DHS Construction update thread (Read Post 1) Updated 8/21/19

[Budshark]

Star Wars Vacation Club.

For $200/pt you own a piece of a Galaxy Far Far Away! Get a special membership card and unique offerings including discounts *subject to change.

Buy a piece of the Galaxy today!! *No refunds if the Empire / First Order destroy the location.


Now that will be green lighted in half a second.

 

[DanBoris]

Nope...the shells of probably 85% of the buildings were built concurrently with what become the only section of PoP!

There were rain shelters for anoles for about 8 years

Only two of the guest buildings and the lobby building were beyond foundations before the project stopped.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Only two of the guest buildings and the lobby building were beyond foundations before the project stopped.

View attachment 145782

But all the site work was done...and I believe they actually demoed a couple in the process.

The ascertion that art of animation was a "new development" is incorrect. Because it absolutely was not.

Robert Iger has NEVER authorized a new resort development. It had been DVC and only add ons at that. And the eyesore correction across from pop.

You're joking me, right?

 

[rteetz]

Wasn't only the Little Mermaid section and the main lobby built when it was the legendary years?

Correct.

 

[rteetz]

But all the site work was done...and I believe they actually demoed a couple in the process.

The ascertion that art of animation was a "new development" is incorrect. Because it absolutely was not.

Robert Iger has NEVER authorized a new resort development. It had been DVC and only add ons at that. And the eyesore correction across from pop.

You're joking me, right?

But you're statement that 85% of the building being built was incorrect. If you look at that photo the lobby and two room sections which is now little mermaid were built. Yes of course they had the site prep done but they didn't have to build it. Look at river country that can still be accessed by guests yet it's just left there to rot.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Correct.

This is the classic "pay attention to the smoke" line of conversation at this point...

I'm not sure when that overhead was shot...but there are clearly the outlines of 8 buildings in the shot and I'm not sure how the lack of all being vertical invalidates a thing...AoA was not s new development...which means it was a Eisner commenced project. There's nothing to see here.

Don't argue over the ketchup and let someone steal your fries.

Disney is in a post rack hotel world...they don't like the economic models and they sure as heck don't want to pay for the employees.

 

[rteetz]

This is the classic "pay attention to the smoke" line of conversation at this point...

I'm not sure when that overhead was shot...but there are clearly the outlines of 8 buildings in the shot and I'm not sure how the lack of all being vertical invalidates a thing...AoA was not s new development...which means it was a Eisner commenced project. There's nothing to see here.

Don't argue over the ketchup and let someone steal your fries.

Disney is in a post rack hotel world...they don't like the economic models and they sure as heck don't want to pay for the employees.

Yes but again that doesn't mean they had to build it (see river country left to rot). Also AoA was never in the plans under Eisner. The legendary years were which in my opinion were not as good as what we got out of it. They went back to the drawing board and came out with something that is good while over priced but good.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

But you're statement that 85% of the building being built was incorrect. If you look at that photo the lobby and two room sections which is now little mermaid were built. Yes of course they had the site prep done but they didn't have to build it. Look at river country that can still be accessed by guests yet it's just left there to rot.

The entire site was developed...it was halted I believe about a year into the project.

Again...nothing has been changed during this debate.

No new hotels under current management...period

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yes but again that doesn't mean they had to build it (see river country left to rot). Also AoA was never in the plans under Eisner. The legendary years were which in my opinion were not as good as what we got out of it. They went back to the drawing board and came out with something that is good while over priced but good.

Art of animation doesn't exist without pop. It's silly to even dispute it. They had a liability scenario and money sunk into it...the only thing that forced action.

It's shocking sometimes how much arguing for the sake of arguing goes on. I do it too...but try not to when the empirical data is fairly solid.

They "went back to the drawing board" with a mandated "what are we going to do with this thing?" Task order.

Think what you want...but there's an easy answer to this conundrum

 

[rteetz]

Art of animation doesn't exist without pop. It's silly to even dispute it. They had a liability scenario and money sunk into it...the only thing that forced action.

It's shocking sometimes how much arguing for the sake of arguing goes on. I do it too...but try not to when the empirical data is fairly solid.

They "went back to the drawing board" with a mandated "what are we going to do with this thing?" Task order.

Think what you want...but there's an easy answer to this conundrum

I understand and agree that it wasn't a new hotel but it was in fact a new concept. Again I'll say Disney didn't have to anything but they did.

 

[DanBoris]

But all the site work was done...and I believe they actually demoed a couple in the process.

The ascertion that art of animation was a "new development" is incorrect. Because it absolutely was not.

Robert Iger has NEVER authorized a new resort development. It had been DVC and only add ons at that. And the eyesore correction across from pop.

You're joking me, right?

But you have to admit that your statement "shells of probably 85% of the buildings were built" is incorrect. It's more like 15% were build. If you look back through Google Earth you can see that this was the state from the time the other half of Pop was completed until the time work started on AOA, so nothing was built then torn down. And considering that the shells that were built probably needed a lot of labor after sitting so long, they had vastly more work to do then had already been done. This may not have been new construction, but it was pretty close to having been built from scratch.

 

[skier_pete]

I'm kind of half-way in this argument. The AoA should be considered a new hotel. However, Disney's motivation here was to bring in a market that they really barely had - one complaint they have from people is the lack of value occupancy for families larger than 4 - families with 3 or 4 kids that wanted to stay on property were staying off because of the accomidations. Disney built a "value" resort to capture that market, but then they priced it like a deluxe (or at least a moderate).

So - I disagree with LOL in that if they see a hotel room market that they are losing out on, then they will build one. However, luxury hotels they have a hard time filling, thus the conversion to DVC. They won't build another deluxe, that's for sure. Someone MAY decide a Star Wars hotel is worth it though. As I stated before, if you can charge Deluxe prices for Value accomodations, I would think Disney would be all over that.

 

[phillipsjp2003]

Personally I don't want to see more resort expansion without significant park expansion to match. The parks are crowded enough as it is. Hopefully the DHS overhaul will help. But if Disney thinks they can make money on a Star Wars resort the they might just build it.

I don't think Star Wars would fit as a deluxe DVC resort though.

 

[Budshark]

I don't think Star Wars would fit as a deluxe DVC resort though.

Rebel scum.

Star Wars DVC with a direct entrance to the Star Wars boat ride.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

It's all theory here....so here's my final one:

If...they hadn't overshot on pop...what is the most likely:

1. Art of animation is built where it is...as is it?
2. All stars or even pop gets more limited suite conversion?

I think it's overwhelmingly the later.

Big shot Bobby has never tasked anyone with clearing ground and building a rack hotel. There's no interpretation or discussion on this. DVC yes...not rack.

Will we ever see one again?
It would take a fundamental shift in philosophy...When DVC add ons, conversions to take rack offline, four seasons, and flamingo crossing is what you got.

At least he's building in the parks now...if at a snails pace.

 

[jade1]

Seems like they are "converting" hotel guests into DVC members (and mostly deluxe guests) so why build empty hotels?

 

[phillipsjp2003]

Rebel scum.

Star Wars DVC with a direct entrance to the Star Wars boat ride.

The first order shall rise stronger than ever to place a Beverly Hills themed DVC resort and spa next to your precious SWL. Come to the dark side.

 

[jade1]

The first order shall rise stronger than ever to place a Beverly Hills themed DVC resort and spa next to your precious SWL. Come to the dark side.

Yep, a DVC hotel that walks into DHS would sell out quickly IMO. Could be a Star Wars Resort or Beverly Hills Resort. Its also a rare opportunity that an actual "hotel" would be successful also IMO.

 

[jade1]

Also the DVC Resorts/hotels/wings will become Disney hotels after the lease ends.

CR turns 50 soon-so there should be life in BLT (7 years old already) after as well as an example.

WDW is building hotels, just members are doing it for them for free.


.

 

[Eoghann]

Also the DVC Resorts/hotels/wings will become Disney hotels after the lease ends.

CR turns 50 soon-so there should be life in BLT (7 years old already) after as well as an example.

WDW is building hotels, just members are doing it for them for free.


.

What makes you think they won't just to do a refurb and sell new points?