More seriously though, they are making the smart call in cutting the number of sailings per week as they can give cast members predictable schedules and cut overhead on lower occupancy. Once they materially drop the price, then all the people who said they would go if it were cheaper will find another reason to say it is not worth it. That's why the price remains fairly static. But as you said, that is for another thread.
No.
If it truly fails, they could extend Galaxy's Edge around the Starcruiser and include the hotel as part of the queue building for a new attraction. Think some classic DHS backstage tour/queue combo, it could also be a rental opportunity for businesses with some overnight packages to sell the rooms.
mattpeto said that if it fails .... Of course they'll drop the price and do a host of other things before scrapping it all together.
I'm fine with no pool and I'm sure I'm not alone.No pool
You missed the early part of this thread in which quite a few people who couldn't wrap their mind around an overnight LARP (or, who didn't want to and just wanted to score points against Disney) made the lack of a pool a defining attribute for why the Starcruiser was a complete failure.
Well it would appear not enough people are wrapping their minds around an overnight LARP (or don’t want to) for this to be a successful hotel.
As someone who pushed big on that a pool should be there, I never said that made it a failure. The whole point was that could be a defining feature and that it was a missed opportunity if this was to be like a cruise. I thought the potential failure revolved around the price and that there wasn't anything for people who didn't want to get fully into the missions and LARPing (or whatever it's called). Maybe others said no pool made it a failure, but I thought most were similar to me on the idea of a pool.
Tomorrowland Hotel!!
This is one of the stranger comments I’ve read here. Buildings don’t fly? That’s why the entrance would be themed to look like a ship (something that flies)! The other two points are equally weird… they want the building to be inconspicuous because they didn’t theme it, and the building could certainly be aesthetically pleasing if themed well, although I’m not suggesting they even do that.
