Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser | Inside Universal Forums
  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.

Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser

Mad Dog

Premium Member
Jan 30, 2013
20,883
Pittsburgh area
That is correct, the DVC point conversion was even more egregious than the cash pricing so it’s not surprising that’s the first discounting lever.

My thoughts about it being a dumb investment are well documented across this thread, only partially offset by the fact that I did think it was better experience than I was expecting. But a few voyages a month isn’t viable because you can’t staff that effectively. You also can’t turn it into a normal hotel because the rooms are postage stamps and there’s no infrastructure for pool/buses/parking/etc. It’s like Jurassic Park - so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.
Good points. They've kind of boxed themselves into a corner, and there's not much in the range of viable, good profit, alternatives....ie. converting into a regular hotel etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HandsomePete

HandsomePete

Contributing Member
Jul 8, 2019
993
Good points. They've kind of boxed themselves into a corner, and there's not much in the range of viable, good profit, alternatives....ie. converting into a regular hotel etc.
It will not turn a "profit" in a pro forma sense, period. Revenue will exceed operating costs, but it will not recoup the capital it cost to build.

I could go on a broader rant (again) but I'll stop.
 

Mad Dog

Premium Member
Jan 30, 2013
20,883
Pittsburgh area
It will not turn a "profit" in a pro forma sense, period. Revenue will exceed operating costs, but it will not recoup the capital it cost to build.

I could go on a broader rant (again) but I'll stop.
I agree with you 100%.. Return on Investment a big negative.......and.......They've probably just about exhausted that hard core SW segment that would pay anything for the experience, as many of us predicted.
 

JoeCamel

Premium Member
May 20, 2015
6,597
Upper Lower
It will not turn a "profit" in a pro forma sense, period. Revenue will exceed operating costs, but it will not recoup the capital it cost to build.

I could go on a broader rant (again) but I'll stop.
I agree with you 100%.. Return on Investment a big negative.......and.......They've probably just about exhausted that hard core SW segment that would pay anything for the experience, as many of us predicted.
If they had just built something knock your socks off amazing it would sell itself. Same goes for the land
 

SkiBum

Veteran Member
Dec 14, 2012
1,839
Cincinnati, OH
That is correct, the DVC point conversion was even more egregious than the cash pricing so it’s not surprising that’s the first discounting lever.

My thoughts about it being a dumb investment are well documented across this thread, only partially offset by the fact that I did think it was better experience than I was expecting. But a few voyages a month isn’t viable because you can’t staff that effectively. You also can’t turn it into a normal hotel because the rooms are postage stamps and there’s no infrastructure for pool/buses/parking/etc. It’s like Jurassic Park - so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.
And now with too much invested in it to change. Well, they could change but they are afraid of admitting failure perhaps.
 

Nick

Staff member
Moderator
Sep 22, 2011
27,793
Orlando
If they had just built something knock your socks off amazing it would sell itself. Same goes for the land
Funny thing about the land - even in VR it gets criticized for not looking enough Star Wars :lol:

There's a VR game called Tales From The Galaxy's Edge. You don't actually get to walk around Batuu and it's more of a FPS blaster game. I played part of it when Meta had a demo of the Quest 2 in the NBA Experience building and used chapter 1 of this game as the demo. It's a fun enough as far as gameplay goes, but the main complaint is it doesn't look enough like a Star Wars planet.
 

PerceptiveCoot

Veteran Member
Jul 13, 2018
1,995
That makes no sense with the IP. Ridiculous.

We have sex with out tails: An Avatar Adventure would've done big business. Could've been 18+. :lol:
It's just like a trip to Mexico, except instead of riding on dolphins you ride on the (checks notes) Ilus.
1669243270076.png

And since this is your story you get to choose if you want to side with the Nav'i or the imperialist military organization plundering and polluting the planet! Fun!
 

Nick

Staff member
Moderator
Sep 22, 2011
27,793
Orlando
It's just like a trip to Mexico, except instead of riding on dolphins you ride on the (checks notes) Ilus.
View attachment 17920

And since this is your story you get to choose if you want to side with the Nav'i or the imperialist military organization plundering and polluting the planet! Fun!
For all the crap that Avatar gets, it's damn impressive that a movie that is unabashedly anti-US Military and pro-conservation is the highest grossing movie of all time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grabnar

fryoj

Premium Member
May 19, 2013
3,321
or as I suggested reducing the “voyages” to a few times a month not continuous.
How would that work with entertainers and other staff? They couldn't very well cut them back to just a few shows a month and probably can't plug and play just any entertainer into the roles. I guess they could push the cast into spots in the parks when the starcruiser isn't sailing. At that point though, they are basically paying them premium rate for lessor roles. Not saying a more limited schedule isn't wise, but I think theres a point it can be too limited.

It will not turn a "profit" in a pro forma sense, period. Revenue will exceed operating costs, but it will not recoup the capital it cost to build.

I could go on a broader rant (again) but I'll stop.
I don't know. That building was a pretty simple building. I don't know their cruise overhead, but at the price they are charging, I can't imagine the building isn't paid for already.
 

HandsomePete

Contributing Member
Jul 8, 2019
993
I don't know. That building was a pretty simple building. I don't know their cruise overhead, but at the price they are charging, I can't imagine the building isn't paid for already.
Way more gets capitalized into a project than just the building.

It was a nine-figure investment. And the first digit is not a 1.
 

shiekra38

Legendary Member
Dec 13, 2009
15,521
Florida
If I could stay IN Batuu in Hollywood Studios, then you have my attention

Otherwise, it's an expensive drawn out theater show with no windows
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darko

Joe

aka TestTrack321
Staff member
Moderator
Feb 15, 2012
15,759
Pittsburgh, PA
How would that work with entertainers and other staff? They couldn't very well cut them back to just a few shows a month and probably can't plug and play just any entertainer into the roles. I guess they could push the cast into spots in the parks when the starcruiser isn't sailing. At that point though, they are basically paying them premium rate for lessor roles. Not saying a more limited schedule isn't wise, but I think theres a point it can be too limited.
Everyone has a second hotel they're positioned at so swap them over to those places. As for entertainers, well they already don't work 24/7 so.
 

HandsomePete

Contributing Member
Jul 8, 2019
993
I guess I am looking at what it would cost in the real world and not Disney.
The sign of how much of a project got burned up by WDI overhead is comparing the Disney capital number (the one I alluded to here, or the ones thrown around online for other projects) and the number that the GC thinks a project costs. The gap between those two numbers here was very large… larger than usual. The GC number is closer to real world construction cost, except that Disney overbuilds everything in the same way a house costs way more when you use top of the line cabinets, countertops, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mad Dog

SkiBum

Veteran Member
Dec 14, 2012
1,839
Cincinnati, OH
If I could stay IN Batuu in Hollywood Studios, then you have my attention

Otherwise, it's an expensive drawn out theater show with no windows
Kind of like how Disney Sea has the hotel that is basically attached to the park. The other miss is the accommodations. Make normal hotel rooms that are themed to the SW aesthetic and yet very luxurious. People would pay for that in my opinion. The rooms are part of the reason converting it to a regular hotel or DVC wouldn't work. Much of the rest can be worked around (separate "shuttles" for arriving and disembarking so guests can come/go as they please) but the rooms are neither luxurious or large enough to function as a place to stay while on vacation. That's just my opinion, though.
 

fryoj

Premium Member
May 19, 2013
3,321
Kind of like how Disney Sea has the hotel that is basically attached to the park. The other miss is the accommodations. Make normal hotel rooms that are themed to the SW aesthetic and yet very luxurious. People would pay for that in my opinion. The rooms are part of the reason converting it to a regular hotel or DVC wouldn't work. Much of the rest can be worked around (separate "shuttles" for arriving and disembarking so guests can come/go as they please) but the rooms are neither luxurious or large enough to function as a place to stay while on vacation. That's just my opinion, though.
Disney's All-Star: Wars hotel you say?
 

SkiBum

Veteran Member
Dec 14, 2012
1,839
Cincinnati, OH
Disney's All-Star: Wars hotel you say?
From what I've seen, I would argue that All Stars rooms might be better. They are larger with better overall accommodations. Without the playacting of the Star Wars cruise, you are in small hotel, with small rooms and bathrooms, with limited amenities. With Star Wars, it is still all of that but with an Escape Room/Dinner Theater thrown in.

One BIG Caveat: I'm not into the whole role-playing thing and dressing up. That's just me.