Uni's New Plan For Potter Could Make Significant Dent To WDW

[Horizonsfan]

It is acceptable to me. Of course I would also like to see more attractions but adding a hotel, especially DVC, will give Disney a quick return on their investment so I can understand why they would do so. In fact I am surprised they did not add a hotel in WS a long time ago.

It's idiotic. Especially for a park like Epcot that has three resorts connected right next to it.

It's one thing when a park is developed with hotels as a mixed use structure like Mira Costa but, to throw them in after the fact causes all sorts of problems with layout and access, thus consuming lots of space. Plus, as we can expect, it's not like these DVC units will contain new attractions on the first level, sure maybe a shop or restaurant (BUY MORE STUFF!) but no way are they going to use expansion pads for what they should be. Instead of visiting a new world of Brazil or actually enjoying the Rhine River Cruise, we'll have the pixie dust overdosed Venetian next to the Italy pavilion. No thank you. :hurl:

I get having parks right next to the park (Boardwalk, Contemporary, even DLP Hotel I'd still consider outside the park) but to blatantly exploit land that should be used for theme park experience is ridiculous. Honestly if they want to have integrated hotels when the 5th park opens in 2130 that's fine but you've got to design the parks with these types of things in mind, they're not something you can just tack on without sacrificing major things.

 

[c-one]

I like the idea, in theory, of staying in the parks, but there a couple problems with plopping down hotels in World Showcase. The chief problem I see is that MiraCosta and the Disneyland Hotel in Paris were built with the parks, and are ingrained in the fabric of the parks' architecture. There's no way Disney could build any hotel of decent size in World Showcase without wrecking the sightlines and scales of the Mexico pyramid, or the China pavilion, or the American Adventure building. Doing so would be a pretty clear message that the company is going after high-margin profits at the expense of the park experience. World Showcase is perhaps my favorite experience in any Disney park, and turning it into a hotel complex would be major damper against my returning to WDW, to be completely honest. If they figured out a reasonable way to do it -- a real chateau in Canada, for example -- then I might be a bit more amenable to it.

 

[DougK]

I like the idea, in theory, of staying in the parks, but there a couple problems with plopping down hotels in World Showcase. The chief problem I see is that MiraCosta and the Disneyland Hotel in Paris were built with the parks, and are ingrained in the fabric of the parks' architecture. There's no way Disney could build any hotel of decent size in World Showcase without wrecking the sightlines and scales of the Mexico pyramid, or the China pavilion, or the American Adventure building. Doing so would be a pretty clear message that the company is going after high-margin profits at the expense of the park experience. World Showcase is perhaps my favorite experience in any Disney park, and turning it into a hotel complex would be major damper against my returning to WDW, to be completely honest. If they figured out a reasonable way to do it -- a real chateau in Canada, for example -- then I might be a bit more amenable to it.

My assumption is that they would figure out a way to do it right. If not then of course I am not interested. But I am not going to be negative about the idea without even seeing a design or plan.

 

[menamechris]

I like the idea, in theory, of staying in the parks, but there a couple problems with plopping down hotels in World Showcase. The chief problem I see is that MiraCosta and the Disneyland Hotel in Paris were built with the parks, and are ingrained in the fabric of the parks' architecture. There's no way Disney could build any hotel of decent size in World Showcase without wrecking the sightlines and scales of the Mexico pyramid, or the China pavilion, or the American Adventure building. Doing so would be a pretty clear message that the company is going after high-margin profits at the expense of the park experience. World Showcase is perhaps my favorite experience in any Disney park, and turning it into a hotel complex would be major damper against my returning to WDW, to be completely honest. If they figured out a reasonable way to do it -- a real chateau in Canada, for example -- then I might be a bit more amenable to it.

The other main issue would be HOW they could do it. With backstage area surrounding the entire WS area - how do you create a way for guests to get to and from their hotel without being insanely inconvenient. It's an interesting idea - but my guess would be that the execution of it would require more planning and infrastructure than would ever make it worth it to TDO.

 

[c-one]

The other main issue would be HOW they could do it. With backstage area surrounding the entire WS area - how do you create a way for guests to get to and from their hotel without being insanely inconvenient. It's an interesting idea - but my guess would be that the execution of it would require more planning and infrastructure than would ever make it worth it to TDO.

Yep. It's crazy-looking on Google Maps, that's for sure. The backstage areas of World Showcase butt up against Buena Vista Drive and Boardwalk, and even closer to a canal. Serious logistic issues here -- again, why I think the concept is more viable when planned with the park from the start.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Using park expansion land for hotels?

Yea, that's exactly what I want.

I wrote something about this a few weeks ago. Capacity has never been an issue in Epcot, specifically in Future World. There are multiple "dead" spots in Future World that could easily house a hotel/DVC without disrupting the current or future capacity of the park. You could remove Wonders of Life and Universe of Energy, replace it with a hotel and please far more people than you'll upset.

 

[Bolna]

OK, don't want to overwhelm your minds ... but how about the fact that major capital projects for two of WDW's parks were recently shot down because Iger/Rasulo/Staggs still don't see the need to actually keep their parks relevant.

How about the fact that DL just immediately gained a new major attraction because of it (and, no, I don't know what it is ... and neither does Disney ... just the power of that little wizard who lived)?

Why does DL get a new attraction if Harry arrives at USH and WDW gets projects taken away if Harry expands at USO?

Of course, he might decide to write a thread on whether a day at DL is worth $80 ...

So, is a day at DL worth $80?

 

[puntagordabob]

. You could remove Wonders of Life and Universe of Energy, replace it with a hotel and please far more people than you'll upset.

awesome lets have LESS attractions in our parks at WDW..... :brick:

 

[WDWGoof07]

Why does DL get a new attraction if Harry arrives at USH and WDW gets projects taken away if Harry expands at USO?

The powers-that-be at WDW must have convinced themselves that the public perceives no distinction between new DVC construction (which is not relevant to the average WDW guest) and investment in the parks themselves (you know, the actual reason for vacationing in WDW in the first place!) in terms of keeping their property fresh.

 

[WDW1974]

HP is a loved series by its fan base. Avatar :snore:

Avatar doesn't have a fan base. It was an incredibly well-hyped film that boasted some never before seen adaptions of current technology that got sci-fi fanbois into a lather ... briefly and made a (blank) load of money.

It was forgotten as quickly as those socks Aunt Martha left you under the X-mas tree in 2009 that are now buried in the back of your closet.:xmas:

Potter is (like a Star Wars) a pop cultural phenomemon that shows no signs of slowing down even without new filmed product coming out. The books and films and characters are timeless (yes, Disney, no matter how you'll try and take a swipe at them in passive aggressive fashion with the 'new' F-land marketing campaign).

I just want to know for all you Avatar apologists (or even those taking the wait and see approach) where you think the fanbase is ... because it isn't out there in the blogosphere, it isn't creating and buying billions in merchandise (Disney makes more on Duffy stuff!), it isn't evergreen ... it is one film, a mediocre (at best) one at that.

Now ... it may turn into a great themed area ... even a piece of crap like Waterworld has led to the best stunt show at a theme park in the USA today.

But if Disney believes blue aliens in 2016 or 2017 is somehow its answer to Potter (which will be multiple times larger with multiple cutting edge attractions by then), its execs are smoking way too much from the pixie dust pipe.

 

[Atomicmickey]

I just want to know for all you Avatar apologists (or even those taking the wait and see approach) where you think the fanbase is ... because it isn't out there in the blogosphere, it isn't creating and buying billions in merchandise (Disney makes more on Duffy stuff!), it isn't evergreen ... it is one film, a mediocre (at best) one at that.

Now ... it may turn into a great themed area ... even a piece of crap like Waterworld has led to the best stunt show at a theme park in the USA today.

But if Disney believes blue aliens in 2016 or 2017 is somehow its answer to Potter (which will be multiple times larger with multiple cutting edge attractions by then), its execs are smoking way too much from the pixie dust pipe.

What you say makes sense, and there's a lot of truth in there.

Here's where I come down on it, and it's basically a positive outlook on what you've already said.

-yes, I agree, the Potter fanbase is huge, and the Avatar fanbase is, well, almost non-existent. Even the people that liked or loved the film haven't really established themselves as a "fan community". That having been said, well, that's not a make or break--but it's a real point worth making.

-I think that Avatar will lend itself to a great environment and great attractions--which, in and of themselves, will be draws--pulling in even the people who don't really care about Avatar. For example, Harry Potter is fine by me, but I'm not really a "fan". But--what I've heard about the FJ ride makes me want to go to experience it. The same could be true for people who are lukewarm about Avatar.

-There are two more films coming out, and that will be a natural build of material to draw from, new "fans" and/or visibility to the general populace, so we needn't worry about people not knowing what Avatar is about--Jim Cameron's worldwide publicity machine will see to that.

So, yeah, Potter is a juggernaut that can't be denied, and on balance, Avatar has a bit of an uphill battle--but if the sequels are good and the attractions and theming are compelling, Disney can have a hit on its hands without there having to be a Potter-esque rabid fanbase.

About the only thing that could really compete with that would be Star Wars, and so, DOH, whatever they need to do with Lucas they should do that as well. And that point has been made here ad infinitum. We shall see.

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WDW1974

But the exclusivity deal is what Disney is looking to tap. They see the entitlement mentality of many in the fan and DVC communities and there certainly is a market for wackos who would pay premium times 10 prices to be able to say they are staying in the EPCOT DVC Japan wing ... or the DVC EPCOT Canada villas.

This is the issue right here. There certainly is this group within the visitor base. Just head to any of the D23 or AP events at either coast to see it in full force.

The whole "stay in the park" thing goes all the way back to Eisner, who got seriously close to doing this. There was the Hollywood Tower Hotel blue sky, and then of course the real deal of the signature Disneyland Paris Hotel, that basically is on Main Street USA.

Absolutely, Steve. ... And GREAT point about the original plans for the ToT Hotel (funny how that concept, a great one IMHO, seems to never get much talk in the fan community ... or, for that matter, the original version of the attraction, which would have basically been a Mansion-like experience through the hotel that culminated with the drop ride we have today).

But, back to the main point, many folks want to stay inside the parks. Why? I really don't get it. I stayed about 10 miles away from DL last week and enjoyed my experience just fine. Not paying $367 to stay at the Grand Californian (which I love and have stayed many times) when I could get a suite nearby for under $80 with free breakfast, Internet and parking.

This whole idea (and, to be honest, I have no idea yet if this is blue sky or a mandate from Iger/Rasulo/Staggs to 'make it happen!') sadly makes sense in the context of people wanting to live (or in this case stay) inside theme parks. In one aspect you could say this is Disney trying to please part of its fanbase. ...But I look at it as Disney, yet again, putting its timeshare/real estate business ahead of its parks business.

DL isn't stale (even if its X-mas parade is -- but that's a subject for another thread). MK is ... and has been since the turn of the century. Same with EPCOT ... same with the others. There needs to be a freshness in product, not a stuck in time mentality.

Oh, but we were talking about timeshares now in parks. Sorry. :xmas:

 

[Mouse Detective]

There are two more films coming out, and that will be a natural build of material to draw from, new "fans" and/or visibility to the general populace, so we needn't worry about people not knowing what Avatar is about--Jim Cameron's worldwide publicity machine will see to that.

I think you can be sure that Disney will have a big say in what's included in those two films. Think merchandise. Those films will be loaded with characters and things that can be SOLD, something the first film failed at.

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WDW1974
You weren't all on the Disney Cruise Line junket in Toronto getting all hot and botthered about your upcoming free cruises in March, were you?

Nope.

And I bet you can't name who was either.

And why exactly does that seem to matter to you? We BOTH know Disney pays for bloggers/podcasters/webmasters or 'selected' ones to get free trips. If you are denying this, then you're just choosing to be ignorant, combative or both.

I don't possess Disney's lists as to who gets invited to what and how much the company places as a monetary value on said individuals.

I'm sure you can look online and find out who attended (which means who Disney paid for). I only heard about the event from Mouseplanet, which had Adrienne Vincent Phoenix (I believe that is how she spells her name) there ... maybe you could contact her and ask her who else was invited since it seems to interest you so.

Or I see you are headed to the Poly soon ... maybe you could set up a meeting with some of the Celebration Place Cabal since you seem to feel I am overly harsh on Disney's Social Media efforts. I'm sure Duncan and Thomas and Jen would all just love ya! :xmas:

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoChesterHester
Wait... why would the ability to stay "in" the park be a bad thing? People have seen images of Tokyo Disney Sea right? Amazing density possibilities.

Sounds like a logical evolution to me. Better then the Garish Art of Animation in my opinion.

Using park expansion land for hotels?

Yea, that's exactly what I want.

There is a HUGE difference between what Disney did in Tokyo (believe me as someone who has been there) and this proposed talk ... hell, there's a huge difference between what Disney did in Tokyo and what it did in O-Town by shoehorning DVC into areas never meant for it (Beach Club and Contemporary would be the two most glaring examples thus far).

And while I am sickened beyond belief that this is being considered, I might be able to live with it IF Disney wasn't allowing its FLA parks to decay and grow staler by the month. Again, this is the resort that has parades from 1972 and 2001 playing daily ... night entertainment spectaculars from 1998 and 1999 that often are in very bad show quality. This is a resort that touts interactive queues as new reasons to spend thousands of dollars to visit.

If Disney were building things like Potter, then I might not be so bothered by more timeshares. But they aren't now, are they? :drevil::xmas:

 

[WDW1974]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WDW1974
OK, don't want to overwhelm your minds ... but how about the fact that major capital projects for two of WDW's parks were recently shot down because Iger/Rasulo/Staggs still don't see the need to actually keep their parks relevant.

Why has so one else reacted to this? Potential huge news and... devestating if true. Please be wrong Spirit.

Well, I could go into a rant about social media and networks and how that has broken up the fan community into echo chambers/cliques ... but I've done that many times.

People just don't seem tuned into what's going on. Last week, almost every CM I spoke with at the DLR was talking about Club 33 'being sold off' and there's signs showing a change in ownership for the liquor license literally hanging on the fences near the floral Mickey and yet no one -- even Lutz -- has spoken about it.

No one online said BOO about Potter being in TWO O-Town parks and swallowing up a shark and his community before a certain Spirit did (and was met by the usual snarky smarmy comments about not knowing what I was talking about and that I was fat, drove an EVC through the parks hurling turkey bones at fanbois:ROFLOL ... or that Potter was headed for UNI parks in Hollywood and Osaka.

People are either not getting info or afraid to put it out or just don't care anymore.

All I can tell you is that two major sized projects (certainly larger than a C-Ticket dark ride or a B-Ticket kiddie coaster) seemed on the way for EPCOT and TPFKaTD-MGMS and both were recently shot down by management, which believes that the smallish Fantasyland project, the who knows if and what will eventually happen Avatar project, the Wishes replacement pyro show and LOADS of new timeshares and hotel rooms is what WDW needs. ... At the same time, DL was able to get approval (apparently fasttracked by UNI's west-coast plans) for a major new attraction before the park turns 60.

I haven't even been that plugged into what's been going on in the business the past month or so and I know this. While momma always told me I was special , I can't believe I am the only one who knows. Far from it.

 

[WDW1974]

Spirit, welcome back (again). I often enjoy your posts and I often agree with you, though not always.

It's OK. I often enjoy my posts too. And sometimes I do disagree with myself too.

While I cannot understand why you refuse to call DHS DHS, or why you improperly use CAPital letters so often (honestly, a man of your intelligence should know better) I do think you make mostly excellent points and I know you obviously care about how Disney has taken quite a turn for the worst in the past decades.

I don't like when parks have names changed, especially when they're watered down and dumb ... the park you refer to as DHS will always be TPFKaTD-MGMS to me. Just like I refuse to lower case EPCOT and make it more Walmarted just 'cause TWDC wants me to.

But I do not understand your point that somehow building hotels in a theme park as would have happened with Westcot is acceptable but adding a hotel to EPCOT at almost 30 years old is somehow a bad idea. Honestly I do not see why one is good and one is bad. If they want to add a hotel to EPCOT I see no problem with it whether it is DVC or just a "regular" hotel.

Just to be clear this does not mean I think Disney is infallable, as I already said I often agree with your points and you obviously have some good inside knowledge. But I do think you sometimes reach a bit to find fault with Disney, and let's be honest you really do not need to there is plenty of fault to find.

It is VERY different. When Westcot was being designed it was a multi-billion dollar, top of the line quality Disney park and the hotel rooms were integrated seemlessly into the product. They were just a bonus on something new and amazing. EPCOT, now, has become a stale old park with vast dead zones that hasn't really expanded since the late 1980s ... things that replaced other attractions or aren't really for use by daily guests just don't count to me.

EPCOT could use a billion dollar (or two) extreme makeover and expansion. It doesn't need timeshares or hotel rooms and neither does WDW as a whole. They are discounting (still, 2 1/2 years after Iger said they would scale back dramatically) just to get solid load levels now. Adding more inventory to the mix is like continuing to build new homes in Las Vegas (which I shockingly found out is still going on now) when they already have about a 10-15 year supply due to overbuilding and the foreclosure disaster. It makes no sense ...

The whole WDW business model is flawed for anyone who cares about theme parks and cutting edge immersive family themed entertainment because the focus isn't on that and hasn't really been since about the time DAK opened.

 

[WDW1974]

The other main issue would be HOW they could do it. With backstage area surrounding the entire WS area - how do you create a way for guests to get to and from their hotel without being insanely inconvenient. It's an interesting idea - but my guess would be that the execution of it would require more planning and infrastructure than would ever make it worth it to TDO.

This is like how you build a suite in Cindy's Castle ... or how you build a connector between UNI's two parks ... or, heck, how you build a massive development like City Center in the heart of the densely built Las Vegas Strip ... or how about a tunnel under the English Channel.

You want to do something, there's a way ... usually multiple ways.

If Disney wants to put timeshares behind/as part of the WS pavilions, rest assured, it can be done. :xmas:

 

[WDW1974]

I wrote something about this a few weeks ago. Capacity has never been an issue in Epcot, specifically in Future World. There are multiple "dead" spots in Future World that could easily house a hotel/DVC without disrupting the current or future capacity of the park. You could remove Wonders of Life and Universe of Energy, replace it with a hotel and please far more people than you'll upset.

Please tell me you are joking and not advocating turning attractions into timeshares?

Or this is just a lame attempt to get on Disney's social media whoring list!:xmas:

 

[WDW1974]

Why does DL get a new attraction if Harry arrives at USH and WDW gets projects taken away if Harry expands at USO?

Great question. But I am not a Disney Exec (but wouldn't it be uber kewl if I were?:king and can't answer this because I don't think like those people. I believe it's because the people in FLA are dumber than mud and those on the west coast are smarter and savvier and don't want to wait for Potter to harm their business (and people don't tend to take week-long DLR trips, so if someone takes a day off an Anaheim visit it hurts much more than in O-Town) before having something new and cool to show off ... and by the time Potter arrives, Carsland will be a few years old and DL hasn't gotten a MAJOR new attraction in forever.

So, is a day at DL worth $80?

In a nutshell, the answer is YES. ... But there are many reasons why I feel this way (although the Spirit much rather enjoys all his DL comps more!):xmas: