3) DHS is a big destination rivaling MK but needs way more attractions. They'd have to move some CM etc parking but they could really bump out the boundaries. Why they didn't do prep work when they built Galaxy Edge ... Marvel has IPs that could be used now - Star Tours to Antman would be great segway to a Marvel land.
...
5) Epcot the big oasis of space that many still don't care about going to ... build the Japan ride, build the Germany ride. Forget more countries on the empty plots, will never happen, just add attractions that are based in other countries ... Coco, Encanto, Pinocchio, Mary Poppins .... so many popular Disney movies come from other countries.
I don't want to spend all day debating because this is such a pie-in-the-sky discussion and people will selectively poke holes in any theory.
But here's my counter to the above. Imagine Disney does this. They build another land with 2-3 attractions at Hollywood Studios. They build attractions in a couple Epcot countries, maybe update Figment and finish WoL. What's the net impact?
- More guests at HS and Epcot. How many more? Based upon recent experiences with Galaxy's edge and Pandora, maybe net 500k per park.
- More guests at each of those parks means more people wanting to ride Rise, TOT, RNR, Frozen, Test Track, etc.
- More people at those parks means they're more crowded than now. Especially in an area like the World Showcase where you might be able to shoehorn a couple attractions but you aren't adding much additional room for foot traffic. The WS can already get extremely crowded, especially during festivals, concerts, etc.
Those two parks will never match the attraction density of MK, in no small part because of how they are already laid out.
Now imagine they take the same resources and invest in a 5th park. It opens with a couple E-tickets, a couple kid-friendly people eaters, a stage show, a walk-through. 6+ attractions on Day 1 with other investments planned. In the first full year, you're drawing 5-6 million guests IMO. Much of that will be cannibalized from the other parks. You're not immediately adding that much new business. But consider the full impact property wide:
- Improved experience for all at the existing 4 parks
- Reduced demand for Rise, GOTG, Tron, etc.
- Reignite interest among the faithful. I don't want to pigeonhole discussion to this 20 year old idea of a villains park, but whatever it is would make the Disney skeptics immediately take notice.
- New opportunities for
Genie+ and ILL sales. I'm of the opinion that you don't need G+ every day of every trip. But add another park and that's at least one more day when G+ would come in handy. Plus $20 per person ILL sales for the park's signature attraction.
- Possible increase in park hopping purchase. A new park will never be a "full day" experience. But many people will still want to see the latest-and-greatest while preserving the ability to go elsewhere before or after.
- New opportunities for destination dining experiences (a la Be Our Guest or Space 220) and other upcharge events planned for the park from Day One.
- New high profile hotel + DVC destination. In 2023, it's kind of a no-brainer to build a hotel on the doorstep of any new park.
Yes there are many logistical issues I'm glossing over like initial construction costs, staffing, guest transportation, RCID management changes, etc. None are insurmountable hurdles, though the cost and/or logistics could be enough to torpedo the concept.
The key to all of this is Disney's claim that they are now more interested in quality over quantity. If they just want bodies thru gates with the lowest overhead possible, adding to EP and HS makes all the sense in the world. (But then we wouldn't have Park Pass attendance caps and they'd probably be selling Annual Passes.)
But if Disney is truly worried about guest satisfaction and are willing to spend toward the end-goal of less crowded paths and shorter wait times at some of the most popular attractions, a new park seems like the easiest way to accomplish that.