Expansion Coming?

larryz

I'm Just A Tourist!
Premium Member
Or in the case of a 'disaster', what would happen? The owners would just be 'out' because their specific unit was destroyed? Its not how it works.

In other words, if building X got leveled in a hurricane, the replacement building X would be those owner's deeded spot. The only difference in the kind of situation where the timeshare operator was willingly replacing/changing buildings would be that the replacement building would probably have to be available before the closed/changed the old building.
Uh, actually, they could be...


"Chateau Charmant

https://www.redweek.com/resort/P991-chateau-charmant/reviews
Gulfport, Mississippi

We are sorry to report that Chateau Charmant was completely destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. According to the resort's Website, this resort will not be rebuilt (Dead link -- http://www.chateaucharmant.com/index.htm)."

The land sat fallow until 2014, when it was auctioned off. I don't know how owners were reimbursed -- if they were. I don't know how many held separate insurance policies on their timeshares.
 

nickys

Premium Member
If anyone wants to read all 96 pages of the Florida licence on vacation and timeshare plans then here it is:


What I think gleaned is that any alteration involving the demolition and rebuild of specific unit(s) would require “DVC” to file an amendment to the public offering statement and, if accepted, to reiisue that to all owners with an interest in those units. Presumably those with a deeded interest would have recourse to object.

I don’t believe DVC would go to those lengths and risk the repercussions just to expand Disney Springs.
 

Kamikaze

Well-Known Member
Uh, actually, they could be...

"Chateau Charmant

https://www.redweek.com/resort/P991-chateau-charmant/reviews

Gulfport, Mississippi

We are sorry to report that Chateau Charmant was completely destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. According to the resort's Website, this resort will not be rebuilt (Dead link -- http://www.chateaucharmant.com/index.htm)."

The land sat fallow until 2014, when it was auctioned off. I don't know how owners were reimbursed -- if they were. I don't know how many held separate insurance policies on their timeshares.
Yes, if the company goes out of business thats a different story. Obviously.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
I'd love it if they could put a Skyliner station. But I'm sure Disney wouldn't want to do that. Because people could park at Disney Springs and get out of paying for parking.

Scary thought though, they could always start charging for parking at Disney Springs as well. So it wouldn't be possible to screw them over, and they would be creating something that makes money.
Or you get x hours free parking.
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
I'd love it if they could put a Skyliner station. But I'm sure Disney wouldn't want to do that. Because people could park at Disney Springs and get out of paying for parking.

Scary thought though, they could always start charging for parking at Disney Springs as well. So it wouldn't be possible to screw them over, and they would be creating something that makes money.
Every mile of Skyliner cable is a $1 million. They'd never do it.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
They'd more than make up for it by adding a new tower at Saratoga. Much like they did at Caribbean Beach, with the new addition of the Riviera resort. They could even theme it to Disney Springs and incorporate that storyline.

Dear god... So you think they should demolish buildings at an existing DVC resort in order to build a tower to add a ton more rooms at what is already it's largest DVC resort? Plus extend the gondolas to a place they don't want to extend the gondolas to?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
It's completely nonsensical to take out hundreds of timeshare rooms, for years, in order to build a tower. Rooms, I might add, that hundreds of Saratoga owners have a legal, titled deed for, and also at a time when there are a ton of points still needing to be used and getting a DVC room is more difficult than ever. That line of thinking has zero basis in reality. What that poster proposes wouldn't get past any planning commission, not to mention a single lawyer, as it's a massive lawsuit waiting to happen.

Disney has enough of a headache with the gondolas needing to stop during a thunderstorm, or during periods of high winds, on the two existing lines. Extending that system only intensifies the headache, not to mention the logistics of a gondola line that runs to a place where parking is free. Could they charge for parking at the Springs? Sure. It's a good way to reduce the number of people visiting the Springs, though. Many locals aren't going to go if they have to pay for parking. Many guests with a car aren't going to go if they have to pay to park. Which means reduced revenue for the stores and shops. Which means higher turnover as places can't make enough to justify the cost of staying open and paying the Mouse. Which means... you get the picture.

The entire premise has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
One thing you're not looking at is the ability to use "Electricity". Disney wouldn't have to have as many buses (and use as much gas) if they connected more resorts via the Gondola system. Which also benefits the environment as well.

Plus they could charge more money for the new resort's rooms and the new Disney Springs establishments.

There are a lot of issues with expanding the Skyliner across the property in terms of blocking available expansion land. They'd also have to keep a large fleet of buses in reserve regardless because the Skyliner can't run during storms, which are very common in Florida. It's also far too slow to go long distances -- some of the Skyliner routes would be 30-45 minutes long, and even longer in some cases.

Trying to use the Skyliner as the main resort-wide transportation system would be both inefficient and unfeasible.
 

tcool123

Well-Known Member
I'm for the gondola's, but I think it's silly to charge people for parking at Disney Springs. Unless we'd get some kind of reimbursement.
I was under the impression that due to how the garages were funded they are not able to charge for parking in them. This is why Valet and Preferred Parking are both on the surface lots.

Looking deeper it does seem that the garages were not funded by Disney, directly, but rather utilized tax dollars from Reedy Creek. I believe that since legally they argued that the garages were for public usage they can't be charged for? In addition to them being owned by Reedy Creek. Mind you I am not a lawyer of any sorts, nor an insider, and just trying to interpret this article.



One thing you're not looking at is the ability to use "Electricity". Disney wouldn't have to have as many buses (and use as much gas) if they connected more resorts via the Gondola system. Which also benefits the environment as well.
I haven't really looked it, but I thought Disney began the phasing of busses being powered by renewable fuel. So in terms of eco friendliness Disney has already begun to cut down on their gas costs. In addition it does seem that electric busses have begun to be phased in as well, and have been in testing for nearly a decade now.


It does seem that it'll make more sense if Disney goes the electric route that'll it be less of a hassle to do so with Electric Busses
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
There are a lot of issues with expanding the Skyliner across the property in terms of blocking available expansion land. They'd also have to keep a large fleet of buses in reserve regardless because the Skyliner can't run during storms, which are very common in Florida. It's also far too slow to go long distances -- some of the Skyliner routes would be 30-45 minutes long, and even longer in some cases.

Trying to use the Skyliner as the main resort-wide transportation system would be both inefficient and unfeasible.

This, plus the fact that you'd have to have bus drivers sitting at the ready 6+ months of the year, and have to pay them to sit somewhere "just in case". So any savings by not running buses would be eaten up by paying drivers to sit and do nothing for 8+ hours a day. Plus they'd have to have all gondolas running and all stations manned for roughly 18 hours a day. And, as you mentioned, the length of time for some of those runs would be ridiculous. Pop to MK? It's already 25-ish minutes from Pop to Epcot, so roughly double that to go to MK, on the conservative side.

Swiss. Cheese.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
You both make fair points, I guess it could be used as just an alternate route. And not a main transportation alternative. People seem to love the Skyliner, so I'm sure it would still be worth it financially.
Don’t get me started about the finances of the cable cars.

It’s a point to point, non weather proof ride. Not a mass transit system. Not that that would stop them thinking about it.
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
There are a lot of issues with expanding the Skyliner across the property in terms of blocking available expansion land. They'd also have to keep a large fleet of buses in reserve regardless because the Skyliner can't run during storms, which are very common in Florida. It's also far too slow to go long distances -- some of the Skyliner routes would be 30-45 minutes long, and even longer in some cases.

Trying to use the Skyliner as the main resort-wide transportation system would be both inefficient and unfeasible.

Don’t get me started about the finances of the cable cars.

It’s a point to point, non weather proof ride. Not a mass transit system. Not that that would stop them thinking about it.

Clearly, the solution is to have a cable gondola system that's completely enclosed.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom