the years.
http://news.yahoo.com/noahs-ark-ky-aims-prove-truth-bible-093543701.html

Exactly why I think this project will be an amazing success. They are building the 'main attraction' first which is sure to draw millions from around the world and then it will be much easier to add the other phases later. And I can't help but think that we will see a new tourist region emerging from Cincinnati to the Smokies.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

It's interesting that one family built the real one (over decades) in the Bible without funding or hardware stores, and today it takes millions and lots of regulation to just fake it. If it is built to specs found in Scripture, people will see that it is truly a massive rectangular barge type container that has engineering prowess, versus the storybook boats shown over the years.
http://news.yahoo.com/noahs-ark-ky-aims-prove-truth-bible-093543701.html

It would be interesting to see a recreation of Noah's Ark, but what really interests me would is the "Old World Village" . . . will this be recreations based on what Israel looked like in JC's time? I think most people have an easier time connecting with the New Testament, and would more interested in seeing a recreation of Jerusalem, at least on the street level, so we could how the disciples lived. Not sure if they could build even a part of the temple . . .

 

[Rasvar]

It would be interesting to see a recreation of Noah's Ark, but what really interests me would is the "Old World Village" . . . will this be recreations based on what Israel looked like in JC's time? I think most people have an easier time connecting with the New Testament, and would more interested in seeing a recreation of Jerusalem, at least on the street level, so we could how the disciples lived. Not sure if they could build even a part of the temple . . .

In other words: http://www.holylandexperience.com/

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

My take is that the studio does not care about uniqueness at DCA enough to keep it out of WDW. Carsland in DHS is a "no brainer" for them and the design is already done. Dinosaurs is an eternal concept so it has merit too (especially in DAK), but for the money I still would rather see an indoor/outdoor "World of Tron" somewhere (DL or Asia) with lots of technology and a big budget. Take me to Argon.

In terms of uniqueness of rides, I can't help but notice that a lot of classic and/or popular attractions are only found in one park these days. For example:

Country Bear Jamboree: Just in MK in the US.
Mr. Toad: Just in Disneyland.
Haunted Mansion Holiday: Just in Disneyland.
Snow White: Just in Disneyland.
Pinocchio (and other rides like Alice, Casey Jr. Storybookland Canal Boats) just in DL in US.
Seven Dwarfs Coaster: Just in MK in the U.S.
Main Street Electrical Parade: Rotated between the coasts.
Indiana Jones: Just in Disneyland despite being a very popular ride.
Mickey's Philharmagic: Just in MK.
Monsters Laugh Floor: Just in MK.
Monsters Inc.: Just in DCA in US.
Nemo Subs: DL managed to keep their version of the Subs


While they did build an apparently identical Mermaid in MK, the queue is much better, perhaps so much that Mermaid fans would want to see MK's version in addition to DCA.

No doubt when Mystic Manor opens, a lot of hardcore Haunted Mansion fans will want to fly out to Hong Kong just to experience this ride.

Obviously, a lot of attractions have been duplicated, but this isn't a strict rule. From a business standpoint, it makes sense to me that keeping some attractions as a Disneyland original (and vice versa) helps the park establish their own identity and force guests to visit both resorts, or maybe this is just a conspiracy theory?

While I love Main Street Electrical Parade, the whole thing was built rather cheaply in the 1970s. LED technology and lithium batteries have come a long way, certainly they could duplicate and improve upon this classic, but they move it around the country like a Broadway show or something.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

In other words: http://www.holylandexperience.com/

Thanks, I'll have to read about that more. I was thinking more along the lines of a Colonial Williamsburg experience in old Jerusalem. Such as having folks dressed up and acting out their roles so that you could ask them questions and such.

Interestingly, I think that Walt Disney visited Colonial Williamsburg before he built Disneyland.

 

[ChrisFL]

Mickey's Philharmagic: Just in MK.

I had to check, but you're right...this one isn't in Anaheim...kinda odd how the asian parks have it and how popular it is.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

"Disney and More" has an interesting video and update on New FL for WDW. Worth a click and a view!

http://disneyandmore.blogspot.com/2012/09/wdw-new-fantasyland-enchanted-tales.html

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

In another thread, there are some interesting new pictures of Mermaid construction which seem to show that the windows on the big tower are being moved from the side facing sorta towards Pooh, toward the wider profile facing west! You can see below that the big tower looks off being just a big brick monolith from the angle below. I wish they’d keep the old windows and add new ones as I think the castle needs more windows.

In Fantasyland in Disneyland, the second story windows are an opportunity to add some details that help with the story, hopefully they’ll add some lights for Eric’s castle in MK, as otherwise its going to look kinda foreboding at night.

Also, couldn't help but notice that this castle doesn’t look very idealized, as I would expect most Fantasyland attractions to look. Looks like they added rust stains leaking from the tops of the towers, mud stains on the bottom, and even replica pigeon poop! Sort of interesting, but a level of realism I’d expect to see in the line for the Subs rather than Mermaid. Also, the castle “bricks” aren’t “stuccoed” over as in other version of Eric’s castle, such as in Storybookland Canal Boats version below, but just sort have that “raw” construction material look.

Too bad they didn’t make Eric’s castle three times bigger, and a small restaurant or shop as I’m sure a lot of guests would be interested in exploring it and walking on those balconies (though maybe there is a safety issue). It seems natural that if a prince had such a castle built, the large tower would have a dining room with windows facing almost every direction.

Now you see the windows . . .

Now you don't . . . (you can see the "new" windows to the left of the hole being patched.)

Artistically, not sure that removing the old windows was an improvement, I guess fiscally they don't have to order another set of poly resin window frames.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

"Disney and More" has an interesting video and update on New FL for WDW. Worth a click and a view!

http://disneyandmore.blogspot.com/2012/09/wdw-new-fantasyland-enchanted-tales.html

Thanks for the link, Lumiere looks fantastic! I assume that given the black background that they didn't put actuators and pulleys within Lumiere's arms as they just look too thin and bend too much.

My five year old niece was captivated watching a video of this, it looks like a home run to me. Obviously, ride capacity might be an issue, though it looks like they have two identical pre-story rooms and story rooms, you can see in the video that they go right, on the left is probably an identical pre-story room, and with an identical story room after that.

My only gripe is that the digital projection of sparkles on the "mirror's frame" don't match up with the magical glow on the LED screens behind the two-way mirror. With a fancy video editing program, I'm sure they could make the green sparkles on the top of the mirror float down a bit over the mirror. They might need a technician to make the green sparkles shown on the LED screens to be slightly larger or brighter or something . . . but I think if they played with it they could make it work. They'd need a computer that simultaneously feeds video output to both the digitally mapped projection and the LED screen doors, if it already isn't setup this way.

Most guests probably wouldn't notice this.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Going back to our earlier discussions about the future of Animatronics, there still seems to be a strategic need for them in the right venue and the right application. I bet WDI did Lumiere themselves.