Long live the Eastern Gateway or how I learned to love the Anaheim City Council after the election.

Darkbeer1

Darkbeer1

Well-Known Member
DanielBB8 said:
The Third park doesn’t need to be in Anaheim. The pandemic opened up many possibilities that will be realized in the next few years. First, Disneyland Resort needs to return to pre-pandemic growth. Second, Disney needs to invest in Resort expansion in Downtown Disney and Hotels. The first is more likely than the second. Disney has no faith in opening hotels in Anaheim unlike Orlando and they’re much more cheaper than theme parks. This is evident in how you noticed Orlando has the same number of overall attractions as Anaheim and multiples more hotels than Anaheim.

I expect more theme parks or amusement centers will come up for distress sales. Disney can pick off one in California. Or just kick the can down the road. There’s no rush when every business is in survival mode.
Click to expand...

Why would Disney want another park in California with its high labor rates and high taxes?

Much better to look at another state or country?

As for distress sales, which ones?

>>Why? A potential end to economic fallout — plus Joe Biden becoming president-elect over the weekend — gave traders the courage to change their bets. For one trading session, at least, they bought coronavirus losers and sold shares in businesses that had been pandemic winners.

Take entertainment giant Walt Disney Co., for example. The pandemic has hammered its bottom line as the masses stay away from theme parks and movie theaters. The Disneyland owner’s shares rose 12% along with competitors Universal, up 5%, and Cedar Fair, owners of Knott’s Berry Farm, up 24%.<<

www.ocregister.com

Theme parks up, e-commerce down. Stocks scrambled by Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine

Drugmaker Pfizer’s shares jump 8% — but far larger gains were found in companies hard-hit by pandemic-related business limitations.
www.ocregister.com www.ocregister.com

And as you stated, Seems like Disney's Hotel ratio is low in Anaheim. Building Hotels on the Toy Story property makes sense. With the Convention Center nearby, they can build the high end Hotels and market to both The Disney fans and Business groups.

Also, the City would accept the fact that Gene Autry jogs to the south, so long as it ends where the current driveway entrance is located on Harbor. That would be cheaper than go under or over the ground.
 
D

DanielBB8

Well-Known Member
It’s more about the vaccine than Joe Biden, but Joe will continue with low growth business discouraging policies to balance things.

Disney won’t spend capital on new resorts without incentives. So this is exactly about converting a distressed amusement park into a Disney park. But I think Disney will just continue to add attractions to existing parks. DCA is not fully built out. Neither is Disneyland. Just pack existing parks with new parking structures to get more locals to show up.

Sure, more hotels on a potential Gene Autry Blvd extension. Not sure how they will get to this point.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
truecoat said:
True but you could make the backstage area on the southern part with some sort of bridge.

It's really just a comment on it being possible size wise because I don't think it'll happen anytime in the next 25 years if at all.
Click to expand...
Robbiem said:
I guess other options would be to relocate the hotel district and parts of downtown Disney to the strawberry field and expand the parks or build the third park on the other side of Disneyland drive where the paradise pier and Disneyland hotels are but I think that’s a long shot with DVC on its way, or possibly to make some deal to relocate the convention centre and use that land and the strawberry field but again I think that would be a long shot as I’m guessing location near Disneyland is a key selling point for the centre
Click to expand...
This all goes back to the question of "What is the actual vision for this space?" Why is it important to extend not just Gene Autry Way but also Clementine St? Is it just to break up a very large block into something smaller and more manageable? The City land use plan envisions medium density hotels in these new blocks, but the City was having to incentivize development suggesting there may not be enough demand for that many more hotels without additional tourist facilities. Breaking up blocks is generally a good idea but as it exists Gene Autry Way is built as a short stretch of highway, not a pedestrian friendly street, not something that makes much sense in either the Resort District and the envisioned hotels or the plans to add residential and mixed uses to the stadium area it connects. Bridging over either or both extensions is possible but it has similar problems of creating an undesirable streetscape. Do you want a street faced by a long row of warehouses in a tourist destination? Keeping the block intact has downsides due to its size but it seems like it is more valuable to Disney and the City as a contiguous plot that can be developed for entertainment (the people living next door might disagree).
 
el_super

el_super

Well-Known Member
truecoat said:
If it was very efficient, you could put another park on the north half. Compared to DCA, it's not far off.
Click to expand...


It's not far off, but it would still be tight. The thing that makes the third gate more difficult than DCA though, is the need for all of the infrastructure that DCA shared with Disneyland. A hypothetical third gate would need an entrance plaza with ticket booths and turnstiles, a transportation facility for buses/trams from whatever parking structure you park guests at. Distribution facilities for the delivery and storage of merchandise and food stock from offsite. Administration buildings, cast services buildings, entertainment production, a parade warehouse (is it going to have parades?). It all adds up really quickly. Creative engineering can produce an efficient use of space, for sure, but it gets expensive.

It's the expense that makes this unlikely to happen for the next 25 years.
 
el_super

el_super

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Keeping the block intact has downsides due to its size but it seems like it is more valuable to Disney and the City as a contiguous plot that can be developed for entertainment (the people living next door might disagree).
Click to expand...

It's potential value as a contiguous plot is greater, but its current value as an empty parking lot, is far far less. I'm sure the city would rather just see hotels go up on that site today, in order to generate more tax revenue, but like you said, the demand probably isn't there (even pre-pandemic) and likely won't be for decades. I'd think the city would not be happy at the idea of a giant gaping hole in their resort district for the next 25 years, but Disney definitely won't commit to a timetable for building on that site.
 
D

DanielBB8

Well-Known Member
Darkbeer1 said:
Why would Disney want another park in California with its high labor rates and high taxes?

Much better to look at another state or country?

As for distress sales, which ones?
Click to expand...


As for distress sales, Del Mar Fairgrounds for one example.

"DEL MAR —
Del Mar Fairgrounds officials said this week that without critical financial assistance the state-owned property could be forced to close.
The loss of the fairgrounds, 340 acres of prime coastal real estate nestled between the upscale communities of Del Mar and Solana Beach, would hurt many residents and have far-reaching economic effects on the region.
Its main event, the San Diego County Fair, was first held in 1880 and last year attracted more than 1.5 million visitors. Scheduled for June 5 through July 5 this year, the fair was canceled for first time in memory because of the COVID-19 pandemic."

www.sandiegouniontribune.com

Fairgrounds says it faces possible closure without financial aid

General manager says property in dire financial straits and needs $20 million in federal aid
www.sandiegouniontribune.com www.sandiegouniontribune.com
 
L

LastoneOn

Well-Known Member
Darkbeer1 said:
Why would Disney want another park in California with its high labor rates and high taxes?

Much better to look at another state or country?
Click to expand...
I figure looking at the track record, the City will suck up to Disney for a few years and then start digging in again and demanding more tribute. While building a new park someplace else from scratch is certainly expensive, it does not have to be anything more than a "starter" park much like the original Disneyland. The advantages of size, as in Florida, thousands of acres of open land, makes a future much more viable elsewhere. The east coast amusement parks, the smaller theme parks, make profit just like Disney - certainly not in gross $ but percentages, ROI, ROE, etc, maybe some better I don't know. So its not a fantasy to see a possible future of a Disney park east of California, its strategic thinking - same way we got overseas expansion.
 
J

J4546

Well-Known Member
i dont think another park in CA will happen anytime soon. I see new parks in china, paris, india, and texas happening before that
 
D

drizgirl

Well-Known Member
J4546 said:
i dont think another park in CA will happen anytime soon. I see new parks in china, paris, india, and texas happening before that
Click to expand...
You'd be insane to invest in a new theme park in CA. I bet if they let their guard down, they'd admit they wish they could just pack it all up and move to another state.
 
truecoat

truecoat

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
drizgirl said:
You'd be insane to invest in a new theme park in CA. I bet if they let their guard down, they'd admit they wish they could just pack it all up and move to another state.
Click to expand...

Lol, let's move to....Missouri? They wouldn't want to move, they are living the good life in Cali. I'm not sure what magical state you'd move it to. Texas? That's not an upgrade.
 
mickEblu

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Disney's biggest hurdle with building a new theme park anywhere in the world is themselves. It's a multibillion dollar endeavor that still will not result in enough attractions and capacity to be worthwhile. The return on investment just does not work for Disney if they have to pay all of the bills.
Click to expand...


They should just build a park with like 4 E tickets and a bunch of small Fantasyland style dark rides and flats. You can pretty much fit all of Fantasyland proper in the ROTR building. Think of how much more JPSI Fantasyland puts out than ROTR.

*JPSI = Joy Per Square Inch
 
B

bestcoastracer

Member
Disney will never leave California. Los Angeles is still their headquarters and the center-hub for entertainment. Even with things filming in other states, pre-production, offices, distribution, and post-production are all still mainly based in LA or NYC.

Plus Disneyland is a locals park, an expensive price-tag for most of the country. California residents (especially OC) make more money and tend to have higher assets and a way of living than most of the country.

The people asking for Disney to pack up and move are just venting their own annoyance at the CA gov. Wishful thinking so that they can have a local park to wherever they live. CA is still the state with the largest economy after "all these businesses leaving".

For the conservative friends, look at what happened to AZ in the last election. Moving business can mean moving people and their political beliefs. Never thought in my life I'd see AZ w 2 Dem senators. lol
 

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

Back
Top Bottom