I don't have much of a horse in this race but I really don't understand some people's fixation on this place adding a pool. It's just not that kind of experience. This isn't really a hotel as much as a longterm theatre experience with a basic room included. If you want to go to a pool in Orlando, you are drowning in other options. Literally every other Disney Hotel has like 2-4 pools and most offsite hotels have them as well. Catering to a group of people who aren't willing to look into the experience that they're paying over $6000 for just seems silly. If you spend that much and don't realize the event you signed up for, that's entirely on you. It's some "Where's Harry Potter Land???" while at Epcot type behavior.
As a criticism, it’s pretty reach-y. What percentage of theme park hotel guests even use the pool? Not enough to worry about a significant number of disappointed customers over it.
I fully reject the concept this is "the next frontier" for several reasons. Emotionally, a high-priced experience that is limited to those who can afford a five to six-figure experience shuts out me, my friends, and my family from something we love. I hate the idea of this being the future.
But from an intellectual perspective I also reject it because this just seems another way Disney tries to find another angle that isn't building more rides and shows:
Respectfully, I think this post is somewhat off base and the argument is under-cooked…
1. In the late 2000s, the thought was that optimization of theme parks would be the future. Then Disney spent well over $1bn on Magic Bands, MyMagicPlus, and more. It wasn't the future. All that technology is deprecated now not even a decade later.
How is it depracated? RFID is everywhere now in the industry. Universal has a project number assigned to implementing some of the features into their parks…you saw the seeds planted with TapuTapu and will continue to see features rolled out on their app.
2. During this time Universal stepped up their game and created the Wizarding World. While we take it for granted now, the level of attraction/land/merch/food & bev design and cooperation was unheard of.
Definitely! Not sure how that’s relevant though.
3. Disny spent years pivoting to the new themed entertainment model, spending billions more than they needed to if they had just spent that NexGen money on attractions.
Not seeing how this came at the expense of new rides. In the past five years Disney has kept up with UO’s pace of one new attraction per year and you could argue they had an edge in quality over that time when factoring in that three of these additions were full multi-ride lands going up against Bourne, Fallon, and F&F…
4. Disney gets sold on an immersive theater experience and thinks its the solution to their expensive lands and experiences.
This reads like an overly emotional take on the situation. Neither is mutually exclusive (see above); Disney has always had exclusive upcharge options that stood above the baseline experience starting with Club 33–these haven’t prevented further investment into the regular daytime experience.
5. Universal is developing new tech, attractions, and shows for a new park.
Are the majority of proposed rides not either retreads of existing tech (Scoop, Kuka, etc.) or off the shelf rides (splash battle, coaster, etc.). Mario Kart will be innovative I guess but it’s already been met with relatively lukewarm reception.
From the sound of it those promoting this concept thing this is the "holy grail" of themed entertainment - it's not, it's a neat addition for theater kids and fans. But the bread and butter of theme parks still stands, rides and shows.
I don’t necessarily disagree with this but to dismiss the experience because it isn’t a new “holy grail” is, again, disingenuous. Like I said before, an objective parks fan should be able to step back and recognize there’s potential here to start building off of to make some neat stuff with other IPs…but it’ll have to be successful first.