Is Disney running out of Locations For Theme Parks?

[CostaFreak]

No, what they need to do is focus on what they have now. Call me crazy, but after how much of a bombshell HKDL turned up to be, I say no more new resorts until December 21, 2012.

[BrizMarc]

I think their is enough room for more parks, But i dont think they should make anymore just yet. Or at least stop making magic kingdom style parks.

[taronga]

I agree, if they ever decide to build in Australia they should stop building "Magic Kingdom" parks. Maybe they could design a smaller park with only one central theme (instead of half a dozen lands).

[Chimay57]

Originally Posted by Big Disney Fan

When I first heard Euro Disneyland, I had absolutely no clue what a Euro was. I do now, but back then, I didn't think that the Euro meant a type of currency; I thought that the European countries still used their own different currencies instead of the Euro they use now. When I first heard of "Euro", I thought it was simply short for "Europe". I thought Euro Disneyland in this sense would have made sense, considering that Disneyland Paris was originally intended to be the Disney resort of not just France, but also all of Europe.

But it WAS the way you say.
It was called Euro Disney. Standing for Europe, short. Of coarse it was !

The currency called "Euro" came well AFTER Euro Disney opened its doors.
It's one of the reasons they changed the name, afterwards, to Disneyland Paris. Not exactly because of the "euro" currency alone, but because the word "euro" started beeing used everywhere for nearly anything and in the end, going to be both stupid & boring, sounding too cheap.
(By the way: also the choice of "euro" for the currency was a stupidity, in my eyes. It allready HAD a name before (more than 15 years before distribution of the coins & paper: the ECU ! - abbreviation of 'European Currency Unit' -)
We USED that ecu allready in Europe, but only on accounts. Ecu accounts were used for trade, as no exchange rates were needed for any European transaction.
Anyway, ECU is a much nicer sounding word for a currency... The first design-models of the currency coins, also had the name ECU on it !
And perhaps, "Euro Disney" would still have been "Euro Disney" !

[gurugriff100]

Here Are Some Locations Where They Should Put Theme Parks:


1. Dubai
2. U.S.A
3.Europe

[tomserwin]

Originally Posted by gurugriff100

Here Are Some Locations Where They Should Put Theme Parks:


1. Dubai
2. U.S.A
3.Europe

You mean aside from The Disneyland Resort and the Walt Disney World Resort in the USA and Disneyland Paris in Europe?

[Chimay57]

Originally Posted by gurugriff100

Here Are Some Locations Where They Should Put Theme Parks:


1. Dubai
2. U.S.A
3.Europe

What do you mean with "Should" ?
Perhaps you are aware that putting a park somewhere is an economical question first. Where do you find , in DUBAI, the 130 million people direct accessible home market you have in Europe with central location Paris? And still, the investment in Paris seemed to be questionable, from a point of rendability.
ONLY Asia still has a FEW potential profitable home market situations.
Disney is not going to feed on their own customers by building a third resort in US or a second in Europe. Because that is most likely what would happen: bringing down the number of visitors in the existing parks...
The total amusement park world in US and Europe is allmost saturated. A new park can only live by feeding on others. Place it simple: bancruptcy of some parks can make place for one new...

It is also about how much money there actually IS to be spent on amusement parks, per year, in a certain area. The money-to-be-spent is limited. You cannot invent THAT ! :)

And a third element is: the way vacation periods are organised in different parts of the world. Shorter available vacation periods lead to more resort attendence, as the few days of vacation you have are easier spent in an all-in resort then in a travel-around freely style. There is a big difference between the US and Europe. The US tends to have much shorter average vacation periods the Europe, so giving a favour to resorts and amusement parks that is impossible in the European situation, on the same scale. European Vacation budget will not be higher then in the US, but must be spread and used more carefully because it must cover a much longer period...

[Big Disney Fan]

Well, here are some of my options for a theme park location:

1. South America (probably Brazil)
2. Australia
3. Europe

[Chimay57]

Originally Posted by Big Disney Fan

Well, here are some of my options for a theme park location:

1. South America (probably Brazil)
2. Australia
3. Europe

Thanks.

Europe is saturated with ONE park. (I explained why)
Australia has been studied. But there as just not enough people living there, to even RISK a project.
South America could be a project, economically spoken, for the future, as there is a big home market, but actually PROBABLY still not enough average income with the people to risk the investment...

Greets

[PeoplemoverMatt]

The last thing Disney needs right now is to build another full-blown Resort, anywhere. I would be shocked if the Disney company built another Resort in the next 20 years.

That being said, I'm surprised no other company has tried to emulate Oriental Land Company's strategy with Tokyo Disney Resort. With Tokyo Disney's success, you'd think someone else would want to follow that model.

-- PMM

[spacedest]

I think there aren't anymore places to think of right now considering they just opened up Hong Kong Disneyland a few years ago.

[spacedest]

I hope they will open another one in the future. It should pop up in a few years.

[Big Disney Fan]

Originally Posted by Chimay57

Europe is saturated with ONE park. (I explained why)

Yes, I know. But can't a guy have an opinion?

[AraBrokenDreamer]

I agree that them building a new park anywhere in the time being sounds implausible and improbable as it is unprofitable. That said, Australia would be the only outside-US park that would get tons and tons of visits as it probably the only one outside the US that has English as a native language (though there is still something to be said for 'Aussie'). That said, they'd have to depend on international tourists to pull a profit at all there, but if they pulled it off, Australia would benefit as much as Dinsey as the climate there is magnificent and there is certainly enough natural resources there for something like SeaDisney or AK. But it's still too big of a risk for probably the next decade. Get some serious numbers of people who would buy AP's and then they'll maybe consider it (after all, isn't it like a 19-22-hour flight?).

-Ara

[Chimay57]

Australia, one complete "continent". Under 22 million inhabitants.
This is a bit less then the combined Netherlands and Flanders in Europe, wich form the dutch speaking community: 23 millions, and that surface is miniscule compared to Australia... but a comparable market. That area is the home market for Efteling theme park (dutch language spoken) wich gets maximum 3,5 million visits per year out of this potential.
Other comparison.
California, one state of the 50+ states in the USA only, under 38 million inhabitants, and totals more than 100 million in easy reach.
Compare, and make your own economic decision. :)
Then Mexico with under 104 million, could be more favorable, even considering the average low income..... allthough, Mexicans allready count for many visitors to both DLR and WDW. Then, building a "Mexico DL" could feed on existing visitor numbers of those earlier 2, so, bringing down rendablity in the US parks... => this is the way investors consider such a decision. (Just a functional example, with Mexico)

It's no kids play ! :)
No offence to anyone, anywhere !! Just the nessessary hint to reality ! :)
Dreams go a long way, investment money does not.