Possible Disney profit trend woes?

[lockedoutlogic]

Originally Posted by derekburgan

Are you seriously comparing the world of Harry Potter to Justin Bieber and the Transformers movies? Other than they all make a lot of money, what else do they have in common? Bieber is mega popular with a very small demographic, and when he tried to extend his brand to another media (his movie), it failed. The Harry Potter book series, already the biggest phenomenon in books in my lifetime, went on to become the biggest series of movies ever. And if you think the only people buying the books or seeing the movies were the tween audience, I don't know what to say. I've seen them with my 8 year old niece, my 17 year old nephew, my 40 year old girlfriend and her 60 year old parents. How many of those groups do you think would want to go to a Justin Bieber concert, see a Justin Bieber movie, or see a Justin Bieber attraction in a theme park?

It's that type of thinking which made Disney make a horrible decision and think Avatar would be a good counter to WWOHP. Hey, the movie made a lot of money, and that's all Harry Potter did, right? Wrong. Outside of the movie, no one had any desire to visit the world of Pandora. All of the merchandise for the movie sat on the shelves. The entire theme park model is built on retail, and the Harry Potter universe is not only filled with things for people to buy, but they showed long before the land was created that they wanted to spend money on this property. Outside of young boys in the toy aisle, how many people are buying Transformers merchandise?

Men In Black is a fad. They are really fun movies that people enjoy. The source material was a minor success, if that. Sales of toys, clothes and other related merchandise is relatively very small, and non existent when a movie is not out. A ride was created that is truly fantastic, but it certainly didn't change any travel patterns in the US, let alone internationally. I think that's what you are thinking of when you are talking about the Wizarding World of Harry Potter.

i'm point out that making money...particularly at the box office...has never been easier.

"dung on film" would open to 60 million opening weekend...

I think i see where you're coming from...and since that is Hogwarts your not coming off as being anywhere close to objective. I'm fully aware of all the money and popularity that HP has had...but that does NOT signal sustainability in the long term without new exposure.

I give Rowlings, Harry Potter, the films, WWOHP, and the movement all the credit its due...

But you're giving it far too much.
We obviously differ...and we'll wait to see who's right.

My contention is that no new material will render potter forgotten pretty quickly. But we'll have to see.

And don't think that i'm defending disney, or any other franchise (certainly not Avatar)...you just have to try to look at it objectively. Juggernauts don't stick around for long these days without constant pumping.

You think they are making more pirate movies for love of the genre? Hell no...its because they need to inject blood into it to keep moving merchandise.

Harry Potter will be no different...she needs to start it again or its going to be forgotten. A niche following or hardcore fan base does NOT indicate longterm dominance.

Look at Star Wars...he was playing with house money, but boned it with bad material - lost most of the old fan base that kept him relevant for 30 years - and now relies on kids in walmart to keep the money coming...and they're going to forget him quickly.

[ChipnDale79]

Originally Posted by lockedoutlogic

i'm point out that making money...particularly at the box office...has never been easier.

"dung on film" would open to 60 million opening weekend...

I think i see where you're coming from...and since that is Hogwarts your not coming off as being anywhere close to objective. I'm fully aware of all the money and popularity that HP has had...but that does NOT signal sustainability in the long term without new exposure.

I give Rowlings, Harry Potter, the films, WWOHP, and the movement all the credit its due...

But you're giving it far too much.
We obviously differ...and we'll wait to see who's right.

My contention is that no new material will render potter forgotten pretty quickly. But we'll have to see.

And don't think that i'm defending disney, or any other franchise (certainly not Avatar)...you just have to try to look at it objectively. Juggernauts don't stick around for long these days without constant pumping.

You think they are making more pirate movies for love of the genre? Hell no...its because they need to inject blood into it to keep moving merchandise.

Harry Potter will be no different...she needs to start it again or its going to be forgotten. A niche following or hardcore fan base does NOT indicate longterm dominance.

Look at Star Wars...he was playing with house money, but boned it with bad material - lost most of the old fan base that kept him relevant for 30 years - and now relies on kids in walmart to keep the money coming...and they're going to forget him quickly.

I'm the type of person who won't do something simply because everyone else is doing it, I don't like to be a part of the "it" crowd. So when Harry Potter came out and it exploded, I rolled my eyes and didn't have anything to do with it.

Last year my father said he was tired of hearing about it and wanted to figure out what all the hype was about. He read all 7 books and loved it, so I thought I'd give it a try.

I finished book 7 about a month ago, I simply could not put the books down, they were that good. Every now and then something comes along that's not a fad, something that will be passed down from generation to generation. Something like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, personally I put Harry Potter in that category. Harry Potter will be around for a long long time. All three of those franchises are something I can't wait to share with both of my sons when they are old enough.

I haven't been to Universal in 15 years, I've been to WDW 7 times in the last 4 years alone. After reading Harry Potter, Universal is on my must do list now.

[Disco]

Originally Posted by ChipnDale79

Last year my father said he was tired of hearing about it and wanted to figure out what all the hype was about. He read all 7 books and loved it, so I thought I'd give it a try.

I finished book 7 about a month ago, I simply could not put the books down, they were that good. Every now and then something comes along that's not a fad, something that will be passed down from generation to generation. Something like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, personally I put Harry Potter in that category. Harry Potter will be around for a long long time. All three of those franchises are something I can't wait to share with both of my sons when they are old enough.

LOL, IMO they were not that great. Only book 3 and 4 were good the rest were meh.
A couple read like detective novels, with the murder suspect being unveiled at the end and everything. Except that the big unveiling at the end of the book ends up being an unknown character. It was the butler's cousin's son!
Others she killed the most interesting characters off just so she wouldn't have to write about them I think.
Then she sums up the plots and motives at the end of each book even though they were obvious.
At least they weren't as bad as that Eragon dragon series. Gawd I hate myself for reading those...
Any who, despite my opinion I think they will be around for a long time and are not a passing fad. While they're nothing compared to the Hobbit and LotR series they've made a big impression with the youth for some reason.

[Peter Pirate 2]

The potter books were not of the critical quality of LOTR or The Hobbit to be sure. But they did hit a market, young people, like no series in a long, long time. They were written well enough to appeal across the board despite what their overall quality was.

The potter movies, as locked said, were produced and released in genius fashion to maximize exposure and tenure but they also were much better suited to crossing demographic lines including world wide acceptance than LOTR and Hobbit. They also specifically drew the family demographic that I think was kind of a shock to everyone.

Universal, using real imagineers, completed a land of such quality, whimsy and realism that Walt would be proud. With appealing attractions that are destined to remain crowded favorites regardless of their being potter related, I see no reason the land will not continue to be huge for a solid 10 years. After that they rest on their laurels or improve - At that time something new will demand to be built and potter will become the other great land at IOA.

[kbelle8995]

I can't speak for others this is simply my opinion.

For the first time in a very long time, I am going to Disney parks but I am not staying at a non-Disney hotel. For the same price a little less than staying at a value I am staying at a nicer hotel. It is close and I still get the perks of extra magic hours.

I also plan to downgrade to a Seasonal pass come November. Yes I'm still going but I'm cutting back.

What with the price hike and now stating that they want 11% more out of me and every guest. I'm becoming disenchanted with the Parks division. As for Potter books, I think that will see this series gaining in popularity. They are imaginative and interesting plus they offer very good ideas and values. Certainly much better than the Twilight series.
Avatar is in danger of being Oh that old movie. Sorry I just don't see it as being a classic.

[pilferk]

Originally Posted by Peter Pirate 2

Universal, using real imagineers, completed a land of such quality, whimsy and realism that Walt would be proud. With appealing attractions that are destined to remain crowded favorites regardless of their being potter related, I see no reason the land will not continue to be huge for a solid 10 years. After that they rest on their laurels or improve - At that time something new will demand to be built and potter will become the other great land at IOA.

To be clear:

They created TWO attractions...and that's only if you count the one who's primary purpose is to sell you something (a wand). The headliner is a masterpiece of mythic (if you'll excuse the pun) proportions, to be sure.

The rest are re-skinned/re-themed leftovers from the previous area.

The theming is amazing, I'll grant you. And we have a blast there, I'll grant you that, too.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by Uncleromulus

The books seem to have been written for children.

Serious question, I have to ask--was this a joke?

[Peter Pirate 2]

Originally Posted by pilferk

To be clear:

They created TWO attractions...and that's only if you count the one who's primary purpose is to sell you something (a wand). The headliner is a masterpiece of mythic (if you'll excuse the pun) proportions, to be sure.

The rest are re-skinned/re-themed leftovers from the previous area.

The theming is amazing, I'll grant you. And we have a blast there, I'll grant you that, too.

Agreed. But the retooled attractions are successful because they are fun no matter what the theme happens to be. Individually or as a whole the land and its parts are successful. How they came to be isn't really important.

This is why the negative Avatar arguments are silly. If Disney spends a billion dollars (whatever) on something it should be good regardless of the trappings. TheTower of Terror would have still been great with no affiliation to the twilight zone.

[pilferk]

Originally Posted by Peter Pirate 2

Agreed. But the retooled attractions are successful because they are fun no matter what the theme happens to be. Individually or as a whole the land and its parts are successful. How they came to be isn't really important.

It's only important when you mention that "real imagineers" created "attractions" that "are destined to remain crowded favorites regardless of their being potter related".

Really, so far, they've created ONE attraction...and one really neat way to sell a wand. I'm not saying I don't enjoy them...I do..but let's put it all in context.

Dueling Dragons is great (and it was, prior)...but the only difference between it's previous incarnation and it's current one is it's queue. And the previous queue was pretty darn astounding, in terms of theme and execution.

Flight of the Hippogryph is.....underwhelming (even as a kiddy coaster...or so my kids tell me). They reskinned the cars and wove in some HP set pieces.

Again, the theming in the area is astounding..and we have fun just checking out the small details. The shops are REALLY well done.

I just don't want to go TOO overboard when it comes to the creation of the attractions, there. The headliner is AMAZING. The wand shop is a creative way to sell merch. But, in terms of ride creation/content....I'm not ready to fawn all over them.

[lockedoutlogic]

No to go "off topic"...which is in this case kinda back "on topic"

But Disney released its quarterlies...and they're raking...

Revenues up 31% over the previous on the whole - and theme park PROFITS up 21%...630 million bucks free and clear

So whatever they're doing...it's not gonna change.
It makes further capital investment look like a fools errand as well.

It's also important to note that revenues were up...but "sales" are down - aka they're making more by selling less.
Which means that while they may not be driving Chinese manufacturing...the suits were lining their pockets

It also makes there "no discount" strategy the right one - which we all pretty much knew to be true...
Less crowds, more affluent crowds, more comfort, more spending per person, less overhead

All "W s"

And of course iger gave the "uniquely positioned for longterm success" line of crap...
Shut up, CMB

[pilferk]

I wish we all had such "woes".

[zulemara]

Originally Posted by lockedoutlogic

No to go "off topic"...which is in this case kinda back "on topic"

But Disney released its quarterlies...and they're raking...

Revenues up 31% over the previous on the whole - and theme park PROFITS up 21%...630 million bucks free and clear

So whatever they're doing...it's not gonna change.
It makes further capital investment look like a fools errand as well.

It's also important to note that revenues were up...but "sales" are down - aka they're making more by selling less.
Which means that while they may not be driving Chinese manufacturing...the suits were lining their pockets

It also makes there "no discount" strategy the right one - which we all pretty much knew to be true...
Less crowds, more affluent crowds, more comfort, more spending per person, less overhead

All "W s"

And of course iger gave the "uniquely positioned for longterm success" line of crap...
Shut up, CMB

bolded - that's where I think things are going, especially with the rumor of DL prices going over 100 dollars within a year, WDW will follow and be higher. They are trying to price themselves out of the casual market it seems.

[pilferk]

Originally Posted by zulemara

bolded - that's where I think things are going, especially with the rumor of DL prices going over 100 dollars within a year, WDW will follow and be higher. They are trying to price themselves out of the casual market it seems.

IF that's their plan...they have some work to do.

Because those affluent crowds expect certain things that Disney does not provide.

Right now..they're walking that fine line. The middle to upper middle income earners are able to afford the WDW trip...and bring with them the middle and upper middle income earners levels of expectations (with some "forgiveness" granted for it being Disney...for example, the expectations at a Disney Deluxe resort). If they start to price themselves into an upper-middle, lower-upper income earner demographic...the expectations are going to go up AND the "forgiveness" level is going to drop.

It'll be interesting to see how they manage that. I'm not sure they'll be as successful as they think they will be.

Again, I hold up the (apparent) backlash/outrage over the pricing at the new AOA resort. That pricing seems in line with the "plan" being outlined. I'm just not sure it will work out the way Disney thinks it will.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Originally Posted by zulemara

bolded - that's where I think things are going, especially with the rumor of DL prices going over 100 dollars within a year, WDW will follow and be higher. They are trying to price themselves out of the casual market it seems.

I usually agree with your take but on this don't. I think Disney is still following simple supply and demand philosophy. Raise prices, reduce expense to the point of discontent and at this point they aren't close. People are even willing to pay monthly for Disney vacations and look at the resort capacities and pricing. The guests they're seeing are not the well heeled, more like the entitled.

They can make that huge price increase at DL because they can. They will ultimately lose very few pass holders and with the increase be way ahead.

Pilferk, imagineers created all of IoA and everything since, so the Disney typen quality at USF is unquestionable.

[zulemara]

Originally Posted by Peter Pirate 2

I usually agree with your take but on this don't. I think Disney is still following simple supply and demand philosophy. Raise prices, reduce expense to the point of discontent and at this point they aren't close. People are even willing to pay monthly for Disney vacations and look at the resort capacities and pricing. The guests they're seeing are not the well heeled, more like the entitled.

They can make that huge price increase at DL because they can. They will ultimately lose very few pass holders and with the increase be way ahead.

Pilferk, imagineers created all of IoA and everything since, so the Disney typen quality at USF is unquestionable.

You may very well be right, but I see a separation of the classes growing in Disney's future through ticket price changes and changes in what is offered at Deluxe vs value resorts in terms of perks for the parks. I don't know exactly what they have up their sleeve, but I think it's very possible they are going to create a level of additional perks for Deluxe guests vs value. Right now, once you get in the park, everyone staying on property is equal. I don't think that will be the case in the future.

I also see declining attendance at Disney hotels in favor of offsite and 3rd party hotels. I also think this relates to the large international tourism that's holding WDW up based on my observations. The international tourism market is what holds WDW up and is the reason they keep increasing prices and cutting things at the resort. If they had to rely on domestic travelers, they would be screwed IMO.

It's all part of the Rizzo factor. They're Tourists, what do they know?