"Marginally suitable" still requires significant investment to make usable, in most cases, if it can be made usable for the intended purpose at all. Thus the reason it's considered "marginally suitable".
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
For Reference: Space for a 5th Park at Walt Disney World
- Thread starter Haymarket
- Start date
Eric M Blake
Active Member
Absolutely! Thing is, as has been pointed out before I came on, even the "greens" can be and have been used for expansions of the parking lots. Obviously it's a lot easier to do that with the "yellows."
Nonetheless, your point is well made that this upper left corner between MK and the golf course is probably best saved for when Disney feels led to go "Screw it--let's go ALL IN!"
When they do, it's a potential treasure chest for a big-time expansion--park, resorts, maybe even a water park.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
There’s more chance of monkeys flying out of Iger’s butt than a park being built in Orlando.
Why? American travel patterns/tendencies
Why? American travel patterns/tendencies
Eric M Blake
Active Member
Universal Orlando's Epic Universe says otherwise....
UOR hasn’t saturated its market yet.Universal Orlando's Epic Universe says otherwise....
Eric M Blake
Active Member
Considering how packed the Disney parks are on a regular basis these days...an oversaturated market doesn't seem to be the problem here.
Research DAK and cannibalisation
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
NoUniversal Orlando's Epic Universe says otherwise....
Yes
No (search around)
YesResearch DAK and cannibalisation
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
…now…do you want to know the actual truth, @Eric M Blake?
Disney discovered it when you were in kindergarten
Disney discovered it when you were in kindergarten
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
You really don't read the posts do you? Taxes are a business expense. If Disney didn't plan for paying taxes to RCID, Disney's books would never balance and a budget would be as useless as a milk pail under a bull. Yes RDIC is structured as a different company, but it isn't really, because it is financially supported almost exclusively by WDW and WDW is the reason for their existence.
It was requested and approved for the two fold purpose of easing the financial burden to the surrounding areas and also to be able to build what is needed to support the resort. It doesn't theoretically run the district but the sole purpose of RCID's establishment was to do WDW's bidding. Why is that so hard to understand. Paying taxes to RCID is paying for all of that indirectly which in itself is sort of a tax break for WDW and I'm pretty sure the district being non-profit is also tax exempt. It is a big deal and has kept WDW one of the most pleasant places on the planet to spend time. Not that laws matter in Florida, but there has always been a law about not taxing taxes. All those things that are considered repairs or improvements are not deductible generally because they are not capex, doing it through the district in the form of taxes are deductible. What it boils down to is a Win - Win.
Last edited:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
There would never have been a wdw without reedy creek. Full stop.
Nothing wrong with the arrangement for 50 years. Full stop.
Disney isn’t a saint…but the complaints being lodged and often have been about central Florida are not of Disneys creation.
Mainly:
1. Bad infrastructure. That’s a statewide choice based on tax policy
2. Low wages. That’s a requirement of Wall Street and supported by statewide policy
3. Changing ideology. That’s what’s left of the 20th century not accepting their loss of control. No really…that’s what it is.
Andrew25
Well-Known Member
Underbuilt parks with no interest in increasing capacity are making the parks feel busier than they really are.
The fact that Epic Universe will be debuting with more actual attractions than DAK or DHS currently is all you need to know about Disney's business strategy and its approach to the Orlando parks.
Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
You're the one not reading the posts.
I am not arguing that Disney doesn't fund the District nearly in full. I'm not arguing that Disney doesn't 'plan' for paying taxes.
What I'm arguing is that the $17b number DOES NOT include taxes because Disney doesn't include taxes in their CAPEX numbers on their financial reports. You can look at these reports yourself at any time.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Then why don't you take your first post and save it to a file on your computer. That way you would have it for your reference and not have to worry about anyone wanting to discuss it on a discussion board. Then maybe ask the board management to delete your post and all the subsequent posts making everyone happy.
Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
Fair, and it did cannibalize the other parks more than add attendance. But since DAK opened in 1998, Florida tourism numbers have gone from about 60m to 125m in 2019 (and back close to that number after COVID). Orlando accounts for roughly half of that number, so even with cannibalization, the argument can be easily made that double the number of tourists to the area could easily support another full gate at both USF and WDW. Whether or not there are enough people to staff an additional park (and the accompanying necessities for each) at each location is a different issue.Research DAK and cannibalisation
That's why if another WDW park was to appear, I'm reasonably sure it would share a lot of infrastructure with an already existing park by being built right near it, like DL and DCA.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I have never said that, ever. I obviously know that based on my last post. My bewilderment is why you keep trying to feel you "got me" when we have been saying the same thing. Except that I had the feeling that you are against that agreement between Disney and Florida and are looking at what the state didn't get as apposed to the landslide that it did get. Glass half full vs Glass half empty. Where we differ is that you think that Disney is not including any and all taxes that they pay to the state whether collected from guests or part of their own expense. CAPEX or not they are still generating that amount of money being spent in the state of Florida. That money that they pay RCID is then being sent back out into the Florida economic picture. It isn't being being sent to a secret Swiss Bank account for future use.
Kamikaze
Well-Known Member
Here's the exact post where you did say that:
For Reference: Space for a 5th Park at Walt Disney World
Plus, keep in mind in the same report, they also said the 10 year plan also included a significant expansion of the WDW workforce. Somehow I doubt that'd be in the cards if we were just talking about one attraction. Hotels need a lot of staff. And money. Roads cost money. Just saying
I am not 'against' the RCID agreement in any way, and if you think that then you need reading comprehension classes.
Personally, I highly doubt Disney has the testicular fortitude to do that these days. Along with that, the current resort was expanded during Eisner's time as CEO to accommodate the typical US family's 7-day vacation. Further expansion on any kind at a theme park level throws everything out of balance and would cannibalize the existing parks, water parks, Springs, etc.
Eric M Blake
Active Member
Enlighten me, then. Explain it like we're all five.…now…do you want to know the actual truth, @Eric M Blake?
Disney discovered it when you were in kindergarten
Eric M Blake
Active Member
That's a fair point to an extent. However, times have obviously changed in several ways:
First, there are simply more people in the parks on a regular basis than there were in the Eisner era. The lines are simply longer throughout the year, even during off season.
To be fair, recent stories HAVE come out showing that the early May off season is easing up again. Nonetheless, time will tell whether that's signs of a total "back to what it was pre pandemic" or not.
Which leads me to the second thing: Increasing use of annual passes. From experience, if you have the whole year at your hands to go to the part, there's more of a desire for variety.
Third, park hopping. Now obviously that's been a thing with resort guests, not just pass holders. But still, pretty commonplace.
Fourth, since anyone can walk into Disney Springs without tickets or passes, it's not necessarily a key part of the 7 day vacation you mentioned. Anyone in Orlando or Kissimmee can head over there for shopping or dinner or what have you. For the vacationers, it's more of an extra.
Let's put all that together, while looking at the 7 day vacation of the resort guests. You have 4 parks and two water parks, with park hopping as an option. That's six. Disney Springs as an additional thing if you have extra time, but that's not exactly top priority. So a 5th gate takes care of the seventh day. And if "We couldn't do everything," well, there's the whole "leave the audience wanting more."