where should Disney build it next theme park?

[AdamEfimoff]

In a Country where the people are really prospering

australia?

 

[low-key]

australia?

to be honest I dont know which Country's are and are not, but when people are making lots of money, a Disney Park is the prefect getaway for a young family

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

I would say that the Gold Coast, Australia would make a lot of sense, and since that’s where the other theme parks are, the infrastructure should be in place to a large degree (and even more so after the Commonwealth Games).

I gather from threads here that WDW gets a lot of South American groups, so I agree with the PP who suggested Brazil.

Another place that I wouldn’t be surprised to hear suggested is Dubai. Given how much money is going into securing Dubai’s future beyond relying on oil revenue, and the effort they are going to in trying to attract Western tourists, I am pretty certain that it’s on a list of possibilities somewhere, belonging to either Disney or the Dubai tourism board.

 

[mrcase77]

In a Country where the people are really prospering

India might be an interesting location actually.

 

[bcla]

to be honest I dont know which Country's are and are not, but when people are making lots of money, a Disney Park is the prefect getaway for a young family

I don't know if it's necessarily that. The issue with Australia is that they have a fairly small population in an isolated location. Texas has a larger population than Australia. The Shanghai metro area has more people. Australia certain has tourism, but it's somewhat out of the way for anything like a Disney park.

 

[Mirielle]

I don't think Disney needs to build another theme park. I think they need to do some massive upkeep on the ones they currently have.

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

I don't know if it's necessarily that. The issue with Australia is that they have a fairly small population in an isolated location. Texas has a larger population than Australia. The Shanghai metro area has more people. Australia certain has tourism, but it's somewhat out of the way for anything like a Disney park.

I think Australia seems that way from an American or Western Europe perspective, but it has an extraordinary level of tourism, and the Gold Coast is already an extremely popular tourist destination from Asia. I think it’s a viable option if you consider it as a tourist park, in much the same way as WDW was when it was built, rather than merely looking at the local population. I think Australia makes as much sense as Paris, as I assume that any Australian park would be on a similar scale, rather than it being the size of either of the American parks (I don’t know about the existing Asian parks so that’s why I’m not commenting on them).

 

[DisneyOma]

Another place that I wouldn’t be surprised to hear suggested is Dubai. Given how much money is going into securing Dubai’s future beyond relying on oil revenue, and the effort they are going to in trying to attract Western tourists, I am pretty certain that it’s on a list of possibilities somewhere, belonging to either Disney or the Dubai tourism board.

They would have to loosen up on a lot of their customs if they want to attract Western tourists, IMO. While they are one of the more 'liberal' countries in the region, there are still a lot of traditions, religious ones, that have to be overcome unless they want a lot of international incidents. Head covering, body covering, separating male/female at certain events and places, etc. All of the websites I checked to learn about traveling in Dubai list a lot of "don'ts". That doesn't work well with a large international tourist drive.

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

They would have to loosen up on a lot of their customs if they want to attract Western tourists, IMO. While they are one of the more 'liberal' countries in the region, there are still a lot of traditions, religious ones, that have to be overcome unless they want a lot of international incidents. Head covering, body covering, separating male/female at certain events and places, etc. All of the websites I checked to learn about traveling in Dubai list a lot of "don'ts". That doesn't work well with a large international tourist drive.

There is definitely a perception problem for some people, but if you go there you will see that it is astonishingly western. There are a huge number of hotels, shopping malls and tourist attractions that cater very well to Western tourists, and the place is packed with western tourists. Much of the advice to tourists on websites is over-zealous, and most of the behaviour that Dubai police have problems with (serious public displays of affection, extreme drunkenness, wearing revealing clothing) are things that Disney also does not encourage.

Edit: I’m not going defend Dubai totally - it does have some problems though usually with people acting in a way that would make me avoid them anywhere else. However, Dubai is by far the most liberal of the UAE states, and arguably is less restrictive than China. There’s also a huge amount of money in that area.

 

[bcla]

I think Australia seems that way from an American or Western Europe perspective, but it has an extraordinary level of tourism, and the Gold Coast is already an extremely popular tourist destination from Asia. I think it’s a viable option if you consider it as a tourist park, in much the same way as WDW was when it was built, rather than merely looking at the local population. I think Australia makes as much sense as Paris, as I assume that any Australian park would be on a similar scale, rather than it being the size of either of the American parks (I don’t know about the existing Asian parks so that’s why I’m not commenting on them).

The distance would still be an obstacle and the local population obviously wouldn’t be enough to support it. It’s not like the new place in Shanghai that has over 200 million people living within 1000 km who could arrive by high speed rail.

What WDW had was that it was in the United States. Disneyland has a sizable visitation from locals who visit on the spur of the moment. Crossing international borders is still a chore for most people.

Of course we’re mostly talking fantasy here.

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

The distance would still be an obstacle and the local population obviously wouldn’t be enough to support it. It’s not like the new place in Shanghai that has over 200 million people living within 1000 km who could arrive by high speed rail.

What WDW had was that it was in the United States. Disneyland has a sizable visitation from locals who visit on the spur of the moment. Crossing international borders is still a chore for most people.

Of course we’re mostly talking fantasy here.

Yes, I agree that none of this is likely to happen. I do understand your point about international travel, but in my experience (having lived in the UK, US and Australia) international travel is less of an issue outside of the US, which is why Disneyland Paris has managed to stay afloat. International travel is a bigger deal in the US, due to the size, the fact that you have such a big country that has beaches, mountains etc (ie no reason to leave), and the high cost of flights. In contrast, Europeans and Australians travel more abroad, because Europe is smaller and Australia is so isolated.

My guess would be that a hypothetical park in Australia or the Middle East would not be targeting the US market, with the exception of the die hard fans who want to visit all the parks. Instead, it would be targeting the local/regional market. That is my understanding of what is happening in the existing Asian parks, and is based on how Disneyland Paris is marketed in the UK and Europe.

Obviously all of this is hypothetical, but that’s my best guess.

 

[bcla]

Yes, I agree that none of this is likely to happen. I do understand your point about international travel, but in my experience (having lived in the UK, US and Australia) international travel is less of an issue outside of the US, which is why Disneyland Paris has managed to stay afloat. International travel is a bigger deal in the US, due to the size, the fact that you have such a big country that has beaches, mountains etc (ie no reason to leave), and the high cost of flights. In contrast, Europeans and Australians travel more abroad, because Europe is smaller and Australia is so isolated.

My guess would be that a hypothetical park in Australia or the Middle East would not be targeting the US market, with the exception of the die hard fans who want to visit all the parks. Instead, it would be targeting the local/regional market. That is my understanding of what is happening in the existing Asian parks, and is based on how Disneyland Paris is marketed in the UK and Europe.

Obviously all of this is hypothetical, but that’s my best guess.

I know that the US market isn't the issue, but targeting even Asia. Sure there's tourism from Asia going to Australia, but I don't believe it's huge numbers. As a destination area, I don't necessarily think Australia has what would be required for something of this magnitude. If the size/scope is pared down, then there would be accusations of simply trading on the Disney name without providing a Disney experience.

In Europe there's the Schengen Area that makes travel between European countries extremely easy. There's effectively no border controls. Europeans vacation in other European countries almost like someone in Louisiana might travel to Florida.

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

I know that the US market isn't the issue, but targeting even Asia. Sure there's tourism from Asia going to Australia, but I don't believe it's huge numbers. As a destination area, I don't necessarily think Australia has what would be required for something of this magnitude. If the size/scope is pared down, then there would be accusations of simply trading on the Disney name without providing a Disney experience.

In Europe there's the Schengen Area that makes travel between European countries extremely easy. There's effectively no border controls. Europeans vacation in other European countries almost like someone in Louisiana might travel to Florida.

That’s a fair point about the allegation of trading on the Disney name; I suppose it depends on the scale of the project. Something the size of Hong Kong Disneyland would be bigger than what is already in Australia, I believe, so that wouldn’t necessarily be true (though obviously there will always be criticism).

Schengen currently covers more than 20 countries - 26 I think - but it started as an agreement between 5 countries. The expanded Schengen Convention didn’t come into force until 1995, three years after Disneyland Paris was opened. It was not brought into de facto EU law until much later. So while border-free movement within Europe is the norm now, it was not the case when Disneyland Paris was planned or even opened. Disney made an educated guess at how things would end up in Europe, but at the time that DLP was being planned there was significant resistance within Europe about the direction that the EU would take. It could have easily gone the other way.

Anyway, we shall see. Disney doesn’t ask for my opinion nearly as often as I feel they should!

 

[AnnaS]

There are talks soon.........of building a Disney park in Termini IMERSE (near Palermo). Talks fell through in 2013.

The ship could make a stop at Palermo (as it did when we cruised in 2007/excursion for the day to the park). Just a thought. I don't think anything will come of this though.

Interesting nevertheless.


http://www.palermotoday.it/economia/parco-disney-termini-imerese-armao.html

 

[Tigger in a kilt]

There are talks soon.........of building a Disney park in Termini IMERSE (near Palermo). Talks fell through in 2013.

The ship could make a stop at Palermo (as it did when we cruised in 2007/excursion for the day to the park). Just a thought. I don't think anything will come of this though.

Interesting nevertheless.


http://www.palermotoday.it/economia/parco-disney-termini-imerese-armao.html

That’s very interesting! I assume that their main target market must have been the cruise ships. I can’t imagine Palermo is big enough to sustain it otherwise, and Paris would surely be easier for most Europeans to get to. It will be interesting to see how things play out.

 

[bcla]

Schengen currently covers more than 20 countries - 26 I think - but it started as an agreement between 5 countries. The expanded Schengen Convention didn’t come into force until 1995, three years after Disneyland Paris was opened. It was not brought into de facto EU law until much later. So while border-free movement within Europe is the norm now, it was not the case when Disneyland Paris was planned or even opened. Disney made an educated guess at how things would end up in Europe, but at the time that DLP was being planned there was significant resistance within Europe about the direction that the EU would take. It could have easily gone the other way.

Even before then, Europeans traveled pretty freely even with border controls. Australia obviously doesn't have land borders.

However, as a practical matter what Disney needed was a partner willing to put in money for all these theme parks outside the United States. That's the biggest obstacle to any new Disney park.

 

[MrJT]

Texas is my choice too. Maybe between Houston and Galveston.

I'd prefer San Antonio or Austin, but the coast isn't too far away, except for Houston traffic. I'd much rather drive in San Antonio.

 

[rickybobby]

I don't think Disney needs to build another theme park. I think they need to do some massive upkeep on the ones they currently have.

EPCOT comes to mind.

 

[neverlandsky]

Over the years there's been lots of rumors of Las Vegas, NV due to the land opportunity.

Hard to pick another spot that isn't impacted by extreme weather. PNW is rainy/snowy, NE snowy, SW too hot and monsoons. Midwest tornados & severe thunderstorms. SE hurricanes/tropical.

DL doesn't have much room to expand anymore. Yet they do keep on surprising by expanding. WDW has a ton of expansion room, yet there's also a dead water park there too. It seems the upkeep of DHS and EP was lacking big time. They could use more WDW resorts.

 

[Colleen27]

Somewhere in South America seems like it would make the most sense, given where the other parks are located. Australia seems a bit close to the Asian parks with an overlapping target market, particularly with Hong Kong (which I know is really small by Disney Parks standards). Weather rules out most of North America, and while we'd all love a park closer, the fact is that the existing parks are in two of the cheapest American markets to fly into so most Americans aren't really that far from a Disney Park. But South America seems like it could be a huge potential target market that tour groups barely scratch the surface of.

But honestly, I'd rather see investment in improvements to the existing parks than something all new. It doesn't make sense to build new parks while letting the established destinations decline.