Master Plan

jrriddle

jrriddle

Well-Known Member
Re: ?

Originally posted by civileng68
First of all, responding to the person who would like more 1/2 parks. I disagree completely, respectfully of course. They are too expensive for only a 1/2 day of use.
Click to expand...

Ah but who says a normal price.
My question is: Is there a market for an upscale theme park?
Something that would cost the visitor more but would give a unique experience.
Seaworld's Discovery Cove with the detailed themeing of Disney Sea (I'm not saying a copy of Discovery Cove or Disney Sea just an example of a specialized park & a highly themed park) and all new cutting edge rides (no Dumbo clones).
Would you pay more for such an experience, even if it wasn't a full days park?
 
C

civileng68

Account Suspended
Re: Re: ?

Originally posted by jrriddle
Ah but who says a normal price.
My question is: Is there a market for an upscale theme park?
Something that would cost the visitor more but would give a unique experience.
Seaworld's Discovery Cove with the detailed themeing of Disney Sea (I'm not saying a copy of Discovery Cove or Disney Sea just an example of a specialized park & a highly themed park) and all new cutting edge rides (no Dumbo clones).
Would you pay more for such an experience, even if it wasn't a full days park?
Click to expand...


Well my view all comes down to this: Just like another poster said, why worry about more parks when we have one that is far off from being completed and really the ones that are already completed can be upgraded heavily. I say put that money back into the current parks for use. There's really no theme available right now that could out produce any other of the parks.
 
lebernadin

lebernadin

New Member
Originally posted by MrDisney16
Actually, I think having 7 parks would be a good idea. It would give people a reason to stay longer, and for people to return more often. This would only work of course if Disney could keep the price down or start offering things at par more often.
Click to expand...

As much as a travel industry company would like this its just not feasible. Many families these days can't even go away when they take their vacation time. So for a company like Disney to hedge a bet that the majority of travelers to WDW are able/willing to spend 2+ weeks of their entire vacation of 4 or less weeks, at WDW, would be naive.

Yes there are people who only go on vacation to WDW and/or have never been elsewhere but those are the minority. Although on these boards i'd bet there are quite a few.

I can only imagine parents with infants/toddlers spending all those days in theme parks and water parks. It'd be overwhelming enough for adults imo.
 
C

cloudboy

Well-Known Member
Are you sure they are talking 7 gates? I know this was talked about on another forum several years ago, and it was pretty well decided that it was more like 7 attractions, counting things such as Blizzzard Beach and Typhoon Lagoon.

And a far as the land is concerned, yes much of it is still buildable. But also remember back when Walt purchased the Florida Land, there were a lot fewer regulations on where and how they could build. They could get away with a number of things they never would be able to now because of environmental problems.

I wouldn't mind another gate sometime way off in the future IF they changed the ticket prices somehow that it wasn't so unaffordable. I mean there is only so much one can do in a vacation - charging more for something no one will be able to use doesn't go over that well...
 
Lee

Lee

Adventurer
Yes, Disney does own more than the 49 square miles they talk about. But, as already mentioned, much of it is unusable or set aside as a preserve.

Also, Disney never intended to build 7 parks at WDW. That number was sort of pulled out of a hat to cover whatever they decided to do. It's safer to plan for 7, even if you only build 4.

Personally, I hope we never see a 5th gate. The four there already can be expanded with out cannibalizing attendance.
 
Shaman

Shaman

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Lee
Yes, Disney does own more than the 49 square miles they talk about. But, as already mentioned, much of it is unusable or set aside as a preserve.

Also, Disney never intended to build 7 parks at WDW. That number was sort of pulled out of a hat to cover whatever they decided to do. It's safer to plan for 7, even if you only build 4.

Personally, I hope we never see a 5th gate. The four there already can be expanded with out cannibalizing attendance.
Click to expand...

If ALL the parks were expanded there wouldn't be a need for a 5th Gate...although the possibilities for one are endless....
 
Tom

Tom

Beta Return
Originally posted by DisneyMagicRW
Upon talking to a few people on the Disney Construction bored in recent weeks, they have let me in on a few secrets, and plans for the future of The Disney World Resort. Firstly, Disney has aquired more land than it has let on it owns. Right now it says it owns around 49 square miles, yet this number is actually higher. The current plan right now is for Disney to eventually build 7 theme parks. ( No date was given for how long this would take to be completed, but one can guess that it will be a very long time. Secondly, Diseny has been planning for an aditional 13 resorts on their property. Another interesting fact that he told me was that Disney is only using 10% of their land right now! I found that fact to be amazing! Okay well, thats what I have found out so far, as soon as I find out more, you guys will be the first to know!
Click to expand...

I have heard of this referred to as the 7-Gate Plan. A Master Plan with 7 parks, one of which may be a dedicated thrill park themed with the Disney Villians (to capture the thrill audience).

I find the 13 additional resorts far-fetched and unrealistic, but if the economy turns around and Disney's executives get their hands out of the pot - then maybe.

I also believe the 10% of their land statement. However, as someone said, roughly 50% of the land is unusable - some due to swampy conditions, some due to nature preserves. Rumor has it that when Walt and company were pleading their case to Orange and Osceola counties to be exempt from Property Taxes, Orange said OK and Osceola said NO. So, all the property in Osceola county was set aside as a Nature Preserve (free from Property taxes) and the parks and resorts are all in Orange County - again just a rumor I read once.

As for developing swamp land, it is POSSIBLE but not economical at all. MK is built on a swamp, but like someone said, the VERY first thing they did was start Reedy Creek Conservancy District - which built all the canals, aquaducts and creeks that you see ALL over property. These direct natural ground water to retention ponds and resivoirs. They dried up enough land to work with, but really can't relocate any more water - it will screw up the natural ecosystem that has been established (and the EPA won't let them). This is the same reason why they won't build any more monorails. The foundations were getting HUGE when they ran the EPCOT loop, to distribute the loads to solid ground.

Anyway, 7 parks would be cool, but VERY expensive. And I don't think any are on the drawing boards right now, the way the economy and the company are. They've got plenty of land to play with, they just need the money to spend - and we don't really want them to take any more from us, DO WE?!?! HAHA!
 
Bill

Bill

Account Suspended
Re: Re: Master Plan

Originally posted by edwardtc
As for developing swamp land, it is POSSIBLE but not economical at all. MK is built on a swamp, but like someone said, the VERY first thing they did was start Reedy Creek Conservancy District - which built all the canals, aquaducts and creeks that you see ALL over property. These direct natural ground water to retention ponds and resivoirs. They dried up enough land to work with, but really can't relocate any more water - it will screw up the natural ecosystem that has been established (and the EPA won't let them). This is the same reason why they won't build any more monorails. The foundations were getting HUGE when they ran the EPCOT loop, to distribute the loads to solid ground.
Click to expand...

Well, first off, Disney doesn't give a darn about the EPA. They will do what they want, thank you very much. Besides, as long as Disney keeps the land set aside for nature preserve, the EPA can't stop Disney from doing anything to the land they already own, even if it completely changes the on-property ecosystem. Now, if it affects stuff off property, then that's different, but the way it is now, forget about the EPA having a say in anything WDW does. If the EPA had their way, they would ban Disney's fireworks and limit construction. Forget the EPA. Second, monorail expansion is still on the drawing board, so don't go hitting yourself in the head. :hammer: Heh heh. That said, due to money, I still don't see a lot happening. Though Destination: Disney is still in the works, and let me just say, it's a whole lot larger then you think. :lookaroun And that project still has a healthy budget.:)
 
Mickeyman819

Mickeyman819

Member
I personally like it the way it is. I think if they use some money to make the parks super nice it would be awesome. there is a whole lot of hotels. there is cheaper hotels, moderate and so on. i thnk ther is plenty of hotels to choose form. just update all of the parks and it will be even better that it is now
 
DisneyFan 2000

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
This is my suggestion: Finish with Project Gemini, add attractions to AK and MGM, then add an E-ticket attraction for the MK! Then move on to the 5th gate and celebrate 50 years for WDW!!! 5 is enough because that makes people want to stay for a whole week (5 full days), but if it's a question of a new park or improving old parks I choose fixing the old parks!
 

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

Back
Top Bottom