Is Disney coming to the Alamo City? (Houston, Dallas: contractors, to live)

[tgannaway89]

I dislike this post more than any other post anywhere on the Internet. OK let me chime in on a few of the issues undergoing speculation.

SAIA is a Class C airport. That is the same classification as the Abilene Regional Airport or the Midland/Odessa International Airport.

In order to support the high traffic volumes that Disney seeks, you'd need a Class B airport. Houston has 2 Class B airports, and so does Dallas. I also want to throw in that Orlando is also a Class B airport. Even after the "expansion", San Antonio will still be a Class C airport.

21 million visitors a year is nice... but many of those drivers are in-state visitors, and a majority do not travel by air. Also, San Antonio is not one of the most visited cities in the US. It falls behind many smaller cities, and in terms of business travel falls way behind.

The public transportation isn't good enough to support a park either.

The list goes on and on.

I think after many of these problems are fixed, San Antonio has a good chance and landing another theme park (probably no Disney).

[oldmanshirt]

Originally Posted by tgannaway89

SAIA is a Class C airport. That is the same classification as the Abilene Regional Airport or the Midland/Odessa International Airport.

In order to support the high traffic volumes that Disney seeks, you'd need a Class B airport. Houston has 2 Class B airports, and so does Dallas. I also want to throw in that Orlando is also a Class B airport. Even after the "expansion", San Antonio will still be a Class C airport.

As an aside, this is why it's such a waste of money to expand SAT to this extent. As soon as they're done with the construction, you know talk is going to start about needing a bigger/more modern airport either somewhere in the SA metro or between SA and Austin.

Might as well spend the hundreds of millions that are going into SAT and ABIA and start securing the land for a serious airport that will attract larger companies and theme parks to this region.

As for your other points, SA was able to attract Sea World and Six Flags while having even more limited infrastructure than exists today, and with all of the ongoing construction in the city I can't see this being a major deterrent to a company locating a park here. If anything, the vast amounts of relatively cheap open land still surrounding SA (look at Atascosa and Wilson counties, for instance) would outweigh any worries about visitor transportation.

[SAguy]

[tgannaway89- 21 million visitors a year is nice... but many of those drivers are in-state visitors, and a majority do not travel by air. Also, San Antonio is not one of the most visited cities in the US. It falls behind many smaller cities, and in terms of business travel falls way behind.

Do you have anything to support what your saying?

[bresilhac]

[quote=SAguy;1019879]

[tgannaway89- 21 million visitors a year is nice... but many of those drivers are in-state visitors, and a majority do not travel by air. Also, San Antonio is not one of the most visited cities in the US. It falls behind many smaller cities, and in terms of business travel falls way behind. /QUOTE]

Do you have anything to support what your saying?

I don't have any links or anything handy right now but I do know that San Antonio is the number one tourist destination in Texas. So that automatically makes it a top destination in the entire US. It is not behind any small cities. And having a Disney park built here would only enhance the visibility of the city as far as tourism is concerned as would an NFL or MLB team.

[slaleman]

Originally Posted by oldmanshirt

As for your other points, SA was able to attract Sea World and Six Flags while having even more limited infrastructure than exists today...

Didn't Fiesta Texas start out as an entity of USAA? Six Flags purchased it after they saw it was a money maker (as they did with many other theme parks around the country), but I don't think that Six Flags would have chosen to put a theme park here on their own...

[940]

Originally Posted by slaleman

Didn't Fiesta Texas start out as an entity of USAA? Six Flags purchased it after they saw it was a money maker (as they did with many other theme parks around the country), but I don't think that Six Flags would have chosen to put a theme park here on their own...

Yes, it started as a small park built with the help and $$ of USAA and Gaylord Entertainment.

Fiesta Texas History


And though I personally don't believe that Disney will build any more large full service parks here in the US, the idea that San Antonio doesn't have the infrastructure or large enough airport is a moot point. When the Orlando area was chosen in the late 60s for DisneyWorld, it was a small city whose main industry included agriculture. Its infrastructure was very limited and its airport was minimal...in fact, next time you fly to Orlando, if you look across all the runways to the other side from where all the large terminals are today, you'll still see the older small-ish one story buildings that made up the old Orlando Airport that was in existence when Disney came to their town then. Orlando, and its airport and infrastructure, has grown exponentially mostly because of the influence of Disney.

[adtobias]

that has been my point for the longest time. san antonio must think bigger or it will get left behind. we need a larger airport yo attract large companies and theme parks as well. sa is a great place to live lets make it better

[Turtle_Mom]

Originally Posted by bresilhac

I don't have any links or anything handy right now but I do know that San Antonio is the number one tourist destination in Texas. So that automatically makes it a top destination in the entire US.

I'm sorry, but your logic in that statement is flawed. Being the number one tourist destination in Texas does NOT make it a top destination in the US. I realize that Texas is big and all that, but that doesn't make sense.

http://www.11alive.com/travel/article_travel.aspx?storyid=99407 (broken link)

It's not even top 10.

But it is Number 1 in Texas - you were correct.

Texas Summer Hotspots

[bresilhac]

Originally Posted by Turtle_Mom

I'm sorry, but your logic in that statement is flawed. Being the number one tourist destination in Texas does NOT make it a top destination in the US. I realize that Texas is big and all that, but that doesn't make sense.

http://www.11alive.com/travel/article_travel.aspx?storyid=99407 (broken link)

It's not even top 10.

But it is Number 1 in Texas - you were correct.

Texas Summer Hotspots

No you're right turtle_mom San Antonio doesn't have one of the literal top ten attractions in the country. But cumulatively the Alamo, Sea World, Fiesta Texas the Missions etc. draw quite a few folks here a year. And that is nothing to sneeze at. My real point was that having a Disney park built here as well as having an NFL or MLB team locate here would be a tremendous boon to both the image of the region and the local economy.

I lived in Northern Virginia for years and while there I followed and supported the Redskins. (Still do). And every time the Redskins played a home game it was a huge event for the entire Washington area. Aside from ticket sales and concessions there is merchandise, television revenue, team merchandise sales and on an on. And this doesn't even include the multiplier effect on the region's economy to include restaurants, hotels, rental cars etc, etc. And to one day have all of this happen in San Antonio because we finally got an NFL team would just tremendous for the area. That's really what I was thinking of in that previous post. The Big Picture.

[tgannaway89]

San Antonio is the top tourist destination in Texas, yes. Believe it or not, visitors do not flock to Texas. Dallas and Houston kick SAs butt in terms of business visitors and travelers in general (they do have many more large companies).

SA had 21 million visitors, juts over 8 million using the airport in San Antonio.

Dallas had almost 60 million visitors only using the airport.

Houston had just over 50 million visitors just using the airport(s).

Dallas also boasts an incredible amount of tourism (why, I don't know). Houston on the other hand, isn't a highly ranked tourist city (though a new theme park is in the works... check out the Houston forum).

As far as national stats, San Antonio is not one of the top 10. According to the Dept. of Commerce the top tourist destinations in the US are:

1New York City2Los Angeles3Miami4Orlando5San Francisco6Las Vegas7Oahu/Honolulu8Washington, DC9Chicago10Boston



FT and SW are great, but they aren't ranked among the most visited theme parks in the country (though SW is ranked in the top 10 destinations in Texas).

1. The Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida. 14 million visitors.

2. Disneyland, Anaheim, California. 12.7 million visitors.

3. Epcot at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida. 8.6 million visitors.

4. Disney-MGM Studios at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida. 7.8 million visitors.

5. Disney's Animal Kingdom at Walt Disney World, Lake Buena Vista, Florida. 7.3 million visitors.

6. Universal Studios Orlando, Orlando, Florida. 6.8 million visitors.

7. Islands of Adventure at Universal Orlando, Orlando, Florida. 6 million visitors.

8. Disney's California Adventures, Anaheim, California. 5.3 million visitors.

9. SeaWorld Florida, Orlando, Florida. 5.2 million visitors.

10. Universal Studios Hollywood, Universal City, California. 4.5 million visitors.

I think a large theme park would do great somewhere between San Antonio and Austin, but not a massive Disney park. Maybe a lot of local investors can make this happen someday.