| |
>
> 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.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
13 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
