There is retail clearly labeled. It could (a) improve overall guest experience (aka spur repeat visitation) by alleviating overcrowding, (b) potentially improve merch sales to ChrisFL's point above, and (C) would be inexpensive to build. A CFO like Staggs would embrace that, not laugh.
A few things.
First, it was Staggs who put the kibosh on removing the hall of fame tent...for the reason that it was, if memory serves, the MK's second highest grossing retail location. I'm guessing here, but I suspect number one on the list is main st. I'm not so sure you're right here. I suspect Staggs would have Main St's retail at the forefront of his mind.
However, if you look back to my previous comment on this, I never suggested that I *knew* what was going through the man's head....and nor should you. I only said that if I were in that position, I would laugh you out of the room. BIG distinction.
Moreover, the idea of cutting a path to Tomorowland is fraught with issues that I don't think were considered:
a) cost benefit of extra stores on this path - Any retail location on this 'side path' would be considered 'secondary' to the main st retail...why? because, and forgive the pun....it's not on a main path. No store owner wants a side street when his competition is on the 'main st' Basic site planning 101....Then we're talking about cost-benefit here. Is it worthwhile to build stores, staff and stock them? Just for a side path? The point at which I think it becomes worthwhile is if it *is* a main path....and the only way to do that is to divert approximately half of your park guests down this path.....this leads into point b.
b) Traffic flow issues. Are you going to want half of your park guests to funnel into Tomorrowland at rope drop (and throughout the day)? What does that do to foot traffic, rider volume, traffic flow, street wear in that section of the park? Is Tomorrowland equiped to handle 50% of the park's initial volume? I think most reasonable thinkers already know the answer to this. Lets look at the inverse. The current evening bottleneck is the hub....While I agree the hub isn't doing the job it needs to, by cutting this path, you may lessen the bottleneck at the hub, only to increase it in front of Tony's. That location is
not at all setup to shoulder a bottleneck. It just doesn't work. These are unintended consequences of this cutoff.....just because the hub gets blocked up @ park closing?! I'd rather have the bottleneck at the hub than watch the rest of the park's flow get bollocksed up.
c) Servicing - You effectively cut off the east-side main st stores. AFAIK, there is vehicle-based servicing to those locations. Will the Utilidors be able to handle the load, if you cut off what used to be vehicle servicing to those stores? If so, will the utilidors
also be able to handle servicing to the proposed retail along the cutoff path? You're cutting off the servicing access and increasing the need. Doesn't sound well thought out to me.
d) Imagineering/Flow - Lets get back to the Hub for a second. It's there for a purpose. Walt's original plan was to funnel people down main st to a visually spectacular landmark. The tone for the entire park is set as you walk down Main St. It may be a light & fluffy, pixie-dustish factor to some, but it's an X-factor that is equally important in the way the park flows and operates. From there, guests walked out radially. The cutoff defeats that whole thing. The setting of the tone down main st, the walking from the center into specificly themed lands. The repeat guest may not care about this, but to the initial visitor, setting such a tone is imperative...and is just as important as good customer service, in ensuring return park guests.
Problem solving like this requires someone to lay out objectives first. What's the objective here? Increase egress flow from the park after wishes? Then address the problem. Bypassing it only creates a problem elsewhere, as I already established.
Perhaps a significant widening of paths at the hub is necessary. Perhaps removing or reducing the size of items at the center of the hub is necessary. Perhaps modification of main street to widen the path is necessary. Perhaps rebuilding the fronts of Main Streets stores to allow for a few more feet on each side is necessary.
I'm quite certain that the cost benefit of some architectural modifications to the existing main st/hub area would be a much better option than cutting through to TL....and it would preserve some of the issues I raised above.
Just my $0.02....
