i have to agree that this was a well laid out explanation/ progression.
of course...the thing that sticks out most is that the retrofit was done on underbooked rooms...even if the stated goal was to prepare for no inventory to be sold at the time of a ssr sellout...that still leaves the original contention i made wide open.
I actually think I stated that the goal was to BOTH fix the issue on the underbooked CATEGORY of rooms AND give them something to sell
Obviously this poster knows what really goes on...that is refreshing. I worked at a WDW resort during the construction of AKL and during its first couple of years of operation. Probably 1/3rd of the staff from my unit transferred to AKL in March of 01 when it went online. I know full well what the problems were there...they did ridiculous amounts of research and survey on both AKL and DAK at the time to attempt and explain both the lack of demand of the lodge and the freefall in attendance at DAK at the time. Theme/ animals was a huge response.
The anecdotal info I've heard doesn't agree. And since we're both nameless, faceless posters on the interwebs, we'll have to agree to part company on that one. I don't expect you to believe me, since I have no concrete proof. And I'm, likewise, not going to take your say so given what I've heard to the contrary.
From what I've heard, the theming/animal viewing experience/guest satisfaction surveys are pretty high from guests who stay there. The most usual places the Lodge fails is location and deluxe amenities (a common theme amongst their deluxe resorts). And, at least as far as I've heard, Disney doesn't often survey guests about why they DIDN'T choose to stay somewhere....only why they chose the resort they did and about their experiences during their stay.
With DAK, the issues seem to stem from completeness....much like when DHS opened. It opened with a lack of "standard" attractions and no real thrill rides. And they have not (for whatever reason) returned to complete the other 1/2-ish of the park, though adding Everest gave them a substantial (7%-ish) boost.
The numbers also don't show an attendance "freefall", either. It is the least attended park, but it has been that way since it opened. There was a slight drop in the late 90's (one seen by all the parks, actually), and another around the events of Sept 11th (which effected both the end of '01 and the beginning of '02). But in reality, the attendance at that gate have been steadily increasing (6 million in 9 months of operation in '98, to 7.7 million in 2001, to 8.2 million in '05, to 8.9 million in '07 to 9.4 million in '08). That's steady growth, and if the bean counters put some more $$ into it (which they won't, until they think they can actually see some better ROI on them than the projects they currently have in the pipeline), likely the park would be fine. It's a 1/2 day park, as it stands...and Disney actually seems to be OK with that.
But, as you mentioned, that's more of a tangent discussion.
The clientele wasn't down with it...to put it succinctly. Perhaps you needed to be there or in direct contact with to understand what the reality of the situation is over there. But it's nice to see somebody who seems to speak from actual knowledge as opposed to just throwing webgeek blurbs drawn from sentinel and wall street journal articles randomly at the intellectual dartboard.
Again, there's so much overwhelming evidence and indications that there are SOME other factors at work here, it's tough for me to simply take your word for it being about "theme". I've heard too many contrary reports, seen too much contrary evidence, to think that's more than simply your opinion. For all intents and purposes, it looks like there was ONE category of room that was really an "issue". And it's hard to logically wrap your head around how that would have anything to do with theme
Resort size
External events
Lack of value/differentiation
All seem to have been mitigating factors. They're much more obvious, logical factors (Occam's razor). And though it's anecdotal (so, again, we're going to have to agree to disagree), they're the ones that have been told to me by people working at AKL.
so...
you take vacant rooms and convert them - even if you need more units because you are afraid you'll not have any to peddle after the tours for a period (though saratoga didn't "sell out" until 2 years after the animal kingdom sales began...and based on one 20 second google search you can see the amount of resales that saratoga has out there...and it is reasonable to assume that disney is also sitting on a scrooge mcduck sized pile of them as well...so did it really sell out? anyway...sidetrack disengaged)...if you retrofit aren't you by definition doing a fix on animal kingdom lodge?
Ultimately, SSR didn't sell out as quickly as they'd projected. So Disney acted to pre-emptively solve a problem that never actually manifested. It's not the first time. Given the upside/downside....that falls into the "no brainer" category. Their projections were telling them SSR could sell out before they had a new offering ready. The upside to "solving the problem" is you fix the underbooking issue in AKL Deluxe rooms AND you have new units, with a pretty big point of differentiation between your current offering, to sell. The downside to "not solving the problem" is you'd run out of units and have nothing new. You look at the two options and quickly see that bringing new units on line actually makes the most sense. Because your worst case scenario still provides benefit and increased opportunity for profit.
Again, I'm not arguing that the retrofit was, in part, a "fix". It certainly was. It just doesn't look like it was a "fix" for the reasons (or, really, for the scope) of the problem you're identifying. It was a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.
Ironically...that both bay lake and animal kingdom kidani opened mere months apart...so you have to wonder why that was as well.
Yes, which is why they chose the retrofit option with AKL.
BLT opened in August of 2009.
Kidani opened in May of 2009.
Jambo's DVC units opened in June/July of 2007.
That's a 2 year head start by choosing the option they did.
As far as eco-concerns...i now work in that field and i can tell you that the reedy creek provision allows disney to not wait for the save the stork society to stop protesting before they move forward with a wetlands area construciton project. nobody stands in the way of the WDW masterplan. Heck, if you look at half of the special initiatives by the florida DEP...walt disney world is and active partner in the programs...same for some USEPA initiatives. The agencies and Disney are practically golfing buddies. So while that might have played a role in some of the pre-construction planning and design work...they got that half moon tower at contemp up off the ground and occupied awfully damned quick...and the pilings alone where a massive hurdle...65-75 foot below grade to the bedrock...and still she was up in 2 years flat.
That one is still more of an enigma
Actually, I wasn't talking about the red tape of the construction with BLT, but the actual PROCESS of construction (and demolition). Because of it's proximity to the lake, the North Tower had to be taken down brick by brick, more or less (also..weren't there asbestos concerns that proved minimal?). Then you had to drive the support beams even deeper than one would usually have to on a project of that size, because of the proximity to wetlands (because you DON'T want that foundation shifting, for anything, obviously). And then you have to construct your footprint in the middle of a guest area, fenced in by the lake. So normal construction techniques have to be modified, as does the waste disposal from the site. It's a much more arduous process that has the potential to take significantly longer. And it did take awhile. Demolition on the North Wing started in Jan 2007, and BLT opened in Aug 2009. That's a 31 month project, from start to finish.
By comparison, Kidani started construction in "late 2007" (it's tough to pinpoint exactly when...since the site wasn't accessible to guests), and was mostly complete by May of 2009. The first evidence I remember seeing/hearing about of Kidani's construction was in November of 2007. That's about an 18 month construction time line, which also had to accommodate some special circumstances (the animals on the savanna, guest proximity (though nothing like that at BLT), etc).
