Subject:
|
Re: A 'possible' LEGOLAND Park in Illinois
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.legoland
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:50:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
12617 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.legoland, Ted Godwin wrote:
> > ... Oh, and there is no major theme-park located right in the
> > Chicago area. Major population center, plus major tourism draw, minus any
> > nearby competition, equals pretty good idea in my book.
>
> Stop for a second and consider what you wrote.
>
> Maybe there is a reason, "there is no major theme-park located right in the
> Chicago area". In fact, that is kind of my whole point.
A point that would be equally valid for Orlando before Disney, Cleveland before
Cedar Point, etc. In some cases a park opened because land was dirt cheap and
could be bought for a song (Disneyworld, especially after problems with
Disneyland). In some cases there were population centers with no local
attraction, and so somebody started one (almost everybody *except* Disney). In
some cases (Branson MO) you have a community that despite being away from
population centers, or having a history... decided to jump-start an industry.
I respectfully maintain that "climate" does not seem to be *the* overwhelming
dominate factor here.
> Look, I visited Chicago once in College and it seemed like a nice
> place... there are serious hurdles that would have to be overcome
> to build a LEGOLAND park there.
I strongly suspect that people who are considering this decision... might not
more about it than us. Just a guess.
--
Brian Davis
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: A 'possible' LEGOLAND Park in Illinois
|
| (...) Except that there are fewer tourists in winter. Not a problem if the local area is densely populated enough but still seems a risky proposition. (...) Really? So that is why all Disney vacation packages I have ever seen offer a day-trip bus (...) (15 years ago, 29-Oct-09, to lugnet.legoland, FTX)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
