Other PPs already have addressed the main arguments against this (including logistics, existing park improvement and limited Fox IP), so I'll throw out a conceptual argument. Disney builds theme parks. Rides, attraction, dining and shopping are all tied into a central theme or unifying identity/concept. Not to sound harsh, but "dumping ground for IP of that studio we just bought" isn't a theme for a fifth park. It's a likely train wreck (and not the fun BTMRR kind of train wreck). Could some "theme" be extracted from the Fox properties to tie them together? Maybe - but I'd say that starting with the IP and working up is backwards. Looking at criticisms of WDW parks and possible misfires, many of those complaints go back to that idea: an IP or idea doesn't fit the theme or is shoehorned in. I'm thinking of stuff like Dinoland and Pandora in AK, the speedway in Tomorrowland, introducing fictional narrative rides into the WP, GotG in Future World, squeezing more recent characters or properties into parades or projection shows without rhyme or reason. I didn't name DHS in that list - since that park is currently a hodgepodge of IP-focused attractions without an overall identity (having abandoned the studios part and awaiting a new name). Which is what a park based on Fox IP likely would be - where the upper end is Universal (WWoHP is amazing but the rest of UO is hit-or-miss for me) and the lower end is something like the Paramount Parks from decades ago. Final point: I get that developing IP-based attractions is the trend to attract visitors, but I don't think it's a coincidence that many of the strongest and most popular Disney rides aren't tied to any IP - or only to the IP that the ride itself created. To pick on the Paramount Parks a bit more, how many people these days would still visit those based on the draw of rides relying on movie IP from Top Gun, Tomb Raider, Congo and Days of Thunder? (Not knocking the rides - some of those were pretty good and are still around - but the IP connection is DOA).