Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Third Gate?

Collapse

Get Away Today

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by Giant Panda
    OK, I see your points, however American's (excuse me, I mean citizens of the US of A) usual bent when it comes to investments (and anything) is to look at the short term .... I guess I interpreted your dissertation on the merrit of selling the parks not as "should" sell, but "would" sell ........looking at the short-term benefit ........

    I agree we 'mercans look way to much at the short-term price. We know we're not saving enough (at all) to provide the kind of retirement we want, therefore look for ways to make unrealistically high RoI in hopes of making up the difference.

    The result is that the stock market has become the Black Jack table.... It is possible to win if you REALLY know what you're doing, but most people don't, so most people lose far more than they make.


    Anyway, back to the third gate.....

    For long-term, slow but stable growth, I think they'll continue to add hotel rooms, expand DTD, and add a coupke more E-Tickets to DCA.... Then add a thrid gate, a second parking garage, and a bunch more, more hotel rooms.... Eventually, they'll circle back around and re-work many of the areas of DCA that work the least.... Route 66, Wharf, Farm.....

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by cellarhound
    It isn't targeted for NorCal at all... Look at Golden Dreams... The park is targeting people who live outside of California...

    I think it was made for people visiting from the East Coast with hopes that they could draw from the DVC members...

    ZOOOOMMMMMM.... right over my head again.

    People that live outside of CA, don't give a rat's behind about CA history.... They won't recognize more than a hand-full of the faces in the montage at the end..... Why on EARTH would Golden Dreams be targeted at people that don't care and don't know...

    No, Golden Dreams HAD to be targeted at the people that live in CA, have some kind of pride about their history, and actually recognize the faces they are seeing in the finally....... That, or the people that designed the park are MUCH bigger idiots then I ever suspected... And I expoected they were pretty big idiots!


    And, as far as brining DVC people fro the East Coast.... WHA??????

    Why on EARTH would you want to attract people to DLR for 3 days that would have gone to WDW for 7-10 days?!?!?!?! You wouldn't!!!!

    WDW already fills that niche... They were trying to attract a NEW niche, not canibalize one they already had. It is called product differentiation and target marketing.... BIG concepts in the typical MBA program!

    They were going for the wine and art "sophisticated" crowd (Mondavi and Puck and PC history and Whoppi, and a very pretty (from a distance) roller coaster back-drop, hip and edgy entertainment) associated with San Fran and Napa.... The NorCal audience.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giant Panda
    replied
    OK, I see your points, however American's (excuse me, I mean citizens of the US of A) usual bent when it comes to investments (and anything) is to look at the short term .... I guess I interpreted your dissertation on the merrit of selling the parks not as "should" sell, but "would" sell ........looking at the short-term benefit ........

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by Giant Panda
    dshimel,

    I think somebody has hacked their way into your MiceChat account. Either that, or maybe I'm just having a hard time understanding your "support" of a third gate when you were just arguing on another thread that the company should (that is, would make good business sense) dump the parks as they are a vrtual "black hole" (my quotes, not yours) of depreciation (among other things)....... :confused:

    Confused for sure....

    What I said in that other thread, is that Disney could probably increase the stock price, in the short-term, by dumping the parks.

    Quotes from me from the other thread....

    "Now, do I want this to happen?????? HECK NO!!!!!

    Would it actually increase the short-term value of the company? Unfortunatly, it is VERY likely it would!"

    AND

    "The parks are slow groth... Good for long-term value. Bad for short-term value. The question is, do the institutional investors that own 66% of the company want short-term stock price increase, or long-term slow growth?"




    There is a HUGE difference between saying "dumping the parks would probably increase the stock price over the short-term" and that the company "should" do this..... I never said they should. I never siad it made good business sence....

    I said it would give short-term gain at the cost of long-term stability.

    Leave a comment:


  • socal05
    replied
    Now that I've got some time under my belt, I think DCA wasn't a complete mistake like I once thought. Some of it is nice, but you shouldn't have a State themed park in the actual State! :-) Maybe they could have made part of it a CA theme (redwoods, etc...) and themed the rest differently.

    Hard to bring "magic" to theme based on reality. "The Magic of Sunshine" ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • cellarhound
    replied
    Originally posted by Giant Panda
    I'm just having a hard time understanding your "support" of a third gate when you (dshimel) were just arguing on another thread that the company should (that is, would make good business sense) dump the parks as they are a vrtual "black hole" (my quotes, not yours) of depreciation (among other things)....... :confused:
    Giant Panda... dshimel sometimes is sarcastic... unfortunately it doesn't read well on the net... He writes at times to provide an arguement that may not be his own point of view...

    Leave a comment:


  • cellarhound
    replied
    Originally posted by dshimel
    When designing DCA, Disney saw 1 more group... The NorCals. Much of DCA's design, I think, was targeted at bringing more people down from the bay area.... But, why would you travel to DCA to see NorCal or taste wine when you live in NorCal... Flawed product I think.
    Being a NorCal myself, dshimel, you are out of your mind...

    It isn't targeted for NorCal at all... Look at Golden Dreams... The park is targeting people who live outside of California...

    I think it was made for people visiting from the East Coast with hopes that they could draw from the DVC members...

    Leave a comment:


  • Giant Panda
    replied
    Originally posted by dshimel
    I think they'll eventually reroute Harbor and Katella out and around the 3rd gate site to reconnect it to the main property without the major roads down the middle.

    My guess for the 3rd gate... a cross between Epcot and Disney Seas.
    I'm not so sure. Harbor and Katella are major thoroughfares that carry traffic besides the resort-bound. Putting that traffic and infrastructure (utilities) elsewhere would be an environmental impact nightmare of biblical proportions, not to mention having to deal with Caltrans.

    I would expect, at a minimum, heavily themed pedestrian overcrossings (think where DTD crosses over Disneyland Drive - you hardly realize you're on a bridge over a city street!), and if we're lucky, monorails and/or peoplemover type systems connecting the parks and hotels.

    Leave a comment:


  • ah schucks
    replied
    Originally posted by dshimel
    I think they'll eventually reroute Harbor and Katella out and around the 3rd gate site to reconnect it to the main property without the major roads down the middle.

    My guess for the 3rd gate... a cross between Epcot and Disney Seas.
    I really like Mod Hotter's suggestion of creating an Epcot world scenario based on Myths and Legends, borrow from the Disney Seas and Epcot to create a less '"reality based" theme park and invest people into the myths and legends that we love.

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    I think they'll eventually reroute Harbor and Katella out and around the 3rd gate site to reconnect it to the main property without the major roads down the middle.

    My guess for the 3rd gate... a cross between Epcot and Disney Seas.

    Leave a comment:


  • Giant Panda
    replied
    dshimel,

    I think somebody has hacked their way into your MiceChat account. Either that, or maybe I'm just having a hard time understanding your "support" of a third gate when you were just arguing on another thread that the company should (that is, would make good business sense) dump the parks as they are a vrtual "black hole" (my quotes, not yours) of depreciation (among other things)....... :confused:

    Leave a comment:


  • socal05
    replied
    When I saw that map of the "possible" 3rd gate property, I thought maybe they could think of a cool "hidden, lost or forbidden" land. You could theme the heck out of it, and find a creative way to get DCA/DL people there. Maybe even have another hotel in the park. My mind goes wild with it...

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    You make a really good point here, and with this, I can bring up another necessity the DLR really needs...Value Resorts
    I'm sure Disney is WELLL aware of their need to add a lot more hotel rooms. Right now they are sitting at 2,000 rooms and even with none of them officially "value" rooms, they're running 87% full on an annual basis... And those aren't heqavily discounted rooms since it seems I can never get a good AP discount room rate no matter what time of year I want to visit!!!!

    That means they're turning away a lot of people in the peak season....


    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    Finally, I will concede that Disney kind of needs a third gate, but not in the sense of a third theme park. They need to turn DCA into their "third gate" (in essence, make it a "new" theme park).
    Don't get me wrong.... I'm the leader of the pack in just about any "DCA SUCKS" thread..... But I don't see it getting the extreme make-over it needs until the real 3rd gate is up.

    My guess is that DCA will get 2 more e-tickets in Timon over the next 5 years, then work will start for really real on the 3rd gate.... with a 2012 or so opening.

    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    Disneyland held it's own for many years.
    But it reached saturation.... The park has a max capacity of about 12-13 million visitors a year. When they'd add a new E-Ticket, attendance would jump... but the park would be so crowded that people would have a bad time, and within a couple years the attendance would fall right back to 13 million a year.

    Law of diminishing returns.... It became harder and harder to attract more people to the park.

    Thus, the need to expand OUTSIDE the front gate of DL.... New park, where you can attract more guests without putting more burden on Main Street and Fantasmic and Fireworks and the existing E-Tickets and existing water/sewer, etc....

    And, as long as all the rides are in 1 park, people will think of it as 1 day. Whether it is 6 E-Tickets or 10 E-Tickets or 14 E-Tickets, people will think of spending 1 day of their SoCal vacation in Disneyland.

    That 2nd, then 3rd "park" really makes them think.... I need 2, 3, 4 days to see all of this!

    Leave a comment:


  • ah schucks
    replied
    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    You make a really good point here, and with this, I can bring up another necessity the DLR really needs...Value Resorts

    In order to keep people in your resort, they need to be able to afford it. Maybe a quick renovation of one of the existing hotels around the property would work. I personally couldn't make enough in a year to afford to stay at the Disney hotels.
    Yes no one will argue with you there. Point in fact, buying some of the local hotels and doing Disney conversions is a great way to reach that goal

    Finally, I will concede that Disney kind of needs a third gate, but not in the sense of a third theme park. They need to turn DCA into their "third gate" (in essence, make it a "new" theme park).
    Before they do that, I can see adding a third park as working in one of two ways.
    Either...
    1. You get the perfect scenario, one-two days at Disneyland, one day at DCA, and one day at "third gate".
    This is what the company would like to see.
    2. You get the more likely scenario, one-two days at Disneyland, one day half at DCA, the other half at "third gate".
    This assumes they do nothing else to improve DCA and they half a third gate. With the ambitious agenda CM Matt is producing I find it hard to believe that DCA will not be renovated shortly in some aspect. Also extra revenue from the massive onslaught of the 50th could spill over into the cup of DCA even as far as the cup of the 3rd gate. So this scenario is not necessarily more likely.
    This leaves a really strong necessity. Whatever park they might build, really needs to be worth seeing and really needs to merit a full day's admission.

    Maybe a third park would work. I honestly would like to see one work, someday I hope to work for WDI, and a new opportunity to create is always great. I just think that first on the priority would be establishing the DLR as a resort, before moving on to another park.
    I think we will see something incredible for that 3rd gate, because they have forced themselves into a corner by using DCA as a hybrid in many aspects of both Epcot and MGM, so this 3rd gate can almost not be a clone or it will look like the long lost further deficient twin of DCA.

    Disneyland held it's own for many years. To be conservative, I would put the bare minimum year before another park at 2020, the sixty-fifth birthday of Disneyland. Before continuing the resort, they must establish the resort, make people associate the word Disneyland with two theme parks and hotels, not just "that park in California", as many people up here in the north ignorantly do.
    They don't have 15 years to wait to execute this, land will become more expensive. The time to strike is soon. It might might might open that late, but construction and design must begin very soon actually to execute a superior park to DCA and a worthy accomplice to Disneyland.
    Last edited by ah schucks; 04-01-2005, 12:45 PM. Reason: spelling corrections

    Leave a comment:


  • DoppelV
    replied
    [QUOTE=dshimel]

    When designing DCA, Disney saw 1 more group... The NorCals. Much of DCA's design, I think, was targeted at bringing more people down from the bay area.... But, why would you travel to DCA to see NorCal or taste wine when you live in NorCal... Flawed product I think.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Group 2, the passer-bys.... These are the people that are going to SoCal for a week-long vacation and spend 1 day at DL.... This IS the target niche of the resort expansion!!!!!

    Add a second gate, and instead of $50, you get $100 or $150 out of them... Heck, they may even stay at your hotel.

    Add a 3rd gate and you may get 3-4 days out of them..... Then, you make the price of a 1-week pass the same as a 4-day pass, and suddenly, instead of taking a "SoCal vacation" with 1 day at DL, they're taking a DLR vacation with 1-2 half days off at the beach or seeing Hollywood.
    [QUOTE]

    You make a really good point here, and with this, I can bring up another necessity the DLR really needs...Value Resorts

    In order to keep people in your resort, they need to be able to afford it. Maybe a quick renovation of one of the existing hotels around the property would work. I personally couldn't make enough in a year to afford to stay at the Disney hotels.

    Finally, I will concede that Disney kind of needs a third gate, but not in the sense of a third theme park. They need to turn DCA into their "third gate" (in essence, make it a "new" theme park).
    Before they do that, I can see adding a third park as working in one of two ways.
    Either...
    1. You get the perfect scenario, one-two days at Disneyland, one day at DCA, and one day at "third gate".
    2. You get the more likely scenario, one-two days at Disneyland, one day half at DCA, the other half at "third gate".
    This leaves a really strong necessity. Whatever park they might build, really needs to be worth seeing and really needs to merit a full day's admission.

    Maybe a third park would work. I honestly would like to see one work, someday I hope to work for WDI, and a new opportunity to create is always great. I just think that first on the priority would be establishing the DLR as a resort, before moving on to another park.

    Disneyland held it's own for many years. To be consevative, I would put the bare minimum year before another park at 2020, the sixty-fifth birthday of Disneyland. Before continuing the resort, they must establish the resort, make people associate the word Disneyland with two theme parks and hotels, not just "that park in California", as many people up here in the north ignorantly do.

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    Basically, people do not need to stay in Anaheim to enjoy Disneyland, and honestly there are people who go to LA not just to see Disneyland.
    In fact, right now, the vast majority of people going to LA are, in fact, NOT staying in Anahiem and NOT going just to see Disneyland....

    And if Disney can change just 2 million of those people.... Change them from SoCal tourists that spend a day at Disneyland..... into people that do stay in Anaheim and do visit just to see Disneyland, then they'll make an extra

    (does the math: 2 million people... average of 5 days each.... average $70 per person per day ) $700,000,000 million in revenue a year from the parks

    and

    (does the math.... 2 million people * 5 day stay / 3 average room occupancy = 3.3 million hotel room nights(about 11,000 rooms * 82% pccupancy * 365 days a year) sold at $100 each = $300 million in revenue.

    That's an extra $1 billion a year in revenue!

    And that would just be off an extra 10 million visits a year by these "passer-bys"... Add in the extra days and extra stays by the fanatics and SoCals and the passer-bys they were only able to convert from 1-day guests to 3-day guests!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • ah schucks
    replied
    I think I just agreed with Dshimel. Wow. I am scared. Te he he just playing

    Leave a comment:


  • dshimel
    replied
    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    The way I see it, Disneyland is a treasure for three main kinds of people...the fanatics (true Disney fans), the passerbys (Side/Day Trippers), and the SoCals.
    You nailed the target audience pretty well, I think.

    When designing DCA, Disney saw 1 more group... The NorCals. Much of DCA's design, I think, was targeted at bringing more people down from the bay area.... But, why would you travel to DCA to see NorCal or taste wine when you live in NorCal... Flawed product I think.

    But, lets focus back on your 3 groups...
    1) The fanatics.... We're going to drive 12+ hours round-trip, spend money on hotels, and visit DL 10-12 days a year whether there is 1 park or 3.
    3) The SoCals.... They're going to visit 2-3 (if non AP) or (8+ if AP) times a year whether there is 1 park or 3.


    ++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Group 2, the passer-bys.... These are the people that are going to SoCal for a week-long vacation and spend 1 day at DL.... This IS the target niche of the resort expansion!!!!!

    Add a second gate, and instead of $50, you get $100 or $150 out of them... Heck, they may even stay at your hotel.

    Add a 3rd gate and you may get 3-4 days out of them..... Then, you make the price of a 1-week pass the same as a 4-day pass, and suddenly, instead of taking a "SoCal vacation" with 1 day at DL, they're taking a DLR vacation with 1-2 half days off at the beach or seeing Hollywood.

    This is why DLR needs the 3rd gate!

    And not a water park!

    Leave a comment:


  • desertdweller
    replied
    The City of Garden Grove has awakened in the past decade and taken enormous measures to clean up Harbor Boulevard as it heads to the 22 Freeway. I always felt sorry for tourists approaching DL from that direction.

    Leave a comment:


  • ah schucks
    replied
    Originally posted by Niyxstyx
    Allrighty, I just need to clairify I few things...
    I have seen the diagrams and the satelite pictures of the Disneyland area, I know there is a lot of land left, I'm simply saying that closing that land off to all who don't pay an admission price may not be the way to go.

    I realize that redevelopment is a trend, I should know, being an architecture student, and having worked on such projects all the time. Urban redevelopment is great, but it needs to be smart. I don't believe a full third (or fourth) theme park fulfills that requirement.

    Even Walt himself did not feel all of Disney land should be used for theme parks. In his original scheme for Florida, he reserved only a small parcel in the north for park development. If Disney wants to increase tourism in their Anaheim property, they need to be working on a "full" vacation destination. Basically, people do not need to stay in Anaheim to enjoy Disneyland, and honestly there are people who go to LA not just to see Disneyland.

    Last, this is simply an opinion. What I say and think is ultimately meaningless, I just wanted to propose a possiblity for the future.
    Just because I spent so much time developing this map in the first place and I want to use it as often as possible I will repost it.


    As far as concepts check out these threads:
    http://www.micechat.com/showthread.php?t=599
    and
    http://www.micechat.com/showthread.php?t=1925
    and
    http://www.micechat.com/showthread.php?t=745

    The urban redevelopment of Anaheim extends beyond gates, there is a preposed GardenWalk co-owned by the city of Anaheim and a San Diego investment firm. Furthermore than just malls and hotels, Disney has made huge efforts in resorting medians, signs, cross walks to make the resort more inviting. Lastly Disney has a huge inceative in progress, cleaning up and retheming Harbor Blvd from the park south to the 22 freeway about 2 or 3 miles away. Old businesses, slums, abandoned buildings are being cleared and new jobs and new development is being created in was a rough neighborhood until a few years ago.

    I agree with the argument that a 3rd gate will lend support to the second gate and I am of two minds if and when it should happen.
    Option 1.) Start building now aim for a date to open between 2010 and 2015, take some pressure off of the ugly middle child DCA and let it blossom.
    Option 2.) The baby park DCA gets rethemed and organized and generates more income to warrant a 3rd gate to open in 2013 to 2017.

    This gate is happening, we should embrace it and make our voices heard so it doesn't repeat the mistakes of the past.

    Leave a comment:

Get Away Today Footer

Collapse
Working...
X