New Four Seasons Timeshare on Disney Property and Value Oriented West Side

[DancingBear]

Where does it say the land will be sold for the Four Season's project?

Sold, leased, what does it matter? The point is that (aside from the fact that they're taking away a nice golf course), that land won't be available to be the next [INSERT YOUR FAVORITE DISNEY RESORT WORLDWIDE], or the Fifth Gate, or whatever great idea might be developed in the future (a Four Seasons is nice, but it's not anything new).

There is only so much property left for them to build on--a ton of the remaining property is set aside for required conservation area.

Also, I understood that Celebration had been earmarked for sale since the beginning. Am I wrong??

Not that I'm aware of.

...Would you rather have the land just sit there?

Well, part of it's not just sitting there now, it's a Pete Dye-designed golf course!

In any event, as stated above, the complaint isn't that they're developing, just that they're not doing anything particularly special or particularly "Disney."

Then you folks would be complaing about wasted resources etc.

Please, find some past quotes from "us folks" along those lines.

It's a Four Seasons for pete's sake, not a HoJo's!!

I thought the Grand Floridian was supposed to be a true luxury resort? I thought Disney was the company which was

...dedicated to perfecting the travel experience through continuous innovation and the highest standards of hospitality....continues to lead the hospitality industry with innovative enhancements...deeply instilled...culture is personified in its employees -- people who share a single focus and are inspired to offer great service...all the ingredients needed to create memorable vacations: gracious and caring staff; beautiful surroundings that are thoughtfully designed; and services and amenities that make every experience one to cherish...

Why does Disney need Four Seasons? Because they've lost their touch? Because they've failed?

 

[DancingBear]

You're right, Gracey. They are all just whinning. This is a way to get HIGH end hotels built with someone else's money.

It's not just a capital play--you can do that and still operate the hotel. They're giving up on operating a true luxury resort.

 

[DancingBear]

The press announcement itself says the land will be de-annexed from RCID - that's why they're making the early announcement. The land for the western expansion will remain Disney property....

That's correct, I misspoke above. The land under the "fractionally owned" homes will be de-annexed from RCID. Disney could continue to own the land, I guess, but per Celebration, why would they?

 

[DisOrBust]

I'm not sure this even makes business sense to do. Aren't they cannibalizing there own hotels business?? Who is going to want to stay at the GF for 400+ when they can stay at the Four Seasons for the same or less according to their rates listed on their website?

 

[DancingBear]

Where's Bicker when you need him to tell DisorBust that she doesn't know nuthin' about nuthin' and that the professional managers like Jay Rasulo have the PowerPoint Slide Shows to prove it?

 

[DancingBear]

Not necessarily. Perhaps it does for the legalize type stuff, but not always from a actuallity standpoint.
There are things such as high end houses that are quarter or eighth owned.

Call it what you want, but presumably this is the product:

A new method of vacation home ownership, fractional ownership has become increasingly popular in the luxury market. Ideal for busy professionals and families looking to maximize their vacation time, fractional ownership is attracting individuals who want to own exclusive properties of the highest quality and service, while paying only for the time they plan to use.

Fractional ownership gives you the full enjoyment and satisfaction of owning an elegant vacation home – without many of the hassles and responsibilities of maintenance and upkeep associated with owning a full-time vacation home. As an owner, you can transfer or sell your interest as you would with real estate ownership.

With only 12 interests sold in each villa, each owner at Four Seasons Residence Club Punta Mita has greater flexibility and options when requesting their vacation dates each year. You enjoy easy access, year after year, to a beautifully designed and impeccably maintained ocean-view villa, enhanced by uncompromising Four Seasons service. You also enjoy exchange privileges, providing access to other Four Seasons Residence Club locations.

http://www.fourseasons.com/residenceclubs/explore_your_destinations.html

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Call it what you want, but presumably this is the product:

http://www.fourseasons.com/residenceclubs/explore_your_destinations.html

That sort of proves my point. That description sounds nothing like DVC, or any traditional timeshare.
That sounds like 1/12 ownership in upscale houses.

MG

 

[raidermatt]

I do apologize for looking on the bright side, and not being doom & gloom like so many here.

And I apologize for wanting Disney to be something more than a landlord, and not being blinded by pixie dust like some others here.

Of course, landlord only applies to the land they haven't/won't sell off.

Instead of developing their own projects, find a brand that already targets that same general market and lease/sell WDW to them?

That's what Disney and WDW is all about to you?

 

[Maistre Gracey]

And I apologize for wanting Disney to be something more than a landlord, and not being blinded by pixie dust like some others here.

Of course, landlord only applies to the land they haven't/won't sell off.

Instead of developing their own projects, find a brand that already targets that same general market and lease/sell WDW to them?

That's what Disney and WDW is all about to you?

If Disney can't fill all their resort rooms now, why should they build more hotels? If Animal Kingdom is still a work in progress, why would they build a fifth park? Do they need another water park? Are the Downtown and Boardwalk areas so crowded that they need another entertainment area? Perhaps they should just let the land sit there and go unproductive??

Look, I know everyone's dream is for Disney to build monorails around the entire property, have 6 theme parks, buy more land and build anouther 20 deluxe resorts (and fill every room), massively increase the maintenance budget, and add 3 billion in new e-ticket attractions.

Oh yes, did I mention they also have to be profitable regardless of their expenses?

Please tell me, what do you think the REALISTIC answer is?

MG

 

[DancingBear]

If Disney can't fill all their resort rooms now, why should they build more hotels?

Huh? If they can't fill all their resort rooms now, why should they place a competitor on the property? And if they think this fills a void of a true luxury resort (one which I thought the Grand Floridian was supposed to fill), why not build one themselves? (Or work on the GF getting that 5th star like it was supposed to have in the first place).

If Animal Kingdom is still a work in progress, why would they build a fifth park? Do they need another water park? Are the Downtown and Boardwalk areas so crowded that they need another entertainment area? Perhaps they should just let the land sit there and go unproductive??

Or perhaps they should continue to bank the land until they have something great AND profitable to go there. It's not like they have huge carrying costs on the land.

Look, I know everyone's dream is for Disney to build monorails around the entire property, have 6 theme parks, buy more land and build anouther 20 deluxe resorts (and fill every room), massively increase the maintenance budget, and add 3 billion in new e-ticket attractions.

That ain't the dream of any of "us folks" you've been talking about (except for the monorails as so some portion thereof).

Please tell me, what do you think the REALISTIC answer is?

What's not realistic about what I've said? I suppose I should lay my cards out on the table and say that I'm a commercial real estate attorney who exclusively represents developers. I'm not proposing any pie-in-the-sky ideas here.

 

[PatriciaH]

Why does Disney want to sell land to people who want to build low-end motel rooms while half of Disney's Pop Century sits rotting in the sun? Is Disney now giving up on the low end of the resort business? Is there that much demand for motel rooms? And then why not finish Pop?

Thank you! I said this right after I read the news. Also, the Four Seasons was supposed to go on Celebration property. It had been in the works for years. Now they are going on WDW property. I wonder if this has anything to do with the recent talks of Celebration incorporating into a town. We may have got the tax revenue from the Four Seasons. I love how they are mowing down our wetlands for this Island Village too.

 

[k5thbeatle]

...It's more land being used for something other than a truly Disney resort,...

Yeah...meaning another mediocre hyped up disguised 3 star resort? I say HURRAY that they are finally getting a truly upscale resort! Finally!

 

[raidermatt]

Nope, no monorail dreams here. Upgraded transportation, yes, but I've always only said Monorail expansion should only be CONSIDERED as a PART of that.

But there is no rush to utilize this particular parcel of land. Disney is not under imminent threat of takeover due to under-utilized assets (or are they?). Also, in the 4 Seasons example, much of the land in question is being utilized currently by two 18-hole golf courses.

Its sounds as though you are saying Disney has simply run out of ideas for the land, and they don't plan to ever need it in the future.

It also sounds as though you have no problem with outside brands taking over large parcels within WDW.

You see no value in the "bubble" concept that Disney worked so hard to build for so long?

 

[raidermatt]

Yeah...meaning another mediocre hyped up disguised 3 star resort? I say HURRAY that they are finally getting a truly upscale resort! Finally!

You know, at least I can see where you are coming from. Disney simply doesn't have the ability to successfully do this stuff anymore, so they might as well turn it over to those who can.

It of course means true Disney is in fact dead, but it very well might be the most realistic pov.

 

[DancingBear]

Yeah...meaning another mediocre hyped up disguised 3 star resort? I say HURRAY that they are finally getting a truly upscale resort! Finally!

The sad thing is the presumption inherent in your post that Disney, once a paragon of customer service, is incapable of building and operating a "truly upscale resort." There's really no reason that the GF and the YC couldn't be true luxury properties if they put the effort into it.

 

[PatriciaH]

Celebration WAS sold to Lexin Corp.

Just the downtown. The golf course was sold to another company. TCC (The Celebration Company aka Disney) still has a big presence here. They will until they make all the $$$ they want to off of Celebration. In fact they are having a meeting soon for residents to voice what they want in the Island Village area. (Like they will listen-most say leave the trees.)

 

[Maistre Gracey]

You know, you folks here are the best "spinners" I've seen. You should consider a career in politics.

The point is that for years folks on this board have been poo-pooing virtually ever move Disney has made. It gets old.
No matter what they do, you will find a way to portray it in a negative light. I'm convinced that Disney couldn't win with you no matter which direction they may take.

What I really wonder is why the pesimists here still have an interest in Disney? I mean, you don't like anything they do...
I just can't imagine sitting and waiting to pounce on every decision, then finding a way to critisize it. If you hate the company philosophy and direction that much, why do you hang out here? You may say "It's what the company could be."
Well, McDonald's could serve steak & lobster, but I don't sit there and whine because they don't.

Now, I know someone will pick apart this post sentence by sentence and try to spin things to make me look the fool. Point is, just look at posts on this board IN CONTEXT over the last several years, and the truth will become very apparent.

I would like to say that when I use the word "you", I'm not referring to anyone inparticular, but rather the board pessimism in general.

MG

 

[raidermatt]

Na-ah, you.

I can't imagine falling in love with 6 letters no matter how the meaning of those letters changes. Slap Disney on the box and certain people will fall all over themselves to praise it.

Heck, now, Disney doesn't even have to be the box.

You may lack the ability to evaluate decisions on their merit and simply praise them based on the name on the box, but some do still think for themselves.

I'd like to say that when I use the word "you", I'm not referring to anyone in particular, but rather the board optimists in general.

 

[DancingBear]

MG, is there anything you care about regarding Disney's past? And I don't mean that the Tiki Room is sacred or anything, but is there anything you value about the philosophy and vision on which the company was built?

And, more importantly, do you have any vision as to what Disney, and WDW might become in the future? Are you willing just to accept every decision of this nature?

Perhaps you don't care whether or not they closed the Hunchback show, or installed another spinner in Adventureland. But doesn't this sort of decision have any significance to you?

Can you respond to the concept that this is a major step beyond outsourcing backroom payroll accounting functions?

McDonalds wasn't founded on serving steak and lobster. Disney WAS founded on providing outstanding service, and an immersive experience.

This is really about something significant within the company. These decisions are about a philosophy of what Disney is about and what the land at WDW is for that is frankly depressing for many of us. What is your big picture view?

 

[Jason71]

Instead of the next "Adventurers Club" and "Once Upon a Toy," we're getting a TGI Fridays and CVS. Instead of the next "Port Orleans," we'll get a Comfort Inn. Clearly the company could do better--they have before--but they just aren't even trying.

I'm halfway through American Genius. What made Walt Disney into an icon was his constant drive to create something new, different and exciting. He could have made decent cash churning out Mickey cartoons for the rest of his life, but he felt the need to add sound and color and make Snow White and Fantasia just because he knew he could create something spectacular that no one had ever seen before. The words "Disney" and "settling" do not belong in the same sentence.

Also, to return to a point Another Voice made a couple months ago, once again WDW is antagonizing a group of local business owners who I am sure have lobbyists in Tallahassee.