I previously explained why there is a need for a third Disney theme park resort in the USA.But where should it be?
Disneyland and Walt Disney World were built where the weather makes year-round outdoor activities easy and common with little hassle or preparation. Yes, sunblock, shade, and air conditioning have been musts. But guest never need a parka. Walt Disney World gets frequent rain, and Disneyland has, over the years, become more and more tolerant of rain instead of needing to close early. Plastic ponchos are a big help.
This is one of several reasons I have long thought of Texas as ideal for a third Disney theme park resort in the USA. But there are other possibilities.
Since the the first two, Disney theme park resorts have been built in places that regularly have an annual season that incudes snow. Tokyo gets a little snow. Paris gets a lot. Hong Kong usually doesn't. Shanghai gets a little. So, "It gets cold there" or "It snows there" isn't a reason to rule out a location as a possibility. Disney parks can function with snow. Some people would say regular snowfall can be used to the Resort's benefit. Consider the project Walt Disney had proposed that never came to be, Mineral King. Also, the Company did consider Virginia for the Disney's America project.
So, in addition to Texas, where else should the Company consider as a possible location?
Discussing this on Twitter, Rod Trett mentioned Branson, Missouri and Kirk Hanson mentioned a few places, including the state of Colorado. I think both could be great possibilities.
I know Branson has been mentioned over the years by people who want to see the Company have additional theme park resorts in the USA. It does seem like a good idea based on it already being a family entertainment draw. Geographically, it is roughly near the center of the contiguous 48 states, and not close to either Disneyland or Walt Disney World, which is my original goal: have a third resort that makes it easier for more people to have visit to a Disney theme park.
Colorado could mean a significant change in overall design to capitalize on snow, rather than merely deal with it. And again, it's very roughly central in location.
There are professional agencies which can explore the feasibility of these three options (somewhere in Texas, somewhere in Colorado, or in or around Branson, Missouri). Among other things, studies of this sort consider the business climate, where enough suitable contiguous land can be purchased for prices that make it worthwhile, likely customers within the right distance, local workforce (there's a reason WDW relies so heavily on the College Program and staffing World Showcase with people from the countries represented), infrastructure and supply chains, competing and complimenting businesses nearby. Some people say it isn't feasible to build another site in the USA. Maybe they're right, maybe they're not. After all, it was already a major undertaking to acquire the land for Disneyland and then later Walt Disney World, and that was half a century ago. Things have only gotten more formidable since. But the resorts seem to be a a major gold mine.
As I was writing this, the Company boosted prices yet again at the domestic theme parks. Supply and demand. The demand is there. It would be great to have more supply.
Disneyland and Walt Disney World were built where the weather makes year-round outdoor activities easy and common with little hassle or preparation. Yes, sunblock, shade, and air conditioning have been musts. But guest never need a parka. Walt Disney World gets frequent rain, and Disneyland has, over the years, become more and more tolerant of rain instead of needing to close early. Plastic ponchos are a big help.
This is one of several reasons I have long thought of Texas as ideal for a third Disney theme park resort in the USA. But there are other possibilities.
Since the the first two, Disney theme park resorts have been built in places that regularly have an annual season that incudes snow. Tokyo gets a little snow. Paris gets a lot. Hong Kong usually doesn't. Shanghai gets a little. So, "It gets cold there" or "It snows there" isn't a reason to rule out a location as a possibility. Disney parks can function with snow. Some people would say regular snowfall can be used to the Resort's benefit. Consider the project Walt Disney had proposed that never came to be, Mineral King. Also, the Company did consider Virginia for the Disney's America project.
So, in addition to Texas, where else should the Company consider as a possible location?
Discussing this on Twitter, Rod Trett mentioned Branson, Missouri and Kirk Hanson mentioned a few places, including the state of Colorado. I think both could be great possibilities.
I know Branson has been mentioned over the years by people who want to see the Company have additional theme park resorts in the USA. It does seem like a good idea based on it already being a family entertainment draw. Geographically, it is roughly near the center of the contiguous 48 states, and not close to either Disneyland or Walt Disney World, which is my original goal: have a third resort that makes it easier for more people to have visit to a Disney theme park.
Colorado could mean a significant change in overall design to capitalize on snow, rather than merely deal with it. And again, it's very roughly central in location.
There are professional agencies which can explore the feasibility of these three options (somewhere in Texas, somewhere in Colorado, or in or around Branson, Missouri). Among other things, studies of this sort consider the business climate, where enough suitable contiguous land can be purchased for prices that make it worthwhile, likely customers within the right distance, local workforce (there's a reason WDW relies so heavily on the College Program and staffing World Showcase with people from the countries represented), infrastructure and supply chains, competing and complimenting businesses nearby. Some people say it isn't feasible to build another site in the USA. Maybe they're right, maybe they're not. After all, it was already a major undertaking to acquire the land for Disneyland and then later Walt Disney World, and that was half a century ago. Things have only gotten more formidable since. But the resorts seem to be a a major gold mine.
As I was writing this, the Company boosted prices yet again at the domestic theme parks. Supply and demand. The demand is there. It would be great to have more supply.
No comments:
Post a Comment