|
|
| |
City council results:
NO, but fix the plan and come back.
From the article:
Among the problems: The proposal does not include a guaranteed revenue stream to
pay for $64.3 million in bonds developers want the city to issue; public
participation would exceed the 50 percent limit the city had asked for; and
there was no dedicated revenue source to pay for the city police and fire
protection to serve the development.
Also from the article:
But Tim McKee, executive vice president of economic development for the Olathe
Chamber of Commerce, said it appears chances were growing slim that the project
would come to Olathe.
Article:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/15283340.htm
From local talk radio:
RED Development the company which is developing the "O-Zone" complex including
Legoland says the deal is not dead and they are planning to return with a
modified financing package.
Also, the Olathe mayor says he is excited about the possibility, but they city
will not pay that amount without the guarantees.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Gerhard R. Istok wrote:
> My whole take on this is that it is NOT Lego driven, but developer driven. If
> it goes thru, then the taxpayers of Kansas will be paying for this.
I agree with you, but as long as Legoland is not owned by Lego, it is an
amusement park like any other, and developers are going to use it as the draw
for retail, hotels, other tourism, etc. and since it will increace the tax base
enormously, the developers will expect taxpayers to pick up the tab.This should
not come as a surprise, since any Legoland not located in one of the major USA
metropolis (something that would cost exponentially more than the KS deal) is
going to have to come as a package deal with the above mentioned types of
entities to make it a success.
I applaud Legoland parks for using creative financing to bring parks where the
might not otherwise be located.
|
|
| |
My whole take on this is that it is NOT Lego driven, but developer driven. If
it goes thru, then the taxpayers of Kansas will be paying for this. But if it
fails in the end, it could affect the reputation of Lego... the product.
I am leary about this.
Just my opinion.
Gary Istok
|
|
| |
Legoland KC is supposed to be presented to the Olathe City council tonight. It
looks good except the current plan has tax payers paying 2/3 the cost. I don't
think people will be real excited about putting up this amount.
This has been discussed on local talk radio today ad nauseum. And their general
consensus is against the government financing.
From the article:
Two-thirds of the estimated cost of the proposed project would come from state
and city tax incentives and direct subsidies from Olathe. The breakdown of the
public financing:
•tax-increment financing bonds, $5.9 million.
•transportation development district bonds, $47 million.
•city-issued bonds, $64.3 million.
•STAR bonds, $556 million.
The article in Kansas City Star:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/15275009.htm
The Olathe mayor has released a statement that the city will not put up any
money.
|
|
| |
Any AFOLs in the Kansas City area, we have a chance to display at this year's
Greater Kansas City Model Railroad Expo at Union Station on Septmber 23rd and
24th. Set up is Friday the 22nd. I have reserved a layout area of 12 ft by 20.
Currently I only have one other participant, but if anyone is in interested we
have room on our layout. Our layout consists of 3 loops, one which will support
8 wide trains.
Please let me know as soon as possible if you are interrested in joining us or
have any questions.
Layout:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/missourilego/Layouts/GKCMRE/union_station_-_sept_24.gif
Thanks,
Matthew Rausch
-Remove .diespamdie. to email
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Mark Chan wrote:
> In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> > I think on their (LLCA's) best day more people are standing in line for
> > Space Mountain at Disneyland than for all the rides at LLCA combined.
> >
> >
> > But hey - if they have a promobrick program then it can't be all that bad ;)
> >
> > Mark
> > http://www.promobricks.com
>
> I'd rather go to an amusement park where I wasn't standing in line for hours.
> Standing in line is not my idea of a fun vacation - especially with short
> attention span 4-12 year olds.
The glory of fast-passes fix that for the more popular rides such as SM ;)
But the rides at LLCA move slowwwwwwwwww. They have very low per-hour capacity
that brings everything to a very slow crawl. And it is only worse when LLCA cuts
down on the number of workers staffing the rides and/or not even running all the
already-slow cars (think the new dragon ride that only has half of it open even
at most of the "busy" times)
> If Legoland purposely cuts off attendance each day to insure small lines, charge
> a high gate fee, and can still make a profit,
But they do not cut off attendance and I (would hope) the high ticket cost is
because of the expense of the area - but I have no idea why it is so highly
priced.
> I heard once that LLCA was struggling financially, so
> maybe the model needs some fine tuning - and maybe the new operators have
> already tuned it enough where they have confidence in opening a new LL in Kansas
> City.
They said the talks were on before the buyout with TLC. But yes, they would have
to have confidence to open a new park wherever it may be.
> Don't worry though - I'll make sure to get you some promobricks when it opens :)
> (nice website btw)
Thanks :)
Mark
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> I think on their (LLCA's) best day more people are standing in line for
> Space Mountain at Disneyland than for all the rides at LLCA combined.
>
>
> But hey - if they have a promobrick program then it can't be all that bad ;)
>
> Mark
> http://www.promobricks.com
I'd rather go to an amusement park where I wasn't standing in line for hours.
Standing in line is not my idea of a fun vacation - especially with short
attention span 4-12 year olds.
If Legoland purposely cuts off attendance each day to insure small lines, charge
a high gate fee, and can still make a profit, I think that's a viable and
successful business model. I heard once that LLCA was struggling financially, so
maybe the model needs some fine tuning - and maybe the new operators have
already tuned it enough where they have confidence in opening a new LL in Kansas
City.
Don't worry though - I'll make sure to get you some promobricks when it opens :)
(nice website btw)
|
|
| |
I think that a better spot in the midwest would be near the major population
centers. That would be near the Great Lakes. I think an ideal location would
be near Cedar Pointe Amusement Park near Sandusky Ohio on Lake Erie. It would
be within a few hours drive of the major population centers of Illinois,
Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Ontario (over 50 million
people within a 4-5 hour drive). And it would be near Sea World of Ohio, as
well as Cedar Pointe Amusement Park (which has the most roller coasters in the
world).
And best of all, for me it would only be a 2 hour drive from Detroit! ;-)
Gary Istok
|
|
| |
>
> I would really hate to see a LL park fail, but if they build it in any other
> location than the theme-park area in Florida or somewhere in New York it will
> fall flat on its face - and do so very quickly. Heck, I think even a NY one
> would fail because the park would have to be closed for a good part of the year
> because of snow.
I think there is a good chance for it to succeed in the Kansas City area. If
your target attendance is 1.4M a year (which the other 4 Legoland parks
average), that is well within the realm of reason if you include everything
within a day's drive of Kansas City.
Some comparisons:
The KC theme park "Worlds of Fun" (which nobody has probably heard of if you
don't live in the region) draws 800,000 a year with only a summertime schedule.
The Kansas City Royals, who have had 100 losses in three of the last four
seasons, and is arguably the worst team in Major League Baseball, still draws
1.5M per year from a large regional (one day drive) area. It's a family friendly
venue (they'll kick you out for foul language/swearing), unlike other MLB or pro
sports stadium environments. It also has the most affordable tickets &
concessions according to the most recent study of the MLB teams.
Besides the two above, there are enough other "Family friendly" synergistic
activities in the immediate, 15 min area that a Legoland can feed off of and add
to.
*A NASCAR track (and possibly the NASCAR Hall of Fame, insiders tap KC as the
lead candidate)
*a huge shopping area near the racetrack (the aforementioned "Legends" in the
article) that is currently the #1 tourist destination in the state,
*an indoor waterpark,
*a new outdoor waterpark,
*a proposed new regional soccer complex for youth tournements which will also
include the Kansas City Wizards home field,
*a minor league baseball team (very inexpensive - even compared to the already
low cost Royals, family friendly fun, draws 250K a year)
Kansas City is not California or Florida or New York, but I think that is what
will give Legoland a great chance to succeed there. It's counter-intuitive
genius in my opinion. If you draw a ring 500 miles around Kansas City (which
represents an easy day's drive with stops) you don't see too many Family
destination alternatives. No mountains, no oceans, no Disneyland.
If you live within this ring (which 54 Million do according to the article), and
want a family vacation, your alternatives are to spend a lot of money to fly
somewhere else, or spend a lot of time and energy driving somewhere else with
kids in the car.
With Legoland and the other family attractions nearby, you could hop in the car,
be in Kansas City that day, and the next morning be off and running to different
activities - including Legoland. People in that region "do" drive to Kansas City
from within a one day radius, it's not just some "tourist experts" rosy
assumption - see NAIA and Big 12 basketball tournaments, and the KC
Royals/Chiefs as examples.
The county where the proposed Legoland would be built also has a strong
reputation for being one of the best places in America to raise a family. This
is the ideal Legoland target customer. With 450,000 just in that county (I typed
in the wrong number in my original post), the local attendance, support and
excitement could also be a very positive factor.
Sure, any project can fail, and none of us want to see a Legoland fail. But I
wouldn't write off Kansas City as a bad bet so quickly.
|
|
| |
(crossposting to .legoland)
In lugnet.announce, Mark Chan wrote:
> Tourism experts say a Legoland theme park would have the name recognition and
> reputation to bring visitors to the Kansas City area from as far as Minneapolis,
> Denver, Dallas and Chicago.
To re-state what I posted on BL:
I think these "tourism experts" need to find new jobs lol. LLCA has trouble
getting people from as close as LA and SD to go to the park. The only reason out
of towners go there is because it makes for a nice side trip between their visit
to Disneyland and Sea World. It is bad enough that in the middle of the summer,
when theme parks are supposed to be packed LLCA is a ghost town for the most
part. I think on their (LLCA's) best day more people are standing in line for
Space Mountain at Disneyland than for all the rides at LLCA combined.
I would really hate to see a LL park fail, but if they build it in any other
location than the theme-park area in Florida or somewhere in New York it will
fall flat on its face - and do so very quickly. Heck, I think even a NY one
would fail because the park would have to be closed for a good part of the year
because of snow.
But hey - if they have a promobrick program then it can't be all that bad ;)
Mark
http://www.promobricks.com
|
|
|
