New Future Disneyland Hotel

[RedHotMama]

Is it just me or does any one else which they would do a value hotel?

That would be nice, but I don't think it can ever happen in Anaheim. Land costs too much. There isn't a lot of it like in WDW. And there are already so many value hotels nearby.

 

[Malcon10t]

Is it just me or does any one else which they would do a value hotel?

I think it is possible, but due to the taxes and all, it would likely not be near Disneyland itself. I could see them putting one down by Target in Garden Grove, where they would be more warmly welcomed, and the taxes are considerably lower.

 

[Malcon10t]

I will try and remember to count seats when we are there in a couple weeks. I would guess there was enough seating for about 80-100 people.

 

[chickapin parterre]

It has been reported that the three resort hotels run a constant 95% occupancy rate which is unheard of in the Hotel Industry..there is a demand for more resort rooms, they are not losing business due to lack of remodeled rooms.

the above observation was the beginning of what we have now in a nutshell...Anaheim created all the requirements for the 4 star lodging...Disney followed the requirements for the 4 star lodging....and there was never a cash-out subsidy...Disney was going to recover the cost of building the lodging, by keeping all the Anaheim resort taxes.

My speculation: the new lodging was never intended for Disneyland guests or that the cost for entering Disneyland would be prohibitive enough to only attract 4 star lodgers in the future


Why, for Anahiem to attract more dignified convention goers ............crowding has become a problem for Disney Corp.

 

[cmash95]

so looking at the art work i can say that there is little to no way I would want to stay at this hotel. It's ugly and for what is supposed to be a luxury hotel, it looks like something built in the 60's not something built in the 2000s. considering the hotels we have here in florida espeically the grand floridian, it reminds me more of our value resorts like art of animation or pop century. not somehwere i would like to stay. also the city of anaheim needs to get it's act together. they now have lost all that sales tax revenue from the businesses that have closed. and if they aren't careful, disney could cut way back on hiring or even sell disneyland if it starts getting to expensive to run and anaheim would have to deal with someone they really wouldnt like

 

[ParkHopper1]

Is it just me or does any one else which they would do a value hotel?

Long term planning speculation was that a mid range hotel closer to the DLH caliber was in the works for the resort...then when Anaheim threw out the tax subsidy incentive for the four star resorts with the intent to attract more convention business, Disney jumped on the four star hotel bandwagon to take advantage of the perks being offered.

...which in my eyes is one reason Anaheim is pushing back, it was never intended for another resort hotel.

 

[Malcon10t]

the above observation was the beginning of what we have now in a nutshell...Anaheim created all the requirements for the 4 star lodging...Disney followed the requirements for the 4 star lodging....and there was never a cash-out subsidy...Disney was going to recover the cost of building the lodging, by keeping all the Anaheim resort taxes.

Correction - 70% of the resort tax.

 

[bethwc101]

http://www.wdwinfo.com/news-stories...disney-updates+(Disney+Updates+-+wdwinfo.com)

Disney is saying they are putting plans for the new hotel on hold since Disney and the city of Anaheim have been disagreeing as to tax breaks and building location.

 

[Malcon10t]

Yes. But from last night "Surprised by Disney’s decision to halt construction of a planned 700-room luxury hotel, Anaheim officials said Thursday they want to work things out with the company, which is the city’s largest employer and provides the bulk of the city’s tourism revenue."

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/16/anaheim-officials-to-disney-lets-talk-about-hotel-subsidy/

While Disney would keep about $267million over 20 years, if they fail to cooperate and Disney does nix this, it would cost Anaheim $140 million over the same period.

 

[rteetz]

"Others want to talk it out. Murray and Councilwoman Lucille Kring both said there’s an easy fix: just do a new economic study of the updated project and amend the old agreement to change the hotel site."

"In Tait’s view, Disney’s choices are to put the hotel on the original site and collect the tax subsidy, or use the new site and forgo the incentive."

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/16/anaheim-officials-to-disney-lets-talk-about-hotel-subsidy/

 

[LizzyS]

so looking at the art work i can say that there is little to no way I would want to stay at this hotel. It's ugly and for what is supposed to be a luxury hotel, it looks like something built in the 60's not something built in the 2000s. considering the hotels we have here in florida espeically the grand floridian, it reminds me more of our value resorts like art of animation or pop century. not somehwere i would like to stay. also the city of anaheim needs to get it's act together. they now have lost all that sales tax revenue from the businesses that have closed. and if they aren't careful, disney could cut way back on hiring or even sell disneyland if it starts getting to expensive to run and anaheim would have to deal with someone they really wouldnt like

Regarding style, and I'm not trying to sass you here, but the Grand Floridian is based partly on Hotel del Coronado in San Diego (which I have stayed at), which was built in 1888. You may not personally like the new hotel they were building at DLR and that's fine, but the GF's exterior style is not modern by any means.

I wasn't crazy about the renderings I was seeing of the new DLR hotel, either, and I probably will never stay there/have stayed there.

 

[OneThree]

The more I read about this

"Others want to talk it out. Murray and Councilwoman Lucille Kring both said there’s an easy fix: just do a new economic study of the updated project and amend the old agreement to change the hotel site."

"In Tait’s view, Disney’s choices are to put the hotel on the original site and collect the tax subsidy, or use the new site and forgo the incentive."

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/16/anaheim-officials-to-disney-lets-talk-about-hotel-subsidy/

This whole situation is just odd. If the issue is the tax subsidy (which I agree Disney does not need), then why allow for it in the first place? Anaheim leadership seems OK, perhaps begrudgingly, but OK with the incentive on the original site so what difference does it make if its moved to a different location? I don't buy the argument that one of the issues is the loss of jobs from places like Rainforest. The new hotel, with reported new dining and other service amenities, would replace most I would wager.

Seems like there is just a lot more going on behind the scenes with the City of Anaheim and Disney both pointing fingers.

 

[dina444444]

The more I read about this



This whole situation is just odd. If the issue is the tax subsidy (which I agree Disney does not need), then why allow for it in the first place? Anaheim leadership seems OK, perhaps begrudgingly, but OK with the incentive on the original site so what difference does it make if its moved to a different location? I don't buy the argument that one of the issues is the loss of jobs from places like Rainforest. The new hotel, with reported new dining and other service amenities, would replace most I would wager.

Seems like there is just a lot more going on behind the scenes with the City of Anaheim and Disney both pointing fingers.

The makeup of city council was different when the tax incentives was originally granted. They were more Disney and tourist corridor friendly then the current members of city council and the current mayor.

 

[tarheelalum]

The makeup of city council was different when the tax incentives was originally granted. They were more Disney and tourist corridor friendly then the current members of city council and the current mayor.

You are correct. This council seems to be more apt to look after small businesses and the local taxpayers. God knows Anaheim has a lot of problems that most visitors don't see in the tourist areas.

But Disney can still build the hotel where they initially said they were, or they can trash the whole thing. Either way they need to get on with it and make a decision. Downtown Disney looks like a mess.

 

[Malcon10t]

Here is the thing. Anaheim WANTS 4 star hotels. They want to be known for conventions, not Disney. Businesses don't schedule conferences in Anaheim because Anaheim doesn't have 4-5 star hotels. Plain and simple. So, Anaheim said "Build a 4 star hotel, and we will give you a subsidy, upgrade your hotel to a 4 star, we will give you a subsidy" in the form of reduced taxes. In the case of Disney, the tax reduction would be $265 million over 20 years. During this same time frame, Anaheim would benefit $140 million to their budget off the Disney hotel. When Disney said this week "Fine, we won't build", you suddenly had the council going "Whoa, what do you mean you aren't going to build?? If you don't build, we lose $7 million from our budget in 2022!" And the talks are back on.

There are other hotels taking advantage of this also. They are working to get 4 star status.

Anaheim profits from Disney being there. Anaheim collects $35 million a year JUST from occupancy tax on the 3 hotels. Let's stop with the "Oh, poor Anaheim, getting taken advantage of"... Anaheim charges us 9% occupancy tax on every hotel room in Anaheim, which I see people on these boards complain about. Travel down the road to Garden Grove, or to Fullerton, and it drops to 2-3%...

 

[LizzyS]

Anaheim is never going to be known for conventions over Disney, period, so while they may want to increase their convention business and that is absolutely fine, if they're trying to move away from being known for Disney, they're making a grave mistake. Malcon10t nailed it in saying that Anaheim benefits greatly from Disney being there, so let's drop the assumption that Disney is taking advantage in some big way. This is a symbiotic relationship and let's not pretend that DLR doesn't sweeten the pot for convention-goers being right next door.

 

[chickapin parterre]

Anaheim is never going to be known for conventions over Disney, being right next door.

how do you know this?

 

[LizzyS]

how do you know this?

Because long before I ever was interested in Disneyland at all or had ever been, when I heard "Anaheim", my first thought was "Disneyland". This applies to when I lived across the country as well. I live in Las Vegas now and I can tell you we're known for the strip and casinos first and foremost, not conventions.

 

[bumbershoot]

Seems like there is just a lot more going on behind the scenes with the City of Anaheim and Disney both pointing fingers.

And it's been going on for awhile now.

Anaheim is never going to be known for conventions over Disney, period, so while they may want to increase their convention business and that is absolutely fine, if they're trying to move away from being known for Disney, they're making a grave mistake.

Agreed.

how do you know this?

I know it because I can think about Anaheim and what it's like, and how just about the only thing going for it is Disney, now that it's destroying all the cool California motels they had... (RIP Anabella)

 

[ParkHopper1]

Anaheim is never going to be known for conventions

It is not about being "known" for conventions...they are literally being passed up by millions of dollars of conventions due to lack of accommodations. They had a very underutilized (and under monetized) convention center facility...which is why they created the incentive. Convention business can bring in big bucks for a city.

I personally have several clients that will pass up Anaheim for their conventions and conferences due to lack of business level accommodations...so it is not just a theory.

I live in Las Vegas now and I can tell you we're known for the strip and casinos first and foremost, not conventions.

?? Some of the largest conventions in the US are held annually in Vegas and know for that destination.


I am in the events business, and also lived and worked in Vegas...while your public perception may be correct, the hotels and resorts almost everywhere in the US live and thrive on the millions in convention and meeting business more so than the pleasure traveler. Most of the priorities we walk into have a $250K food and beverage minimum...and that does not include room rate spend. They will bump pleasure patrons in a heartbeat to sell a convention....heck two weeks ago we toured a property with a $500k F/B minimum for a two day meeting. It is big business for destination properties.

Why do you think you cannot guarantee a King room at the Grand?...they hold them back for meetings and conventions cuz that is what the business traveler expects and they can book meetings as late as only a few weeks out...then and only then will they release them for resort patrons if they are not held for the events room blocks. Those patrons are more valuable than a park visitor sorry to say.