So is the Hyperion Wharf project dead?

[Krack]

Actually, we agree much more than you might think. :wave: Responses in red.

BTW, I regret posting anything in this thread simply because I'm tired of talking about PI. :lol:

EDIT: Definitely not trying to pick a fight with you, Krack. I respect your opinions and LOVE your avatar, which is more correct than you know.

I suppose you could say the point I vehemently disagree with is the notion that prior to the turnstiles being removed, PI was not profitable. The area was operating fine until management scapegoated it on Westside's behalf and changed the business model (removed the turnstiles).

 

[Lee]

I'm sorry, I don't have time to search.

I'll save you the time.
What I have said, many times, is that Pleasure Island was not losing money. It was, however, not making enough money to satisfy the growth-hungry pencil pushers.
And I'll say it again, for the thousandth time...it had nothing to do with the "brand" or the types of people that came to PI, or the fact that *gasp* there was drinking.

The only reason given was that the island wasn't profitable. When they later announced it internally, Disney said it wasn't "meeting expectations"—business code for not making enough money.

Exactly. They got greedy, and tried to make a cash grab.
Instead they have gone from modestly profitable to completely un-profitable due to the closures. Real brain surgeons here....
(Note: A bird in the hand....)

Then they said they'd shut down everything except the AC, which was later added to the chopping block too.

Which would have been a great idea. It was the club that would have most easily made the transition from PI to whatever it ends up being.

It's a long, sad story, but Disney didn't suddenly decide to close a money-making part of DTD simply because they didn't want the company's name a liquor license. Disney doesn't close restaurants or shops unless they aren't making enough money, and this was one of those times.

Correction in bold.

Losing the turnstiles was the killer. Having PI as a gated-access area was one of it's strengths. Made it an attraction in and of itself, what with the live music, clubs and fireworks.
I understand their logic (getting guests to the ghostown that was Westside) but I definately find fault in their methods.
It's been one blunder after another and currently shows no sign of changing.

 

[jt04]

I'll save you the time.
What I have said, many times, is that Pleasure Island was not losing money. It was, however, not making enough money to satisfy the growth-hungry pencil pushers.
And I'll say it again, for the thousandth time...it had nothing to do with the "brand" or the types of people that came to PI, or the fact that *gasp* there was drinking.


Exactly. They got greedy, and tried to make a cash grab.
Instead they have gone from modestly profitable to completely un-profitable due to the closures. Real brain surgeons here....
(Note: A bird in the hand....)


Which would have been a great idea. It was the club that would have most easily made the transition from PI to whatever it ends up being.


Correction in bold.

Losing the turnstiles was the killer. Having PI as a gated-access area was one of it's strengths. Made it an attraction in and of itself, what with the live music, clubs and fireworks.
I understand their logic (getting guests to the ghostown that was Westside) but I definately find fault in their methods.
It's been one blunder after another and currently shows no sign of changing.

Yet the parking lot is fuller than ever, the AMC sells more tickets than ever, the area supports far more restaurants than ever and the Marketplace has more retail facilities than ever. Even during a down economy and all of the transition and temporarily shuttered facilities. I don't see "blunders" any way I look at it. Sorry. :shrug:

 

[Kamikaze]

Yet the parking lot is fuller than ever,

There is no way to prove this either way. At the most generous, I'll give you that its a debatable point.

the AMC sells more tickets than ever,

Nationwide, movie ticket sales are down. Do you have something you can point to that proves the DTD-AMC is up? Or are you just making things up? Hint: Increased revenue is NOT due to selling more tickets. It is due to higher ticket prices. That is how the movie studios are selling these ridiculous box office numbers, because of the giant 3D premium and tickets being expensive. The actual number of moviegoers is way down.

the area supports far more restaurants than ever

Ah, sneaky choice of words, that. Yes, it supports more restaurants because of what they tore down. Does it have a marked increase in restaurants? No.

and the Marketplace has more retail facilities than ever. Even during a down economy and all of the transition and temporarily shuttered facilities.

Because they subdivided tons of the buildings to lower the rent into the price range of third parties. Do you actually think Ridemakerz was paying the same amount of rent that Virgin was? Not a chance. Disney had the giant empty building, so they gave Ridemakerz a deal, with a proviso that they could be moved. And when something better came along, they were moved.

I don't see "blunders" any way I look at it. Sorry. :shrug:

Hard to see anything from under your rock.

 

[xdan0920]

Yet the parking lot is fuller than ever, the AMC sells more tickets than ever, the area supports far more restaurants than ever and the Marketplace has more retail facilities than ever. Even during a down economy and all of the transition and temporarily shuttered facilities. I don't see "blunders" any way I look at it. Sorry. :shrug:

I hesitate to even get involved in this debate again, but, as usual you are spinning like crazy.

Also you have offered no actual statistics to back up your claims. Furthermore, you can not even offer up anecdotal evidence because as you have said before, you have not been to WDW in years.

Shuttering the Island for what is going to amount to 3+ years, at a minimum, is a major blunder.

 

[Kamikaze]

I hesitate to even get involved in this debate again, but, as usual you are spinning like crazy.

Have to give him credit, he's a very good troll.

 

[tirian]

Correction in bold.

Funny thing is, that's exactly what I meant. :lol:

Do I really need to specify that Disney's idea of "profitable" is different from a normal business?

 

[jt04]

There is no way to prove this either way. At the most generous, I'll give you that its a debatable point.



Nationwide, movie ticket sales are down. Do you have something you can point to that proves the DTD-AMC is up? Or are you just making things up? Hint: Increased revenue is NOT due to selling more tickets. It is due to higher ticket prices. That is how the movie studios are selling these ridiculous box office numbers, because of the giant 3D premium and tickets being expensive. The actual number of moviegoers is way down.

I read real ticket sales at the DTD AMC are up. I'm sure if you could refute that you would.

Ah, sneaky choice of words, that. Yes, it supports more restaurants because of what they tore down. Does it have a marked increase in restaurants? No.

I guess if you do not count T-Rex, Paridiso and the new restaurant inside the AMC then you are right.


Because they subdivided tons of the buildings to lower the rent into the price range of third parties. Do you actually think Ridemakerz was paying the same amount of rent that Virgin was? Not a chance. Disney had the giant empty building, so they gave Ridemakerz a deal, with a proviso that they could be moved. And when something better came along, they were moved.

Exactly. Again everything is in transition. Sounds though like demand for space is exceeding supply. I think it is possible the picture will get even clearer soon. Hope so anyway.


Hard to see anything from under your rock.

:snore:

...

 

[John]

This tete' tete' has been very intresting to say the least. I really hesitate to post on the subject, there are so many more knowledgable people on this subject. I do so at the risk of being considered as just a troll passing thru.

But from a regular (once a year) WDW guest I would like to give you my perspective. Most of the reasons of WHY PI closed has been debated since the doors closed. Kee and others have some real knowledge of why tis took place. To me it really dosnt matter. Its closed! I think a lot of people are correct at the notion that WDW just didnt properly promote PI. which leads me to my opion as to why PI and other attractions end in similar fashion.


Turnover, thats right....I believe that in TDO and WDW people move thru the ranks rather quickly. People move into a new job and want to put their name or their take on what they are in charge of. They think if they just take the attitude of "if it aint broke" it will be percieved as them not doing their job. They change things just to change it. Lee, can you tell me if there is consequences for failure in the corporate culture? If so someones head should have rolled over the PI failure.

Its very plain to see that when TDO closed PI they had no real plan or never had any third party actually signed on the dotted line. If we believe that there was problems at PI for years then you would think TDO would have had a plan and new tenants already lined up. Also, PI was never really REVAMPED... just things subtracted. Cost sutting measures. People argue that taking away the turnstiles were to increase buisness but I agree with those who say it killed it. PI was an event in it self. Having turnstiles made it exclusive. Its the same premise has those high fluteing places in L.A. that always has lines and the parties were for the "in " crowd. In PI you were in...all you had to do is pay the twenty bucks. People got dressed up to go to PI. It was an event.


I know...I know WDW wanted to become a more family freindly resort. But I also know that Disney is very progressive in their attudes toward their guest. In this day and age families came in all shapes and sizes. People are having less and less children. More and more adults are learning that WDW isnt just for kids.Not to mention Disney has always been known to squeeze every dollar. Why leave out the adult segment of the population? Its just a fact that adults like adult entertaiment. PI was the adult WDW.

 

[PalisadesPkteer]

For JT04 how do you explain Flamingo Crossings? There is a large hunk of land there and I do not see it being gobbled up.

 

[flavious27]

I'll save you the time.
What I have said, many times, is that Pleasure Island was not losing money. It was, however, not making enough money to satisfy the growth-hungry pencil pushers.
And I'll say it again, for the thousandth time...it had nothing to do with the "brand" or the types of people that came to PI, or the fact that *gasp* there was drinking.


Exactly. They got greedy, and tried to make a cash grab.
Instead they have gone from modestly profitable to completely un-profitable due to the closures. Real brain surgeons here....
(Note: A bird in the hand....)


Which would have been a great idea. It was the club that would have most easily made the transition from PI to whatever it ends up being.


Correction in bold.

Losing the turnstiles was the killer. Having PI as a gated-access area was one of it's strengths. Made it an attraction in and of itself, what with the live music, clubs and fireworks.
I understand their logic (getting guests to the ghostown that was Westside) but I definately find fault in their methods.
It's been one blunder after another and currently shows no sign of changing.

 

[tirian]

Turnover, thats right....I believe that in TDO and WDW people move thru the ranks rather quickly. People move into a new job and want to put their name or their take on what they are in charge of. They think if they just take the attitude of "if it aint broke" it will be percieved as them not doing their job. They change things just to change it. Lee, can you tell me if there is consequences for failure in the corporate culture? If so someones head should have rolled over the PI failure.

The people responsible for the MK's lack of maintenance and WDW's constant cuts either still have their jobs, or have been promoted. The same people who fought against spending money on FLE, the Space Mountain refurb, and Star Tours 2 were promoted. Can you think of any other Fortune 100 company that would do that?

People argue that taking away the turnstiles were to increase buisness but I agree with those who say it killed it.

I think that was the point many of us were making; execs decided removing the turnstiles would help, but it only made the island less exclusive and fun. I don't think anyone here meant to defend the decision—at least, I hope not. :lookaroun :wave:

 

[tirian]

I suppose you could say the point I vehemently disagree with is the notion that prior to the turnstiles being removed, PI was not profitable. The area was operating fine until management scapegoated it on Westside's behalf and changed the business model (removed the turnstiles).

Ah, I agree with you there. Instead of investing in PI and ramping up its publicity, Disney did the easiest thing; and removing the turnstiles implied the island was just as family-friendly as the rest of the World. Big mistake.

 

[flavious27]

For JT04 how do you explain Flamingo Crossings? There is a large hunk of land there and I do not see it being gobbled up.

How can you explain FC and not include the words blunder and overzealous? The same minds that decided it would make more sense to turn dtd truly into a glorified "upscale" walkable strip mall, thought they could make a cheapy version with hotel chains adding all of their budget offerings.

There is a very large amount of land that wdw / rcid owns west of the western expressway, atleast a square mile of land.

I just whipped up something they could do as a new resort.

This would be an adults only (21 and over) resort. There would be the three tiers of hotel types built, to match the budget of the guests. To make sure that only those that are 21 and over are on site, parking and the check in area for all three resorts will be where FC is right now. After guests check in or come back from the rest of WDW, trams will transport guests to their hotel. This also makes the views from the hotels better, no more parking lot views.

In the center of the lake will be a PI type area for guests to enjoy their nights. Each hotel will have a beach on the lake and boat access to the new PI. There are gaps between the hotels to buffer better but shops and or restaurants can be added. There is room between the moderate hotel and check in area that an entertainment area could be constructed.

This is a pipe dream but it fulfills the hole that PI left and also gives adult couples peace and quiet from babies / kids / tenns .

 

[jt04]

For JT04 how do you explain Flamingo Crossings? There is a large hunk of land there and I do not see it being gobbled up.

I think it was as much a trial balloon as anything. But with rents so much cheaper nearby and a weak economy it really had little chance of developing on the scale they hoped for IMO. It is only a matter of time though before the area is developed so going ahead with utilities at todays prices seems like a no lose investment to me. Not to mention they might have avioded further regulations that could be passed in the future. There are infinite possibilities as to why they timed things the way they did. From depreciation to pending environmental regulations, the list is endless.

It is just sitting there now and could be developed quickly rather than a year or two spent with paperwork and infrastructure. Disney still has many options too. They can still go third party, or they can develop their own facilities or the could sell the land. Since much of the infrasructure is in place that only makes the land potentially even more valuable. So no matter what else, that alone likely makes what they spent so far a good investment. The one thing you can't accuse them of is lacking savy business instincts.

That is why you have to take the attacks on management with a grain of salt. The detractors get to complain and spin all day long but Disney really can't respond without potentially giving up proprietary information. That is what I find the most frustrating in that the people taking cheap shots at management know full well Disney can't respond with specifics. There is something cowardly in engaging in such a one-sided attacks. I just find it to be a low rent way to behave.

PS- I mention no 'names' (I rarely do) so if anyone reading this is not guilty of such behavior then no need to act offended. Right?

 

[markc]

Yet the parking lot is fuller than ever, the AMC sells more tickets than ever, the area supports far more restaurants than ever and the Marketplace has more retail facilities than ever. Even during a down economy and all of the transition and temporarily shuttered facilities. I don't see "blunders" any way I look at it. Sorry. :shrug:

INCORRECT again...JT - please think about what you post before you actually press "send".

AMC is NOT selling more tickets than ever - quite the opposite. Which is why it had the ability to convert over some of its theaters to the "fork and dine" concept. It's also very stupid to even associate ticket sales with downtown disney's popularity - AMC ticket sales are a function of movie popularity - not of the area itself. Considering that Orlando has very few movie theaters; people who go to the downtown disney AMC are often locals more so than tourists.

Second of all - the parking lots arent quite as full as you think. For somebody who is there almost every day, I can tell you, it's easier for me to find a spot now than it was pre-PI death. But again - thats a poor indicator of any kind of popularity of the place.

The key indicator of Downtown Disney's success lies squarely in sales - and those have not been as good post PI's closing. Whether thats due to the economy, or PI, or both - is unknown. But thats the only measurable indicator we have.

 

[markc]

That is why you have to take the attacks on management with a grain of salt. The detractors get to complain and spin all day long but Disney really can't respond without potentially giving up proprietary information. That is what I find the most frustrating in that the people taking cheap shots at management know full well Disney can't respond with specifics. There is something cowardly in engaging in such a one-sided attacks. I just find it to be a low rent way to behave.

Low rent behavior and logic is something you should know all too well JT.

Disney can more than respond without giving up proprietary information. The fact of the matter lies in the truth that there is nothing to report on - because there hasnt been any concrete progress (both literally and figuratively).

 

[jt04]

INCORRECT again...JT - please think about what you post before you actually press "send".

AMC is NOT selling more tickets than ever - quite the opposite. Which is why it had the ability to convert over some of its theaters to the "fork and dine" concept. It's also very stupid to even associate ticket sales with downtown disney's popularity - AMC ticket sales are a function of movie popularity - not of the area itself. Considering that Orlando has very few movie theaters; people who go to the downtown disney AMC are often locals more so than tourists.

Second of all - the parking lots arent quite as full as you think. For somebody who is there almost every day, I can tell you, it's easier for me to find a spot now than it was pre-PI death. But again - thats a poor indicator of any kind of popularity of the place.

The key indicator of Downtown Disney's success lies squarely in sales - and those have not been as good post PI's closing. Whether thats due to the economy, or PI, or both - is unknown. But thats the only measurable indicator we have.

Others that work there have stated the opposite and Garcia quotes Disney officials as saying they have seen a recovery despite a worsening economy. So I choose to believe actual real people rather than an anonymous poster here who may have an agenda.

And the AMC chain is adding food service at many locations so it has nothing to do with anything particular to DTD. Except being a great idea.

 

[Mouse Detective]

This tete' tete' has been very intresting to say the least. I really hesitate to post on the subject, there are so many more knowledgable people on this subject. I do so at the risk of being considered as just a troll passing thru.

Actually, an excellent summary of what happened!

 

[John]

I think it was as much a trial balloon as anything. But with rents so much cheaper nearby and a weak economy it really had little chance of developing on the scale they hoped for IMO. It is only a matter of time though before the area is developed so going ahead with utilities at todays prices seems like a no lose investment to me. Not to mention they might have avioded further regulations that could be passed in the future. There are infinite possibilities as to why they timed things the way they did. From depreciation to pending environmental regulations, the list is endless.

It is just sitting there now and could be developed quickly rather than a year or two spent with paperwork and infrastructure. Disney still has many options too. They can still go third party, or they can develop their own facilities or the could sell the land. Since much of the infrasructure is in place that only makes the land potentially even more valuable. So no matter what else, that alone likely makes what they spent so far a good investment. The one thing you can't accuse them of is lacking savy business instincts.

That is why you have to take the attacks on management with a grain of salt. The detractors get to complain and spin all day long but Disney really can't respond without potentially giving up proprietary information. That is what I find the most frustrating in that the people taking cheap shots at management know full well Disney can't respond with specifics. There is something cowardly in engaging in such a one-sided attacks. I just find it to be a low rent way to behave.

PS- I mention no 'names' (I rarely do) so if anyone reading this is not guilty of such behavior then no need to act offended. Right?

No need to name names. I thought this was a discussion forum, therefore we discuss opinions etc. I praise Disney when it is warranted. This is not one of those times. I gave my opinion at the topic at hand. To imply someone is "lowrent" is a tad personal dont you think? I didnt attack anyone with my opinion (other then TDO).

Lastly,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arewethereyet!
This tete' tete' has been very intresting to say the least. I really hesitate to post on the subject, there are so many more knowledgable people on this subject. I do so at the risk of being considered as just a troll passing thru.

Actually, an excellent summary of what happened!


I have read every page of this thread. I come to this site everyday. I refrain from posting because of this example of how some people are treated here. Dont worry, No need to tell me twice. Thanks for the warm welcome.