|
|
| | DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! |    |
| |
| Auteur | Message |
|---|
Vinc
Modérateur
Messages : 8658
Inscription : 29/04/2010
| |  | | Jake Sully
Âge : 35
Messages : 11268
Localisation : Esbly
Inscription : 05/04/2010
|  Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée !  Jeu 26 Oct 2017 - 13:52 | |
| Comme quoi, il y a encore plus con et bête que les riverains de DLP... ceux de DLR  . Franchement, sans DLR, le "Anaheim resort" n'existerait même pas, alors pourquoi faire chier Disney quand ils ont des projets d'extension pour accroitre un peu plus son attrait, et par ricoché, celui de l'Anaheim Resort (et rapporterait donc plus d'argent à la dite commune d'Anaheim). |
| | | | pierrot57100
Âge : 34
Messages : 950
Localisation : Lorraine
Inscription : 25/07/2009
| | | | | yopayan
Âge : 41
Messages : 2713
Localisation : frontignan
Inscription : 16/06/2013
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Jeu 26 Oct 2017 - 13:59 | |
| Disney ne veut quand même pas que tous les commerces à l'est du resort périclitent pour racheter les terrains et s'agrandir (parkings, hôtels, 3e parc,etc...) ??   n'hésitez pas à faire un tour sur la chaine youtube de themeparks voyages  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu7b4elLrO-tYXmM0xIj5IA et pour voir les autres publications cliquez sur les icônes ci dessous ;-) |
| | | | fafa45
Messages : 4171
Localisation : gien loiret
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | | | | Mr.Ravenswood
Âge : 22
Messages : 880
Localisation : Bordeaux
Inscription : 22/02/2015
| | | | | polo85
Âge : 39
Messages : 4562
Localisation : Ouest de la France
Inscription : 23/01/2010
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Ven 27 Oct 2017 - 22:30 | |
| Pourquoi n'importe quoi, tu as pleins de commerces et hôtels sur Harbor Blvd qui n'ont fait que défendre leurs intérêts, en plus Disney est loin d'être perdant dans l'affaire puisque toutes les personnes qui vont se garer dans le nouveau parking devront passer par Downtown Disney alors qu'avec l'ancien projet ce n'était pas le cas. |
| | | | Mr.Ravenswood
Âge : 22
Messages : 880
Localisation : Bordeaux
Inscription : 22/02/2015
| | | | | J. Thaddeus TOAD
Âge : 49
Messages : 5431
Localisation : Orléans
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 11:25 | |
| Non ce n'est pas une perte d'argent, il faut arrêter de voir les choses à court terme! Je suis persuadé que le projet Eastern Gateway n'est que mis de côté et que Disney a l'intention de le construire à moyen ou long terme! Le jour où les terrains du parking Toy Story seront développés, il faudra un parking à étages supplémentaire... C'est à jamais
Dernière édition par J. Thaddeus TOAD le Sam 29 Déc 2018 - 13:06, édité 1 fois |
| | | | fafa45
Messages : 4171
Localisation : gien loiret
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 13:03 | |
| Il ne faudrait pas que la ville d'Anaheim refuse encore ce parking la ou il devait se situer , sans doute que la ville ne preferait pas maintenant ce parking aussi malgré leurs mécontentement ??
DLR ne perd pas de place pour autant avec le changement de place pour le parking superposer ?
Pour l'hotel pourquoi ne pas l'avoir fait sur le parking du Downton Disney comme sur les plans de depart ?
Autre soucis , pour l'extension Marvel de DCA , comment ça peut se passer pour la place du Hub transport ?? |
| | | | polo85
Âge : 39
Messages : 4562
Localisation : Ouest de la France
Inscription : 23/01/2010
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 14:28 | |
| La preuve que tu n'as jamais été sur place car le hub de transport il est situé de l'autre côté derrière Space Mountain, du côté de DCA ce sont les bus pour le parking Toy Story. - Mr.Ravenswood a écrit:
- Ben du coup d’après ce que j’ai compris, Disney a quand même acheté le terrain du Carrousel Inn, qui ne sera pas utilisé, non? C’est donc une perte d’argent.
Là dessus je ne m'inquiètes pas trop, ils vont trouver un moyen de l'utiliser ne t'inquiètes pas, j'ai pas l'impression que Disney à franchement insisté sur le projet Eastern Gateway  En plus les choix de Disney me semblent un peu bizarre, il y a quelques années le Garden Walk était en vente et Disney n'en a pas profité, idem sur des hôtels en construction actuellement autour du parking Toy Story? Il faut bien voir que le projet Eastern Gateway ce n'était pas que le parking, il y avait aussi le hub de transport qui était déménagé ainsi que l'entrée "piétonne" du resort qui passait de Harbor Blvd à Disney Way.
Dernière édition par polo85 le Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 16:19, édité 1 fois |
| | | | fafa45
Messages : 4171
Localisation : gien loiret
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 16:07 | |
| - polo85 a écrit:
- La preuve que tu n'as jamais été sur place car le hub de transport il est situé de l'autre côté derrière Space Mountain, du côté de DCA ce sont les bus pour le parking Toy Story.
mais si je c'est bien c'est entre DL et DCA , ont voit bien sur google maps  ! mais ça prend de la place le hub transport , il y a le tram , le passage piéton et les arrêts de bus depuis harbor Blvd on peu se demander ou ils vont le placer après pour l'extension Marvel de DCA ! |
| | | | Mr.Ravenswood
Âge : 22
Messages : 880
Localisation : Bordeaux
Inscription : 22/02/2015
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 21:39 | |
| - J. Thaddeus TOAD a écrit:
- Non ce n'est pas une perte d'argent, il faut arrêter de voir les choses à court terme! Je suis persuadé que le projet Eastern Gateway n'est que mis de côté et que Disney a l'intention de le construire à moyen ou long terme! Le jour où les terrains du parking Toy Story seront développés, il faudra un parking à étages supplémentaire...
Évidemment, mais ce terrain sera pendant un moment vide, non-exploité, et aucun projet ne lui offrira d’avenir. C’est un peu bête que Disney ait acheté le terrain sans savoir s’ils pourraient l’utiliser. Mais peut-être que dans les années à venir... Grim Grinning ghosts come out to socialize! |
| | | | Fgth
Modérateur
Âge : 53
Messages : 6544
Localisation : Draveil
Inscription : 02/09/2007
| | | | | J. Thaddeus TOAD
Âge : 49
Messages : 5431
Localisation : Orléans
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 28 Oct 2017 - 22:27 | |
| Loin?  Il suffit de mesurer, la phase 1 du parking à étages d'Eastern Gateway aurait été plus près de l'entrée des parcs que l'actuel parking Mickey & Friends (et aussi éloigné des parcs que le futur parking à étages Pinocchio)! Articles à lire: http://www.ocregister.com/2017/10/25/disneyland-cancels-eastern-gateway-project-will-build-new-parking-structure-and-four-diamond-hotel-on-the-west-side-of-the-resort/ et http://www.ocregister.com/2017/10/25/3-reasons-why-disneyland-may-have-dropped-the-eastern-gateway-project/ C'est à jamais |
| | | | Fgth
Modérateur
Âge : 53
Messages : 6544
Localisation : Draveil
Inscription : 02/09/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Lun 30 Oct 2017 - 10:18 | |
| Je n'ai en effet pas mesuré par rapport au parking ouest mais les vidéos d'illustration de ce nouveau parking me laissaient penser qu'il y avait bcp de marche à faire. Après je me suis aussi pas mal basé sur la distance par rapport à certains hôtels d'harbor Boulevard (genre Camelott Inn & Suites) qui sont donc bien plus proches de l'entrée des parcs. |
| | | | Vinc
Modérateur
Messages : 8658
Inscription : 29/04/2010
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 4 Nov 2017 - 2:27 | |
| Reportage du Los Angeles Times en deux parties sur les relations entre Disney et Anaheim. Première partie : EDIT : Un lien vers le premier article a déjà été posté par FOBS page précédente. Si vous en avez déjà pris connaissance, vous pouvez passez directement au second article. - Spoiler:
- Citation :
- Is Disney paying its share in Anaheim ?
The money battle outside the Happiest Place on Earth
Afew hours after the gates swing open at Disneyland and Disney California Adventure, the cars are still pouring into the massive 10,241-space parking garage.
They zoom into the six-story concrete structure, carloads of costumed kids, foreign tourists and graying baby boomers sporting Mickey Mouse ears, “Frozen” dresses and “Star Wars” backpacks.
The cash pours in too: Each vehicle pays $20 to park at the Mickey & Friends facility, $35 for a preferred space close to the escalators and elevators.
Even if the parking garage fills just half its spaces, it would still generate more than $35 million in annual revenue and easily hundreds of millions of dollars over the life of the structure.
That money all goes to Walt Disney Co. The city of Anaheim, which owns the garage and spent $108.2 million to build it, charges the company just $1 a year for the lease.
More than 20 years after Anaheim agreed to pay for the parking facility as part of Disneyland Resort’s expansion, it has become a symbol of the city’s complicated and increasingly tense relationship with its biggest and most powerful corporate citizen.
Over the last two decades or so, as Disney’s annual profit has soared, the company has secured subsidies, incentives, rebates and protections from future taxes in Anaheim that, in aggregate, would be worth more than $1 billion, according to public policy experts who have reviewed deals between the company and the city.
Disney has negotiated these pacts with a carrot-and-stick approach — one that has often included the company’s threat of directing its investment dollars elsewhere. The agreements have spurred development of billion-dollar projects, including the California Adventure theme park and the forthcoming Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge area at Disneyland.
The Burbank company masterfully works the political system, sometimes deploying aggressive strategies that belie its carefully cultivated image. Support for various deals benefiting Disney has come from Anaheim City Council members who have received generous campaign contributions through a byzantine network of political action committees funded by the company.
But now, for the first time in Disneyland’s 62-year history, the entertainment giant is facing serious opposition from Anaheim politicians, including Mayor Tom Tait, who feel that the recent guarantees in particular were too much. The city’s finances are squeezed for a variety of reasons — it has, for example, unfunded pension liabilities of $590 million. Despite the tens of millions of dollars in tax revenue and high-profile benefits that Disney brings to Anaheim, some of the city’s working-class residents said they don’t see enough of the upside.
In a letter to The Times, Disney challenged that view. “Disneyland Resort has played a pivotal role in Anaheim as a job creator and economic engine,” the company said, noting that it is committed to investing more than $2 billion there in the next decade.
Faced with growing criticism inside City Hall, last year Disney stepped up its local political spending, contributing $1.22 million to 10 PACs that were involved in the November election, according to an analysis of campaign finance disclosures by The Times. The PACs, most of which also spent money on elections outside Anaheim, received funds from multiple sources, though Disney was often a significant donor.
Even with Disney’s large PAC contributions — which dwarfed the money raised by the candidates it opposed — two politicians supported by the company lost to reform candidates, flipping the balance of power on the council. Now, Disney’s ability to extract lucrative deals from the city is in question.
“Some of the big projects that they may be thinking about — some of the money they want to siphon off from the city — will probably get postponed,” said City Councilman Jose F. Moreno, who defeated incumbent Jordan Brandman, a beneficiary of more than $250,000 spent by Disney-backed PACs. “It is about being pro-neighborhood, pro-city.”
The election offered a measure of vindication for Tait, who for years has been the most prominent critic of the Disney pacts.
“A lot of these things aren’t a natural, normal thing for any city to do,” the mayor said. “It is way too much.”
The biggest Disney deals since the 1990s include the following incentives:
•Anaheim agreed in 1996 to issue $510 million in bonds to finance various infrastructure improvements, the expansion of the Anaheim Convention Center and the construction of the $108.2-million Mickey & Friends parking structure, which Disney needed for California Adventure and other projects. When the 40-year bonds, which include roughly $1.1 billion in interest, are paid off, Anaheim will transfer ownership of the garage to Disney. Meanwhile, the company pockets the parking revenue.
•In 2015, Anaheim approved an agreement to shield Disney’s theme parks from any potential entertainment tax for as many as 45 years. In return, Disney is building the “Star Wars”-themed area at Disneyland and will invest in another major project at its resort in the future. By a conservative estimate, an oft-discussed tax of $1 per ticket could have generated more than $1 billion for Anaheim.
•Last year, the city granted Disney a tax rebate for a luxury hotel the company plans to build. The deal, which is estimated to be worth $267 million for Disney, would amount to the largest subsidy given to any hotel in the city.
“Anaheim residents should ask themselves if the return on investment was worthwhile,” said Michael Thom, an assistant professor at USC and an expert on tax incentives. “If not, then it's time to start asking elected officials why they continue to help Disney instead of spending the same resources on other things.”
Disney declined requests to interview company executives, including Chief Executive Robert Iger and Disneyland Resort President Michael Colglazier.
But in a statement, the company disputed The Times’ estimates and analysis valuing Disney’s Anaheim incentives at more than $1 billion, arguing that future benefits and protections to the company shouldn’t be part of the calculation. Two experts said the estimate is reasonable and that the deals should be included in any calculation of Disney’s financial benefit. “Of course they have value. If they didn’t, why did Disney want them?” Thom said.
Disney also said that its investments far outweigh the value of the deals from Anaheim and that it is contributing more than its fair share “despite what people with their own political agenda are insinuating.”
Benefits for a changing city
As Anaheim’s largest employer and taxpayer, Disney has been an undeniable boon to the once-sleepy agricultural town.
About 30,600 people work at Disneyland Resort, accounting for nearly 19% of Anaheim’s jobs, based on a recent city report. The Anaheim Resort District, which includes two Disney theme parks, the convention center and dozens of hotels, is expected to account for $171.9 million in tax revenue during the fiscal year that ends next June — or 43% of general fund revenue.
According to the company, in 2016 Disneyland Resort “paid more than $125 million in taxes, bonds, levies, fees and contracts, directly benefiting Anaheim, its residents and local schools.”
Disney has also taken steps to unburden Anaheim: Since 1992, the company has paid the city for police service at its resort property, and has done the same for fire and paramedic service since 2000; those contracts now generate more than $10 million a year for the city.
Many Anaheim stakeholders said that the company’s direct and indirect impact on the city is unmatched. “There would be no tourism here without Disney,” said Jay Burress, president of the nonprofit Visit Anaheim tourism bureau, which is partly funded by Disney tax revenue. “They are the hook that brings [people] here.”
City Councilwoman Kris Murray, a Disney supporter, said the deals with the company have been good for taxpayers. “The city has a long history of partnering with private investment to raise its revenue, rather than having to go to our residents and local businesses for tax increases,” she said. “We’ve been able to keep our taxes and fees lower than all of our neighbors.”
Disney also said it is the city’s largest contributor to local philanthropic endeavors, addressing issues including hunger, public health and education. The company said that in the last year, Disneyland Resort has given nearly $20 million to nonprofits that are mostly in Orange County, including more than $4 million to various causes in Anaheim. Among them is ACT Anaheim, an initiative Disney co-founded, that provides grants to nonprofits in the community.
“I have never seen a corporation that has taken so to heart their commitment to the surrounding community,” said Shelley Hoss, president of the Orange County Community Foundation, which manages ACT.
Disney critics acknowledge the company’s important role in the city. But they also note that Disneyland Resort is crucial to the company’s bottom line. Cowen & Co. analyst Doug Creutz calculates that during Disney’s last fiscal year, the resort accounted for about 20% to 25% of the $3.3 billion in operating income generated by Disney’s parks and resorts unit. In the company’s global stable of parks and resorts, only Walt Disney World Resort is more important to Disney’s finances, he said.
Disneyland Resort’s outsized success is why some believe the company, which returned $2.3 billion to shareholders in the form of dividends last fiscal year, should do more for the city that’s home to its most storied property.
Rising poverty and crime, as well as changing demographics, have all fueled some discontent and unrest in the city of nearly 350,000 people. And the growing Latino population — Anaheim is now 53% Hispanic — contributed to a change in local elections brought on by a 2012 American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit over the city’s allegedly discriminatory political system.
Even some Disney employees wonder whether the company — whose stock market value is about $152 billion — is squeezing more out of the city than necessary. Chris Shively, an Anaheim resident and server at Blue Bayou restaurant in Disneyland, drives by the Mickey & Friends garage each day knowing that city tax dollars are paying for the facility.
“It’s a company — they have their own best interests,” he said. “But it is definitely something where the company, Disney, got a great deal — a deal that we are paying for. Absolutely frustrating.”
A history of deal-making
Disney’s Anaheim deals represent only a portion of the overall incentives the company has secured.
There have been pacts for the construction of ESPN studios in Connecticut, new projects at Walt Disney World in Orlando and movies shot in production-friendly locales such as Australia. This year, Disney was awarded a $20.8-million subsidy to make “Captain Marvel” in California — the third-largest film incentive ever from the state.
Other entertainment companies also scour the globe for subsidies. But Disney is the master: The $866 million in incentives it secured for film production, real estate development and other projects from 2000 to 2016 far outpaced incentives won by its rival media conglomerates, according to IncentivesMonitor, a service of data firm Wavteq Ltd. Disney’s haul was more than double what Time Warner Inc., Comcast Corp., Viacom Inc. and 21st Century Fox Inc. each got over the same period. The Wavteq tallies, calculated in a report for The Times, exclude certain kinds of incentives, such as those that protect against potential future costs — like the entertainment tax exemption.
Some of the company’s boldest deal-making efforts have occurred in Florida. For example, the state allowed Disney to create a local government, the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which oversees an area that includes Disney World and enjoys some of the benefits of cities, such as the ability to issue municipal bonds.
In Orlando and Anaheim, Disney has successfully secured agreements by threatening to hold back expansions to its existing theme parks, said Richard Foglesong, author of “Married to the Mouse,” which details Disney’s business in Florida.
“They use strong-arm tactics in order to get the things they want from local government,” said Foglesong, a critic of the company. “At work is this very long-standing corporate culture, which says they are owed something from the public sector in return for their private investment.”
In the 1990s, after Disney decided to build its second theme park and other projects in Anaheim, the company persuaded the City Council to pump more than $500 million into the surrounding area, creating the Anaheim Resort District. The money would pay for the Mickey & Friends garage, the convention center expansion and infrastructure improvements. Tait, then a councilman, was skeptical of the arrangement, but Disneyland President Paul Pressler wanted unanimous support, Tait recalled.
He said he got Pressler to agree to a few key concessions — including an entertainment tax exemption that expired in 20 years rather than continuing in perpetuity. Disney also agreed to guarantee debt from the bond issuance, shielding the city from some risk. Disney won Tait’s vote. Pressler declined to comment.
“I think the deal should have been much better for the city. But it was the deal that was presented, and it was going to pass regardless of my vote,” Tait said. “I would do it again, given the circumstances. It was much better than it would have been without my vote.”
A Republican businessman, Tait had initially been seen as industry-friendly when he was appointed to a vacant seat on the council in 1994. But he later came to view the financing agreement as a poor one for the city.
Anaheim is still paying off $510 million in bonds issued in 1997 to fund the resort district improvements, relying on tax revenue from the Disneyland Resort and others to cover the debt. Today, Disney’s booming business helps generate more tax revenue than is needed for the annual bond payments. But because of a complex financing structure created by Anaheim and Disney, the growing surplus — $104.1 million as of June 2016 — can only be used to pay off the debt.
Tom Schuette, a partner at Gurtin Municipal Bond Management who analyzed the bonds for The Times, said it was “somewhat surprising” that the “surplus funds do not flow back to the city’s general fund,” where the money could be freely spent. This structure “works out well for Disney and for bondholders” in part by giving them a cushion should there be financial problems in the future. But, he said, “it can easily be argued that the rest of the city is missing out.”
Indeed, critics of the financing structure argue that it has put Disney’s interests first because a large portion of the company’s annual city tax payments go toward paying off the bonds — tying Anaheim’s hands and limiting its ability to fix pressing problems.
“The area immediately around Disneyland is beautiful, but you go a few blocks in any direction and the streets are run-down, the sidewalks are cracked and broken,” said Jeanine Robbins, an Anaheim resident and activist.
Disney opened California Adventure, the Grand Californian Hotel & Spa and the Downtown Disney retail area in 2001. The Mickey & Friends garage opened a year earlier.
The parking facility, which Disney pays to operate and maintain, is a gleaming edifice — a hulking mass of steel and concrete with floors named for Disney characters whose cheery faces emblazon buttons in the elevators.
The city does not know how much revenue the garage generates for Disney, which owns a portion of the land beneath the facility and leases the remainder from a third party, an Anaheim spokesman said.
The city doesn’t see any of that parking money, but it can use part of a nearby Disney-owned lot for its convention center visitors and shares that revenue. Since that arrangement’s inception in 2001 it has, according to the city spokesman, generated just $3.8 million in total for Anaheim.
New, hotly debated incentives
When it comes to deal-making with Disney, Anaheim is at a major disadvantage.
“You have one of the most sophisticated corporate entities around negotiating with a small, capacity-constrained local government,” said Stuart Gabriel, director of the Ziman Center for Real Estate at UCLA. “There is an imbalance of sophistication, an imbalance of power and an imbalance of resources.”
Creutz, the Cowen & Co. analyst, said it more plainly: “It is management's job to extract as much money as they can. It’s — I guess — the City Council’s job to give as little money as they can. Whether a City Council is as well-equipped to do their job … that’s another question.”
The apparent imbalance, economists said, has been spotlighted over the last two years in fresh pacts that critics say are further impinging on the city’s future finances.
Last year, Disney sought a tax rebate for a proposed hotel at its resort. Under a program started in 2015 to encourage the development of four-diamond properties, Anaheim offered hoteliers a 70% refund on the 15% bed tax collected from guests for 20 years. Without the incentive, Disney said it would not build the 700-room hotel, The Times reported last year.
Still, Alan Reay, president of Atlas Hospitality Group, a real estate firm that specializes in hotels, says it would be hard for Disney “to argue that they wouldn’t build that hotel without subsidies,” given the company’s financial position and the strong economy.
A city-commissioned study said that the new Disney hotel would create 5,050 construction jobs during the course of the project and 1,150 full- and part-time positions when it opens. The city projects Disney’s hotel to generate about $381 million in transient occupancy tax during the rebate period — and about $267 million would flow back to the company. The subsidy, along with rebates for two non-Disney hotels from another developer, was approved in July 2016.
That deal came on the heels of another controversial vote to give Disney a long-term tax exemption that protects it from a potential levy on tickets to its local theme parks.
Several U.S. cities have such entertainment taxes. In San Francisco, a similar levy of up to $2.25 per ticket is projected to generate $1.4 million in revenue for the city this fiscal year.
In 1975 and 1991, the Anaheim council considered imposing an admission tax on local entertainment venues, but abandoned the idea amid opposition from Disney. In 1975, then-Mayor William Thom dropped his support of the tax after threats of a recall. Thom, who has since died, told The Times in 1991 that he “chickened out” under the pressure.
Besides Disneyland Resort, the only other business in Anaheim to hold a similar tax exemption is the Angels baseball franchise, a city spokesman said — and Disney negotiated for it in 1996 while purchasing a controlling stake in the team. (The company sold the Angels in 2003 but the exemption remains in place until 2029.)
In 2015, about a year before Disneyland Resort’s 20-year entertainment tax exemption was scheduled to end, Disney sought to renew the safeguard, explaining that the scope of its continued investment in Anaheim hinged on getting a new deal. It also expressed concern that a tax on Disneyland Resort tickets could dissuade customers, according to reports.
But critics note that the $1 ticket tax that had long been discussed in civic circles would be less than 1% of Disneyland’s regular adult price of admission, which is now $110. Since 2007, that price has risen 67% — and attendance has soared over the same period.
Although a $1 levy was never formally proposed, former council candidate Arturo Ferreras, who last year was defeated by Disney-backed incumbent Lucille Kring, said he thought “it would be nice if we could use those taxes for the benefit of the community.”
In exchange for a new 30-year entertainment tax exemption, Disney promised to complete $1 billion in development at Disneyland Resort by the end of 2024. (The development, Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge, is now under construction and scheduled to open in 2019.) If Disney spends an additional $500 million, the company would get an additional 15-year extension. Under the agreement, Anaheim would have to reimburse the company for any entertainment tax that voters might approve. The exemption protects Disney not only from a potential ticket tax but also other prospective levies, including one on parking revenue.
An economic report produced for the city indicated that the first phase of Disney’s new development would generate about $17.9 million in new annual tax revenue for the city, while the second phase would add an additional $8.9 million annually.
Theme park experts and analysts who cover Disney said that incentives Anaheim gave to the company decades ago may have been necessary to get it to expand its resort property. But now that Disney’s presence is so firmly established in Anaheim, the company’s threats to hold back investment in the resort are probably less realistic, especially as competition has grown, Foglesong and others said.
“Private marketplace factors would drive Disney to expand and improve the quality of the park, irrespective of whether they get a public subsidy,” Foglesong said.
Disney’s threat, however, was enough to convince some council members, including Murray. “They look at a finite amount of new investment every year … and each one of [Disney’s] facilities competes for those dollars,” she said. “So, if extending the tax policy gave the comfort level to the corporate decision makers to invest another billion dollars in our city, that was a comfortable position to take.”
A ticket tax could have been an economic boon for the city. In 2016, Disneyland welcomed 17.9 million visitors and California Adventure had 9.3 million guests, according to consulting firm Aecom. Even if attendance remained static, a $1 tax per ticket would generate $1.23 billion for the city over the next 45 years.
Disney disputed the calculation: “You can’t put a value to a tax that has never, ever existed in the city of Anaheim.”
The July 2015 meeting in which the City Council debated the tax exemption was a grueling affair that lasted past midnight as dozens of Anaheim stakeholders weighed in.
Colglazier, the Disneyland Resort president, made his case: “What we are trying to determine right now though is the scale of the next investment, as well as the viability of Anaheim for future expansions relative to other Disney parks around the world.”
Mayor Tait didn’t buy that claim — figuring that Disney was likely to invest in its thriving theme park operation whether it got the exemption or not. But he knew he was outnumbered: Three of the five council members had expressed support for Disney in recent years.
Before the vote, he delivered a warning.
“This just took ‘tax the tourists’ off the table for 45 years.… The people have a right to decide that. Not three people up here tonight, at 12:45 a.m., with a whole lot of political pressure,” said Tait, resignation evident in his voice. “This just shouldn’t happen. And for that reason, I am going to vote no. And I think, down the road, people will rue this day.”
Los Angeles Times - 24 septembre 2017.
|
| | | | Vinc
Modérateur
Messages : 8658
Inscription : 29/04/2010
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 4 Nov 2017 - 2:52 | |
| Seconde partie : - Spoiler:
- Citation :
- How one election changed Disneyland’s relationship with its hometown
Disney got decades of deals from Anaheim. Now the city is pushing back.
When Jose F. Moreno ran for Anaheim City Council last year, he wasn’t just challenging another politician. He was taking on the Walt Disney Co.
In front-porch pitches, the reform candidate told residents that politicians had prioritized Disney ahead of them, hurting a city already challenged by rising crime and poverty.
Disney responded with its pocketbook, making hefty contributions to PACs supporting Moreno’s opponent, incumbent Jordan Brandman, who had voted to approve lucrative incentives for Disneyland Resort.
Outgunned financially, Moreno’s chances appeared slim. But he hammered away at the idea that corporate subsidies had created “two Anaheims.”
“We’ve invested billions, really, in the children of tourists,” Moreno said. “We’d now like to really turn our investments toward making sure we take care of the children of Anaheim so that they can have that magical life that I think we all want for our kids and families.”
Moreno’s message resonated. His victory — in one of the tightest races in Anaheim history — helped flip the balance of power on the City Council.
Now, the new majority, led by Mayor Tom Tait, is already shaking things up. It forced the resignation of a city manager who had favored pro-Disney initiatives, voted to oppose a $300-million streetcar that would’ve ferried riders to the company’s resort, and says it wants to focus on making life better for locals.
Absent from the agenda: cutting big deals with Disney.
That puts the Burbank company in an unfamiliar position. For decades, it has been able to secure incentives, subsidies, rebates and tax protections from the city that, in total, would be worth more than $1 billion, according to public policy experts who have reviewed the agreements.
Guarantees secured via the City Council, such as a decades-long exemption from any potential entertainment tax at Disneyland Resort, have helped insulate and expand the property, whose two theme parks welcomed a combined 27.2 million guests last year, according to data from Los Angeles consulting firm Aecom.
To help get its way, Disney has over the years spent heavily on Anaheim politicians, using a complex network of political action committees to back friendly candidates who will often vote in its favor.
Last year, Disney contributed $1.22 million to 10 PACs that were involved in the November election, more than any other company or single individual, according to an analysis of campaign finance disclosures by The Times. Those PACs received funds from multiple sources and most also spent money on elections outside of Anaheim.
This time, though, Disney’s spending didn’t pay off.
In interviews with The Times, more than a dozen community activists, political observers and current and former city officials pointed to the results in the November election as proof that voters are ready to take a harder stance on issues related to Disney. They say that the 45-year entertainment tax exemption secured in 2015 and a $267-million hotel tax rebate a year later pushed too far, souring some of the goodwill the company has built up in the city.
Disney declined requests to interview company executives. However, in a letter to The Times, the company said that some politically motivated critics in Anaheim “want to blame Disney for larger socio-economic ills that exist in cities throughout California and across the nation.”
“While there are some differences in opinion between Disney and several Anaheim officials regarding policy issues and how best to secure Anaheim’s economic future, our relationship with the city, its administration and the majority of its political and community leaders remains strong,” Disney said.
The company also disputed The Times’ estimates and analysis valuing Disney’s Anaheim incentives at more than $1 billion, and said that it has contributed much more to the city than it has received.
Lucy Dunn, chief executive of the Orange County Business Council, a nonprofit whose PAC received more than $100,000 from Disney in 2016, said she believes the council majority’s stance has left Disney “sort of baffled” — especially while it is in the midst of an expensive expansion that includes the Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge area at Disneyland and a new luxury hotel.
“They are investing $1.5 billion in that town,” she said. “It’s odd to me that there isn’t a better working relationship between leadership at the city and Disney.”
The shift has been years in the making. Disney has grown, over decades, from a purveyor of children’s amusements into one of the world’s largest media and entertainment companies, a corporate juggernaut with a stock market value of about $154 billion.
Anaheim has undergone its own evolution. In 2016, the City Council expanded from five to seven seats. The six council members are now elected by district; the mayor is still elected citywide. Last year, four seats were up for grabs, more than any previous election. The change came after the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit alleging the prior at-large election structure discriminated against Latinos, who make up 53% of the population.
Poverty, declining income and rising crime are all contributing to a creeping restiveness. The city’s crime rate, after dipping earlier this decade, increased 14% from 2014 to 2016, according to data from the FBI. It has risen 1% since 2000.
Several Anaheim residents said they want more of the city’s tax revenue spent on making neighborhoods safer and tackling homelessness — a mushrooming problem that has drawn headlines as a large encampment of people has formed near Angel Stadium. The City Council voted unanimously in mid-September to declare a state of emergency on homelessness.
“I’m lucky I live [near] Disneyland Resort — it is nice and clean. But it’s not really representative of what Anaheim is,” said activist Luisa Lam. “The council before always kept giving and giving to Disney.… Honestly, I felt that we were spiraling out of control.”
Not far from Disneyland, a tall stone wall exemplifies the divide in Anaheim.
It runs along a section of East Gene Autry Way, a pristine thoroughfare lined by rows of manicured palm trees and gold-capped street lamps. The street is in the Anaheim Resort District, an 1,100-acre area created by the city after it issued $510 million in bonds to pay for infrastructure and projects, including an expansion of the city’s convention center and a parking garage for Disneyland Resort. Disney’s property, with its two theme parks, hotels and retail area, is the crown jewel of the district.
But just on the other side of the wall is the working-class Wakefield neighborhood, better known as the turf of the Boys From the Hood, a notorious local gang. It’s not part of the resort district.
On a recent visit, former City Council candidate Arturo Ferreras, who was defeated by a Disney-backed incumbent last year, pointed out the area of a trash- and graffiti-saturated alley where police shot and killed a man in 2012.
“You don’t go here during the night,” he warned.
Wielding influence
Few cities as large as Anaheim are so identified with a single company — some residents even call it “Disneyheim.”
Sleepy Bentonville, Ark., home to Wal-Mart Stores Inc., is a fraction of the size of Anaheim. The same is true of tiny Hershey, Pa., the headquarters of Hershey Co. But Anaheim, with a population of nearly 350,000, is also a company town — a place where one business exerts extraordinary influence.
Back in the 1960s and 1970s, when Disneyland was a growing but still somewhat quaint operation, chummy relationships with city of Anaheim officials helped the company achieve its goals. Former Disney executive Jim Cora, whose 43-year career included managerial roles at Disneyland in that era, said that company executives used to give City Council members “silver passes” that allowed free access to the park and take “top officials of the city of Anaheim” on annual trips to locales including Coronado and Santa Catalina islands.
“We laughed, we told jokes, we drank together, we played poker until well into the night,” said Cora, who attended the getaways with the men he called “the city fathers.” “The next morning, a group of guys would go out on a fishing boat, another group would go play tennis, another group would go out and play golf, and there was a group that just had bad hangovers and couldn’t go anywhere. So that’s what we did for a long time.”
One of Cora’s former Disneyland colleagues, Ron Dominguez, found the trips to be invaluable.
“It built relationships,” said Dominguez, who after 39 years with Disney retired from his post as executive vice president at Walt Disney Attractions in 1994. “If you had a power outage [at Disneyland] in the middle of the night, you could get some support because you knew the individual [at the city] that had that particular function.”
The state’s Political Reform Act of 1974, which regulates campaign finance, lobbying activity and conflicts of interest, put an end to the big gifts and junkets — around the same time the practice was fading.
“It became … unfashionable to accept gifts from Disney,” said Cora, who retired as chairman of Disneyland International in 2001. “And the city of Anaheim didn’t want to do it anymore, because it looked like they were being paid off.”
These days the interactions are much more subtle.
Take Carrie Nocella, Disneyland Resort’s director of government relations and minority business development. Little known outside of Anaheim, Nocella is a prominent player in the city.
Moreno, the newly elected City Council member, described her as Disney’s “political gatekeeper.”
“She was the one designing strategies, meeting with political consultants about what kind of PACs needed to be funded,” said Moreno, who previously served eight years on the Anaheim City School District Board of Education.
Christopher Duarte, president of Workers United Local 50, recalled his surprise when Nocella showed up for a 2016 meeting with Councilman Jordan Brandman to discuss Disney’s prospective hotel tax rebate.
The encounter came about after Disney-backed Brandman asked if he could bring along an executive from the company, Duarte said. He was surprised by the request, but said he “agreed to it because I was interested to see who was going to come with him.” When Brandman appeared with Nocella, Duarte said, he realized how important this issue was to Disney. But the meeting “felt like a sales pitch,” Duarte said. “I don't believe that government and big business should be that close together — in tandem.”
Ultimately, Local 50 did not take a position on the rebate, which was approved by the City Council. Brandman declined multiple requests for comment. Disney declined to make Nocella available for an interview.
People who have encountered Nocella describe her as smart and savvy — but she has also been scrutinized for her friendship with City Councilwoman Kris Murray. The two women, along with a group of longtime friends, went on a European vacation shortly after Murray was reelected to a second term in November 2014. Her campaign was aided by financial support from Disney and Disney-backed PACs.
Murray told The Times that each person paid her own way, and city business wasn’t discussed. “Our friendship predated [my] service on this council,” she said. But the trip, first reported by Voice of OC, alarmed good-government experts.
“It looks terrible from the point of view of someone who doesn’t want the city decisions to be influenced and controlled by Disney,” said Tracy Westen, chief executive of the nonprofit Center for Governmental Studies, a nonpartisan think tank focused on governance reform.
Some Anaheim activists believe the councilwoman should recuse herself from votes related to the company. But Murray pointed out that other council members are friends with people who “interact with the city in a variety of capacities.”
“We all are capable and equipped to distinguish the difference between our personal relationships and our work to represent the residents of Anaheim, and I have certainly been able to do that during my tenure,” she said.
Murray has said she voted for the Disney-related deals, including the entertainment tax exemption in 2015, because they benefited the city financially.
Big campaign contributions
Disney also wields power in Anaheim by building relationships with an assortment of local organizations, whose members have become key emissaries for the company. They speak at council meetings in support of Disney and do some campaign legwork.
Support Our Anaheim Resort Area, known as SOAR, is perhaps the best-known group. It was founded in 2007 with financial backing from Disney in part to fight a housing development proposed near the company’s resort. By the end of the year, the developer’s plans, which included building low-cost apartments, had fallen through.
But amid the battle, SOAR backed a ballot initiative that would give voters the power to block future housing projects in the resort district, affording Disney the chance at a wider, longer-lasting victory. A few months ahead of the June 2008 election, the City Council adopted the initiative. The deciding vote was cast by City Councilman Harry Sidhu, who had received direct campaign contributions from Disney. All told, Disney gave $2.1 million to SOAR during the housing debate, The Times reported in 2008.
There are perks that come with joining a group like SOAR. The organization’s advisory committee members, for example, have in the past gotten free access to Disney’s theme parks.
That became problematic for longtime SOAR advisory committee member Gail Eastman, who visited Disneyland 16 times from December 2009 to December 2010, during her successful Disney-backed run for City Council and shortly before she was sworn in. Even though she said she never spent time in the park with her free “red pass” — and only briefly escorted Anaheim visitors and community members into the property — Eastman said she reimbursed Disney for gifts over the annual $420 limit. Her visits were valued at $3,896, according to an economic disclosure form.
“Wow, what a costly mistake on my part,” said Eastman, who added that she’d been initially unaware that the visits had to be reported.
In Anaheim politics, Disney’s money, more than anything, has given its favored candidates an edge.
During the pivotal 2016 election year, Disney’s $1.22-million outlay to 10 PACs beat its own record for spending on an Anaheim City Council election.
Shannon Nickerson, who for nine years has worked as a vendor at Disneyland, selling ice cream from a cart, said the company’s political spending isn’t surprising. “The big corporations pick politicians that they want to support and they fund them so they can get their way,” said Nickerson, who lives in Anaheim.
Disney’s money takes a serpentine path, often flowing from one PAC to another before being spent. (It also sometimes has unexpected beneficiaries: Even Mayor Tait, long a vocal critic of Disney deals, received contributions from the company when he was up for reelection in 2014.)
During last year’s election, Disney-backed PACs doled out money in support of four candidates — largely via independent expenditures, which by law cannot be done in consultation with politicians. (Disney also made direct contributions to those four politicians, giving the maximum $1,900.) Three PACs — one that received funds directly from Disney and two that got funds from a Disney-backed committee — spent money on advertisements attacking four other candidates.
Anaheim was flooded with mailers, lawn signs and advertisements in a massive display of corporate involvement in the City Council race. It was a crucial election — the first under the new district system designed to give Latino residents more of a say in city politics.
Even though Anaheim is 53% Hispanic, only three Latinos had served on the council in the city’s history as of 2012, according to the ACLU lawsuit that brought about the election change. Over the years, many council members have come from Anaheim Hills, a tony, largely white section of the city dotted with planned neighborhoods. Disney supported the move to districts, but council members it has backed, including Murray, did not.
Some Anaheim political players, including Moreno, noted that three of the four council candidates that Disney’s campaign spending in 2016 supported were white, while three of the four candidates who were targeted with negative campaigning by PACs with direct or indirect financial connections to Disney were Latino.
Though Moreno faced nearly $31,000 in opposition ads by a PAC that got money from Disney, he said that he believes the company makes its political decisions based on “its bottom line” and not race.
In its letter to The Times, Disney said its support of candidates is determined by their political and economic ideology.
“Our support of candidates is not based on ethnicity; it is based on candidates who support business growth and the continued development of the resort district, both of which help ensure a strong local economy and vibrant community,” Disney said.
Taking on Disney
Even as Disney has faced more opposition in Anaheim, the company’s deep pockets have still helped it defeat challengers.
Arturo Ferreras was one of those opponents during last year’s election. With just $33,000 in contributions and minimal PAC support, he was crushed by Lucille Kring, a Disney-backed incumbent who voted in favor of the entertainment tax exemption and hotel tax rebate. Ferreras, a pastor who works in his church’s Hispanic ministry, said he decided to challenge Kring to help refocus the council on neighborhood issues.
“Disney is the crown jewel of Anaheim,” he said. “But we would want them to be more responsive to the needs of our community.”
He wasn’t prepared for the amount of political money that would be deployed against him. PACs backed by Disney spent $272,000 in support of Kring’s campaign. Meanwhile, two PACs that received funds from a Disney-backed committee spent $63,000 in attack ads against Ferreras.
Residents in District 4 — which includes Disneyland Resort — were deluged with mailers. One showed a grainy photo of Ferreras next to a warning: “Arturo Ferreras would make reckless decisions on the City Council that would … threaten public safety.”
Kring also took legal action against Ferreras — alleging in a court petition that his true surname was not listed on the ballot and that his designation as a priest should not be included, contending, in part, that he’d been “defrocked.”
Both claims were inaccurate, according to the ruling from an Orange County Superior Court judge that denied the petition. The case forced Ferreras to spend $3,500 on a lawyer.
Kring said she followed the advice of her “campaign people” but now regrets filing the petition. “I wish I hadn’t wasted the money or the time, but in politics you have to do what you think is best at the moment,” Kring said.
One of the candidates who successfully took on the Disney money machine in 2016 was Moreno, who beat out Brandman, the incumbent whose campaign was turbocharged by the company.
Several PACs that got contributions from Disney and two that received money from Disney-backed committees spent a total of $330,000 in support of Brandman. And three PACs — one that received funds from Disney and two that got contributions from a Disney-backed committee — spent a total of about $85,000 on ads attacking Moreno.
A day before the election, a news release sent to area media outlets detailed a 2016 misdemeanor domestic violence case involving Moreno’s brother-in-law. The news release was sent by strategic planning firm Communications LAB, an Orange company under contract with the city of Anaheim to provide “policy aide” services to Councilwoman Murray. The firm also has ties to Disney — it names Disneyland Resort as a past client, and one of its senior executives, who also serves as Murray’s aide, is married to a Disney employee.
“As a political tactic — beyond the pale,” Moreno said of the news release. “It had nothing to do with the issues we were running on.”
Communications LAB executive David Cordero said that the work was done on a pro bono basis at the request of the ex-wife of Moreno’s brother-in-law.
“The firm was not paid for its assistance nor was the effort related to any candidate, campaign or PAC,” he said.
Moreno defeated Brandman by 72 votes. His win, and that of retired accounting supervisor Denise Barnes, gave Tait a like-minded majority with which to work until he is termed out in 2018. Councilman James Vanderbilt, who in 2014 was elected over Eastman, said the victories reflect the public’s desire “to have somebody who is in their corner.”
“Our first challenge,” said Vanderbilt, “has been to unwind a number of things that were questioned and were perhaps over-reaches.”
A new agenda
Almost immediately, the new majority — dubbed the “people’s council” — signaled its intention to upend the status quo. In December, the council voted unanimously to end the hotel tax rebate program that Disney and another developer took advantage of last year.
Although the program is expected to spur the construction of about 2,000 hotel rooms — and Disney still would get a rebate valued at $267 million over its 20-year term if it builds the project — the incentive will no longer be offered to future developments.
Next, the council voted 6 to 1 in January to oppose the streetcar project that would have benefited Disney by connecting its resort to the city’s transit hub. The company had in the past supported the project, which lost the backing of the Orange County Transportation Authority last year.
“It’s not an anti-Disney approach,” Moreno said. “It’s an anti-greed approach.”
Among the changes at City Hall, none roiled the establishment more than the forced resignation of City Manager Paul Emery.
Tait said he sought the official’s removal, in part, because Emery had recommended the council approve the entertainment tax exemption and the hotel tax rebate for Disney. In July, the council voted 4 to 3 to ask Emery to step down.
“I wanted to take the city in a new direction, a dramatic new direction — and Paul recognized it,” Tait said. “We have a fiduciary duty to the 350,000 people we represent. We have to look out for their best interests.”
Just before he resigned, Emery declined to comment via a city spokeswoman. After stepping down, he could not be reached for comment.
Some former Disney executives, including Jeff Kurtti, believe that the company is being scrutinized for pursuing deals that any blue-chip firm would seek. In some ways, he and others said, Disney is a victim of its own carefully crafted wholesome image.
“It’s almost as if Mickey Mouse went and wrote checks for campaign funding,” said Kurtti, who consults for the company. “I think it is a contradictory image that hits people in the wrong way.”
But not everyone is convinced the 2016 election represented a sea change. Former Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, who was supportive of the company while in office from 2002 to 2010, acknowledged that there is tension in the city. But he wonders if last year’s election simply reflected “some folks feeling that they want to shake it up and do things differently.”
An answer could come soon — another election is just around the corner. With Tait stepping aside next year and incumbents up for reelection, the 2018 race is sure to be hotly contested.
Among the mayoral candidates is Sidhu, the former councilman who cast the deciding vote on the anti-housing ordinance.
During his first successful run for the council in 2004, he received a contribution from a powerful company that was later able to count on his support.
The Walt Disney Co.
Los Angeles Times - 26 septembre 2017.
|
| | | | Vinc
Modérateur
Messages : 8658
Inscription : 29/04/2010
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 4 Nov 2017 - 3:10 | |
| Un troisième article relève les dons effectués par Disney pour la campagne électorale des candidats favorables à Disney avant les élections municipales qui se sont déroulées l'année dernière à Anaheim.
Comme mentionné précédemment, seul trois candidats ayant reçu le "support" de Disney ont finalement été élus (pour un collège municipal élargi à sept sièges), ce qui a débouché sur le changement de majorité et les difficultés rencontrées depuis par Disney (entre autre pour son projet Eastern Gateway abandonné récemment).
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-disney-anaheim-campaign-finance/ |
| | | | Fgth
Modérateur
Âge : 53
Messages : 6544
Localisation : Draveil
Inscription : 02/09/2007
| | | | | zelko
Messages : 11492
Inscription : 20/09/2011
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Sam 4 Nov 2017 - 16:28 | |
| - Fgth a écrit:
- C'est autorisé les pots de vin là bas en quelque sorte (soit c'est vrai, soit ce sont des pots de vin masqués). Bon, cette fois ci ça a moins bien payé. Et Disney risque de le payer.
Oui c’est légal et il n’y a pas de plafond de versement comme en France . Pareil pour les spots TV autorisée aux USA ,les partis les plus riche diffusent le nombre de spots TV qu’ils veulent .Et vu le prix certains n’y ont pas accès . Impensable en France . |
| | | | fafa45
Messages : 4171
Localisation : gien loiret
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Dim 12 Nov 2017 - 17:13 | |
| J'ai regardé un peu , en fait ça revient au même ^^ !
Ils ne perdent pas de place avec ce changement, si on regarde bien, le parking qui va se construire sera déjà sur la surface plate de parking où il y a aussi les bus... Ensuite, pour le Diamond hôtel, les salles de ciné seront surement incluses sur le bas de cet hôtel et le rainforest déplacé ( seule question ou) ils vont bien le caser quelque part...
Pour l'extension du DCA pour Marvel, j'ai vu qu'ils peuvent aussi utiliser l'ancienne arrivée des trams qui borde l'hub transport... Le futur parking superposé du Downtown Disney occupera seulement un quart du parking derrière le DLH !
En fait ça n'empêchera pas les projets de renouvellement sur la surface actuelle du resort ^^ ! ça change presque rien ^^ |
| | | | dazel
Âge : 48
Messages : 1033
Inscription : 12/04/2016
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Lun 13 Nov 2017 - 22:19 | |
| - polo85 a écrit:
- La preuve que tu n'as jamais été sur place car le hub de transport il est situé de l'autre côté derrière Space Mountain, du côté de DCA ce sont les bus pour le parking Toy Story.
J'adore ce genre de phrase du genre qui sous entend " toi le petit pauvre qui n'a pas les moyens d'aller dans le parc américain, écoute moi qui suis un grand spécialiste des parcs US après y être allé". Et c'est là que je vais me faire engueuler... Il y a d'autres façon de tourner une phrase je pense. |
| | | | polo85
Âge : 39
Messages : 4562
Localisation : Ouest de la France
Inscription : 23/01/2010
| | | | | J. Thaddeus TOAD
Âge : 49
Messages : 5431
Localisation : Orléans
Inscription : 04/07/2007
| | Sujet: Re: DisneylandForward : Expansion de Disneyland Resort approuvée ! Mer 31 Jan 2018 - 10:35 | |
| Et si le 3e parc de DLR était un jour construit sur l'actuel terrain de l'Angel Stadium of Anaheim? Pure spéculation à ce jour évidemment mais ce stade pourrait déménager au tout nouveau http://www.cityofirvine.org/orange-county-great-park/sports-complex et ainsi libérer environ 60 hectares... Encore faudrait il que Disney achète ce terrain.  Lire https://disneyandmore.blogspot.fr/2018/01/will-land-of-anaheim-angel-stadium-be.html C'est à jamais
Dernière édition par J. Thaddeus TOAD le Dim 29 Avr 2018 - 0:08, édité 1 fois |
| | | | |
Sujets similaires |  |
|
| | Permission de ce forum: | Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
| |
| |
| |
|
