Disneyland Australia; will it EVER happen?

[SunshineTom]

And by ever, i mean in OUR lifetime, so say in the next 50-60 years. 

I think it will. I heard they own land in Australia and have scouted for possible locations for a theme park. So they've definitely shown interest but it seems at this stage that it's a no go.

[Ratbag93]

I so very much hope so.

The last hint of anything was project Lester in Sydney but even then that wasn't really a park

http://disneytimes.com/2014/01/disneyland-australia-details-on-the-failed-plan/

I guess part of the question for Disney is where?

Disney proves that weather isn't really an issue so we cannot rule out somewhere like Melbourne just because of the cold.

The Gold Coast is the popular choice if I remember correctly and would be amazing I would live at Disney if it was there... but the thing is does the coast have the space for it in the first place yet alone expand? Disney seems to be the kind of company I can imagine wanting all that extra space.

When we are considering location for a Disney theme park we need to not only think of rides and attractions but of the hotels and shopping district surly wanting to do. On top of that with an Australian park being not only Disney's first thing Downunder but the first something other than a cruise ship in the southern hemisphere I am sure they would want to do something special.

On that also Disney might actually decimate the Australian theme park industry if it was built on the coast or not. It is one of the those things that will either help or hinder our parks if built outside the coast.

With the consideration of project Lester I wouldn't be surprised if it is to happen if it is Sydney...What are your thoughts?

I also get the feeling that having Disney somewhere in Australia would attract not only the locals but the foreign tourists including the Asian market irrespective of their own Disney parks to have the "Disney Downunder" experience.  Its a money maker for sure I just hope it hurry's up.

I feel like they could build it in Tassy and the people would begrudgingly come. or somewhere in the middle of the nowhere and I'm sure we would all come. Why? because its Disney.

On that note please Disney do not build the park is Tassy....

 

 

[Slick]

http://www.parkz.com.au/forums/search/?&q=disney&type=forums_topic&search_in=titles

I'm just going to leave that there.

TLDR, this topic has been done to death, resurrected, shot, killed, burried again, resurrected again ad nauseum.

Here are the cliffnotes:

• They've tried many times in many different places and different state governments haven't given Disney the subsidies on land or tax they need to make it work
• They've tried to create smaller resorts and precincts but we just don't have the population or the spend to support something small, let alone a full blown magic kingdom
• We're not printing money like China is right now
• Did I mention the population? Because we don't have the population for it.
• At this point, given I could spend $300 on a budget airline and be at one of THREE magic kingdoms within 8 hours, it's neither here or there for most people in terms of location anymore.
• For most local and interstate tourists, the market tends to corroborate that they're not willing to spend Disney money in Australia right now. Disney overseas as part of a bigger holiday? Yes. Here? No.

Basically, we need to become a smarter nation with more focus in services to have more spend on longer recreation & leisure, and we need a lot more of us to do that AND we need a government with a strong focus on tourism who's willing to make long term concessions just to get the ball rolling, and even then it needs to make fiscal sense, which I still think it won't, and you'll find data from the likes of @Richard @joz in about a dozen other threads who will support this.

[Prequel]

We don't need it.

[pushbutton]

I wouldn't be surprised if Disney is seriously considering making an offer to buy Dreamworld. 

Obviously there'd be a lot of work to do on it,  but they'd basically have a functioning park to start with,  and Ardent have said recently they'd be happy to consider a really good offer. 

It would get around issues like there already being enough parks in the gold coast and avoid them having to find suitable land and start from scratch. 

I think if it's gonna happen anytime in the next 20 years that's the most likely way it would.

 

[SunshineTom]

28 minutes ago, pushbutton said:

I wouldn't be surprised if Disney is seriously considering making an offer to buy Dreamworld. 

Obviously there'd be a lot of work to do on it,  but they'd basically have a functioning park to start with,  and Ardent have said recently they'd be happy to consider a really good offer. 

It would get around issues like there already being enough parks in the gold coast and avoid them having to find suitable land and start from scratch. 

I think if it's gonna happen anytime in the next 20 years that's the most likely way it would.

 

 

Disney would be smart to step in and buy D/W. They'll get it for a bargain now since no one wants the D/W brand now as its damaged goods. They can swoop on in, revamp the place, add the Disney name and it'll double patronage. 

[Brad2912]

13 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

Disney would be smart to step in and buy D/W. They'll get it for a bargain now since no one wants the D/W brand now as its damaged goods. They can swoop on in, revamp the place, add the Disney name and it'll double patronage. 

For the investment required to bring DW up to a Disney standard park, so you think they'll be offering $99 annual passes? I think not. Don't forget how much people blew up when the passes went up by $10 and buy 3 get 1 free was removed. 

The locals here are accustomed to, and now expect, bargain basement theme park pricing, so you won't double attendance by slapping a Disney badge on & upgrading facilities unless you offer comparable DW type pricing. 

Either way it's a moot point...

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I do not believe Disney has ever stepped in and purchased an existing theme park ever. I doubt they would want to start with someone else's mess.

Disney would be DUMB to try it with Dreamworld, unless they planned to bulldoze the whole park and start from scratch - in which case there are many far more appealing options presenting themselves... like building on the wrong side of the Antarctic chasm.

[Prequel]

13 minutes ago, AlexB said:

I do not believe Disney has ever stepped in and purchased an existing theme park ever. I doubt they would want to start with someone else's mess.

Disney would be DUMB to try it with Dreamworld, unless they planned to bulldoze the whole park and start from scratch - in which case there are many far more appealing options presenting themselves... like building on the wrong side of the Antarctic chasm.

They offered to buy Knott's. 

32 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

Disney would be smart to step in and buy D/W. They'll get it for a bargain now since no one wants the D/W brand now as its damaged goods. They can swoop on in, revamp the place, add the Disney name and it'll double patronage. 

Dreamworld isn't going to be sold to anyone anytime soon. Plus whats your problem with Dreamworld?

Edited December 7, 2016 by Prequel

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

20 minutes ago, Prequel said:

They offered to buy Knott's. 

I think Knott's is in a unique position, not the least of which would be how much Walt and Walter worked together and helped each other out, and the fact that it is only a few minutes from an already established major Disney Park. 

Remember, they worked for many years to get a second gate on the west coast. 

That situation is hardly comparable with buying dreamworld.

[Flynn_Smith]

If you want my opinion, i think Dreamworld would go better as a Universal Studios. (Mostly because they have the spinning Globe) but because the rides can easily be themed to one of their movies and the zombie area can be transformed into one of the famous dark rides.

But i dont know, we'll see how it plays out.

[Prequel]

The chance of a major movie studio buying Dreamworld is very unlikely. Also i don't want one to buy Dreamworld, i love Dreamworld as it is.

[Flynn_Smith]

Just now, Prequel said:

The chance of a major movie studio buying Dreamworld is very unlikely. Also i don't want one to buy Dreamworld, i love Dreamworld as it is.

I dont want it to change either, its an iconic landmark in Australia!! IMO i just thought it would probably be more likely than Disney... Warner Bros. has Movieworld.. so why not?

[SunshineTom]

40 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

For the investment required to bring DW up to a Disney standard park, so you think they'll be offering $99 annual passes? I think not. Don't forget how much people blew up when the passes went up by $10 and buy 3 get 1 free was removed. 

The locals here are accustomed to, and now expect, bargain basement theme park pricing, so you won't double attendance by slapping a Disney badge on & upgrading facilities unless you offer comparable DW type pricing. 

Either way it's a moot point...

 

Um people spend thousands of dollars going to America with Disneyland at the top of their ticket. Yes i'm sure people would be fine with increased ticket prices. They already know they're a steal at $120 a year anyway. 

Just now, ClassifiedLlama said:

I dont want it to change either, its an iconic landmark in Australia!! IMO i just thought it would probably be more likely than Disney... Warner Bros. has Movieworld.. so why not?

 

D/W used to be iconic for sure, but not anymore. They're just another run of the mill theme park cutting costs at every corner, exploting the innocent and now suffering major brand damage. 

[UpperCoomera]

13 minutes ago, ClassifiedLlama said:

If you want my opinion, i think Dreamworld would go better as a Universal Studios. (Mostly because they have the spinning Globe) but because the rides can easily be themed to one of their movies and the zombie area can be transformed into one of the famous dark rides.

But i dont know, we'll see how it plays out.

I would love a Universal Studios down the road!!

But not to replace Dreamworld.

Edited December 7, 2016 by UpperCoomera
not to replace DW

[Flynn_Smith]

Just now, UpperCoomera said:

I would love a Universal Studios down the road!!

Haha, wouldn't we all? I kinda used to think that if Movieworld went Belly Up it would be the PERFECT place for a universal studios. But now that i think about it, Dreamworld would be a better candidate!

Just now, Prequel said:

You got to be kidding me? You can sit on your computer saying how much you don't like this park and we will all be at Dreamworld loving Tower Of Terror 2.

Tower of Terror was my favourite ride when I was 6 and will always be one of my favourites. Just hoping they bring out a Tower of Terror 3, where the cart spins the whole time, or Goes backwards the whole time, by turning at the top.

[Prequel]

I think a Universal Studios should go to Sydney Or Melbourne, it would completely destroy Movie World and Dreamworld.  

[Jamberoo Fan]

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

I guess part of the question for Disney is where?

Even though the Gold Coast is Australia's theme park hub, I'd say Sydney currently because it has the most populated significant urban area but given Melbourne is predicted to be more populated than Sydney in the future, Melbourne might be a better long-term goal for Disney.

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

...the thing is does the coast have the space for it in the first place yet alone expand? Disney seems to be the kind of company I can imagine wanting all that extra space. When we are considering location for a Disney theme park we need to not only think of rides and attractions but of the hotels and shopping district surly wanting to do

You'd need about 30 hectares of land for Disneyland alone - Songcheng's land in Nerang is bigger than that by about 10 hectares so yes, there is space for it. Disneyland is circular in shape so the shape of the land lot would also need to be taken into account to ensure it fits a perfect circle in. Expansions to include a shopping district/hotel would require about an extra 11 hectares more and then add any extra needed land for car parks. The land I'm sure is there somewhere.

Currently, Australia would be lucky to get just Disneyland so to get anything like an adjunct shopping district or hotel in the near future, Disney would probably build Disneyland near a hotel/shopping district or work with 3rd parties (like Scentre Group & Best Western) to build their own hotel/shopping district on nearby land that Disney leases to them and when Disney is ready, end the lease & buy the buildings off the 3rd parties so they could run the shopping district/hotel themselves. If not, we'll just have to wait until Disney finds enough finances or thinks it's a worthy extra investment in Australia to proceed with from scratch.

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

On top of that with an Australian park being not only Disney's first thing Downunder

Disney has had something in Australia already - their Disney Store retail chain appeared in 16 locations across Australia between 1992 & 2003.

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

On that also Disney might actually decimate the Australian theme park industry if it was built on the coast or not. It is one of the those things that will either help or hinder our parks if built outside the coast.

4 hours ago, Prequel said:

I think a Universal Studios should go to Sydney Or Melbourne, it would completely destroy Movie World and Dreamworld.  

Disneyland would probably help the theme park industry in Australia. The USA survives with Six Flags & Universal etc. after all. Disneyland isn't exactly known for it's thrill rides (MW), waterslides (WNW) or marine creatures (SW) too. DW would only suffer mildly as it was designed with Disneyland in mind & does have some family-friendly rides but it still offers different experiences to Disneyland. Disneyland is a more family-friendly version of DW (minus the water park + wildlife) so it would probably fit right in amongst the Gold Coast theme parks. Outside the Gold Coast, it wouldn't affect any of the smaller theme parks as they are unique in their own way & offer different experiences. Disneyland would just be the stand out attraction.

Universal Studios would probably be a very good rival for MW but I can't see them affecting DW at all - DW is too family-friendly compared to Universal Studios.

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

I also get the feeling that having Disney somewhere in Australia would attract not only the locals but the foreign tourists including the Asian market irrespective of their own Disney parks to have the "Disney Downunder" experience.

Why would you travel somewhere for a complete replica of something that is in your own country? Disneyland is near identical everywhere it is built around the world. No one from the USA, Europe or Asia would travel to an Australian Disneyland just because it is in Australia. It's like Australians travelling to Asia to visit a near-identical DW. Given Hong Kong is the closest place with a Disneyland to Australia, the only countries whose people would visit an Australian Disneyland are Australia, NZ, PNG, Indonesia & any Pacific Ocean island nations like Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu etc.

10 hours ago, Ratbag93 said:

I feel like they could build it...somewhere in the middle of the nowhere and I'm sure we would all come. Why? because its Disney.

No, we wouldn't & Disney would never build in the middle of nowhere. They would build somewhere near a highly populated area with transportation links, ease of travel & lots of nearby accommodation. It lessens costs for them (building in the middle of nowhere might mean building & operating their own airport, rail line or upgrading long stretches of roads as well as building a very large hotel) whilst keeping costs low for the consumer so they can spend big at Disneyland. Imagine them building Disneyland in Kiwirrkurra. Would you pay for a ticket to go to Disneyland there? Along with paying for transport, accommodation as well as trying to figure out how to & how long it will take to get there?

Edited December 7, 2016 by Jamberoo Fan

[Brad2912]

The only land east of The ranges that could facilitate a Disney sized development would be the farm land at Jacobs Well/Norwell/Woongoolba 

[rappa]

Answer... NO

[Reanimated35]

^ Not a fan of the multiverse theory?  

[iwerks]

8 hours ago, Brad2912 said:

The only land east of The ranges that could facilitate a Disney sized development would be the farm land at Jacobs Well/Norwell/Woongoolba 

Or Perth/Adelaide/Darwin.

As much as I'd love to see a Disney Park like the HK one here, you do think the population wouldn't justify it. I suppose what we do have in our favour is the technology, safety and the service culture. Tourism is certainly higher on the WA Government's agenda now that the resources boom has gone off the boil. I think they'll be more willing to do a deal for a large park when the new stadium is finished, providing that the Liberals get back in.

There are certainly locations up and down the freeway which look ripe for a park location. The problem is, you fly 5 hours from here and you get a Universal park and a bit further beyond that, a Legoland.

I also think Disney is always going to choose a greenfield site and not an existing park. It's so much cheaper just to buy up farmland.

[aaronm]

I can't see Disney ever building a park in Australia, especially when the ones in Hong Kong and Paris have struggled even with a significantly greater population catchment area.

They may decide to build an Aulani-style resort here one day, but that would be it.

[webslave]

Ugh.  Here's an idea; stop clicking the 'start new topic' button.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

10 hours ago, Jamberoo Fan said:

You'd need about 30 hectares of land for Disneyland alone - Songcheng's land in Nerang is bigger than that by about 10 hectares so yes, there is space for it. Disneyland is circular in shape so the shape of the land lot would also need to be taken into account to ensure it fits a perfect circle in. Expansions to include a shopping district/hotel would require about an extra 11 hectares more and then add any extra needed land for car parks. The land I'm sure is there somewhere.

Why would you travel somewhere for a complete replica of something that is in your own country? Disneyland is near identical everywhere it is built around the world. No one from the USA, Europe or Asia would travel to an Australian Disneyland just because it is in Australia. It's like Australians travelling to Asia to visit a near-identical DW. Given Hong Kong is the closest place with a Disneyland to Australia, the only countries whose people would visit an Australian Disneyland are Australia, NZ, PNG, Indonesia & any Pacific Ocean island nations like Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu etc.

No, we wouldn't & Disney would never build in the middle of nowhere. They would build somewhere near a highly populated area with transportation links, ease of travel & lots of nearby accommodation. It lessens costs for them (building in the middle of nowhere might mean building & operating their own airport, rail line or upgrading long stretches of roads as well as building a very large hotel) whilst keeping costs low for the consumer so they can spend big at Disneyland. Imagine them building Disneyland in Kiwirrkurra. Would you pay for a ticket to go to Disneyland there? Along with paying for transport, accommodation as well as trying to figure out how to & how long it will take to get there?

Ok so here we go:

• Disneyland is not a circle. Especially not a perfect one. Although they are generally 'rounded'  in shape, and follow the 'hub' concept, each land sprawls as it needs to. Also bear in mind that whilst the berm for the railroad follows a relatively circular shape, that is not the boundary of the park as many ride show buildings extend beyond the berm. Expansions and additions also ruin your circle - Hong Kong Disneyland's expansions to date have all been outside the railroad. In addition, whilst the park may have a vague 'circular' shape, you ignore all of the support and logistics the park needs, which typically fill in the gaps and square off against the correct property boundaries. Lastly - Hong Kong (and Magic Kingdom) showed us that to build a 'disneyland' park, one doesn't need the same amount of land as previous parks - it can be bigger or smaller.
• Why would you travel somewhere for a complete replica? first of all - none of them are. Each park has its own subtle differences whilst still being true to the 'americana' that is Disneyland. Each still has 'familiar' things - like main street, and the hub, and the castle, but each does things differently too.
• Sorry but - Disney has built in the middle of nowhere many times over. The original Disneyland was in a field of orchards a great distance from the population sprawl at the time. That was the issue - there was much land surrounding the park easily snapped up by people wanting to cash in on the disney tourism in the area, so Anaheim developed quickly into a sprawling trashy tourist metropolis. This is why Walt set about building his second park.... IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE in florida - only this time he bought thousands of acres of land all around his chosen site so that nobody else COULD build near him, whilst also giving room for expansion. I believe Paris Disneyland is the same situation - its a huge trek from metropolitan centres, and TBH - Hong Kong Disneyland is about as far from Hong Kong as you could possibly be out on Lantau Island - although everything in Hong Kong is relatively close - so its hard to be far from anything there.
• As for Kiwikurra - hell yes i'd go. I don't care where it is.