Disney Announces Big Changes To Parks

[Disney's Folly]

I just don't get it. We're going to be in Disney October 2-9 with free dining. I figured that i would actually start the 7 day park hopper the day we get there. And end it the day we leave. So that actually left me short one day, in the middle of our trip. That day we're going to spend the morning/afternoon at US to basically see Harry Potter (and probably Spider-Man and Jurassic Park and some of the water rides). But that night, we're spending our anniversary at Narcoossee's. Sure it's free dining plan, but it's an evening with Disney.

I only made the decision to utilize this day completely out of the parks when I realized that our arrival and departure days left us with enough time to go to the parks. If we didn't do this, we would've merely used that last day to hang around the hotel or to go to DTD or spent $10 more to get the 8-day pass. Disney lost no money with me other than perhaps what I might have spent on for lunch the day at US. They still got me for 7 day park hopper, 7 nights at Yacht Club, and all the money i'm going to spend on food beyond what i'm getting free.

I LOVE the Harry Potter series and have enjoyed Universal excursions a few times in the past but I just don't think it offers enough beyond a few "in" franchises. And I honestly don't know anybody who travels to Florida just to go there, usually it's a minor tack-on to a major Disney stay. I imagine many will do the same as me. Find a way to fit it in and probably in a way that doesn't really cost Disney that much, especially if you're like me and spending upwards of $400 a night in one of THEIR hotels.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

And is STILL known for!

Nah, DC7800 got it right.

 

[ahoyle]

I consider myself a pretty big Disney fan. We normally take a trip to Orlando at least once a year. With that said, I think Disney will take a decent size hit in the short term, and possibly the long term. We just got back last month from a week in Orlando without visiting Disney, and it was as good as any Disney trip. We visited Busch Gardens, Sea World, Aquatica, and both Universal Parks.

Next year when we go back, or maybe this year for a quick trip, we have to go to Universal over Disney again (despite my preference to go to Disney). My son and Fiance are both huge Harry Potter fans. I think its the 25 and under crowd that Disney needs to worry about. Those just starting families grew up on Harry Potter, and if they take a once every few years trip down to Orlando, I think a lot of them will choose Universal. If cost isnt an option, maybe they will do both, but both parks make it more economical to do the whole week deal.

I just don't know how much of Disney's attendance is from loyal, go often type visitors, versus people going every few years.

 

[malampsdisney]

I agree the MSELP takes me back to my childhood. We are going in mid september with our 3 children. It will be their first time. I am so bummed that most of Fantasy land will be torn up and the MSELP will be gone! Couldn't they wait till Oct. Taking out in Aug. is so WRONG! Summer isn't even over!

 

[anthony2k7]

Disney just announced their advance reservations for the balance of this year is down 10% --- with an "uptick" seen recently. I guess it's the 40% discounts.

That's 10% down from 2009.

Quite a lot of that has got to be because of the very delayed free dining offering for american guests surely?

But the lack of investment they've made in the last year has got to be causing a drop in bookings for the regular visitors as well. I cant really think what they've done in the last year other than the space mountain big refurb which seems more like they were just trying to keep it going rather than raising the game on it.

As for Harry Potter, the way I see it, I actually think Disney should be thankful for potterland in the short term - at least someone is doing something to get people into FL/Orlando. Potterland is surely a one day thing, but people arent going to travel half way around the world for the day so the chances are they'll still stay at disney, or at least visit disney on their trip to see potterland. If universal hadnt done potter this year, all those people may well have just stayed home.

 

[Oglet]

Nah, DC7800 got it right.

I agree! WD Entertainment in particular has become somewhat of a joke in my opinion.

Add a new name to a old parade, bring back an old parade (and add some led's and dimmers to tinks float) , rename fireworks and promote it as a major change. Re-branding and a re-theme isn't what Disney should be known for... Imagineering has become nothing more than a cosmetic change department.

There are only so many different things you can do to goofy and his bike float and I believe that for the price guests pay to get in they deserve far more.

I did notice lots of nice new lanyards to peddle... maybe the creative genius is in the marketing and sales departments.

 

[Donut23]

I agree! WD Entertainment in particular has become somewhat of a joke in my opinion.

Add a new name to a old parade, bring back an old parade (and add some led's and dimmers to tinks float) , rename fireworks and promote it as a major change. Re-branding and a re-theme isn't what Disney should be known for... Imagineering has become nothing more than a cosmetic change department.

There are only so many different things you can do to goofy and his bike float and I believe that for the price guests pay to get in they deserve far more.

I did notice lots of nice new lanyards to peddle... maybe the creative genius is in the marketing and sales departments.

Very well said. Thank you.

What also worries me is Disney has been known for doing it RIGHT....over-build.....make sure it lasts.

New examples.....the Yeti and the Fantasmic Dragon in DL which missed the entire Nightastic season last year because.....he lost his head during rehearsal. He was the centerpiece of advertising but didn't make his debut until September. Now I WILL say.....that dragon is WICKED-GOOD<----just not built well enough the first time.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Very well said. Thank you.

What also worries me is Disney has been known for doing it RIGHT....over-build.....make sure it lasts.

New examples...the Yeti and the Fantasmic Dragon in DL which missed the entire Nightastic season last year because.....he lost his head during rehearsal. He was the centerpiece of advertising but didn't make his debut until September. Now I WILL say.....that dragon is WICKED-GOOD<----just not built well enough the first time.

I don't know about disneyland....but the yeti at AK was built by an outsourced company...which went bankrupt quickly after.

They will continue to try...and have big blunders like this...to outsource everything.

But somethings can't be.


as far as their "reinvestment"...this has and will most likely continue to be a joke. All capital expenses are simply to either build more units that generate profit beyond general attendance (vacation club...and merchandise lands like the new fantasyland) or a way of outsourcing more chunks of the property/ operation (the four seasons, the westgate project, the conversion of pleasure island to complete outsourced retail)

disney is stock price driven...and you will never be able to separtate that from the "amusement" side of it again. Things are done to generate revenue (not attendance...REVENUE...and that doesn't come from ticket sales), and therefore the reason for expansion/ addition will never be "because it's cool"

not so in the past...but those days are decades in the rearviewmirror. So don't count on anything.

harry potter is not, nor ever will be, a legitimate threat to WDW. the numbers show that out. Disney is so dominant that nothing a "competitor" will ever do will have any kind of possibility to carve out a big enough chunk to threaten Anaheim. The numbers have always played this out: the more "competition" - the more money and attendance ends up at lake buena vista. Symbiotic relationship...win/win (even when they are "losing")

Iger and the financials have said why the discounts will end. And it makes perfect sense.
The heavy discounting brought alot more clientele who were "budget oriented" or attempting to squeeze in visits they hadn't thought possible.
Great for them, bad for disney. Because they didn't buy enough stuff. That is where the profit is made (a shockingly high percentage) - at the gift shop.
So the choice has been made...go back to catering to the more "privileged" clientele...decrease the attendance a little...and know what exactly you're getting when somebody books a trip.
So it was nice while it lasted...now they want full price...which is the history of WDW. Full price is standard (people think that that isn't/wasn't possible...but it is/was)

so there you go

 

[Donut23]

I absolutely agree.

Outsourcing in Disney's Song of Joy the last few years....just ask "castmembers" who were outsourced in the last year or two. disney now pays less and is no longer responsible for any benefits Disney=winner.....employees=not so much. I guess this explains why some people are finding less pixie dust from some castmembers.

Sadly the outsourcing of the Yeti and probably the Fantasmic Dragon at DL are very good examples of the decline in quality disney is producing compared to quality in the past.

Ok, it sounds like World of Color is an exception - thank goodness!

But hey....we must all stand up and CHEER that Disney is a For Profit Corporation.....even if it IS at the expense of their staff and guests.

 

[skiingfast]

as far as their "reinvestment"...this has and will most likely continue to be a joke. All capital expenses are simply to either build more units that generate profit beyond general attendance (vacation club...and merchandise lands like the new fantasyland) or a way of outsourcing more chunks of the property/ operation (the four seasons, the westgate project, the conversion of pleasure island to complete outsourced retail)

disney is stock price driven...and you will never be able to separtate that from the "amusement" side of it again. Things are done to generate revenue (not attendance...REVENUE...and that doesn't come from ticket sales), and therefore the reason for expansion/ addition will never be "because it's cool"

not so in the past...but those days are decades in the rearviewmirror. So don't count on anything.

Disney is expanding or reinvesting currently at a high rate. It just not all going into WDW. Iger or Staggs noted that they don't forsee future spending at any high rate once current projects are done.

Disney though has done plenty to our benefits as a stock price driven coporation. This is why there are resorts and parks in WDW. I think Disny (DIS) was listed on the NYSE in the late fifties. At least post buiding DL, and much of the money was to buy DL from it's original owners.

What should be kept in mind about how Disney invests is that it is not a park company. It is first and foremost a film company.

 

[anthony2k7]

I don't know about disneyland....but the yeti at AK was built by an outsourced company...which went bankrupt quickly after.

They will continue to try...and have big blunders like this...to outsource everything.

But somethings can't be.


as far as their "reinvestment"...this has and will most likely continue to be a joke. All capital expenses are simply to either build more units that generate profit beyond general attendance (vacation club...and merchandise lands like the new fantasyland) or a way of outsourcing more chunks of the property/ operation (the four seasons, the westgate project, the conversion of pleasure island to complete outsourced retail)

disney is stock price driven...and you will never be able to separtate that from the "amusement" side of it again. Things are done to generate revenue (not attendance...REVENUE...and that doesn't come from ticket sales), and therefore the reason for expansion/ addition will never be "because it's cool"

not so in the past...but those days are decades in the rearviewmirror. So don't count on anything.

harry potter is not, nor ever will be, a legitimate threat to WDW. the numbers show that out. Disney is so dominant that nothing a "competitor" will ever do will have any kind of possibility to carve out a big enough chunk to threaten Anaheim. The numbers have always played this out: the more "competition" - the more money and attendance ends up at lake buena vista. Symbiotic relationship...win/win (even when they are "losing")

Iger and the financials have said why the discounts will end. And it makes perfect sense.
The heavy discounting brought alot more clientele who were "budget oriented" or attempting to squeeze in visits they hadn't thought possible.
Great for them, bad for disney. Because they didn't buy enough stuff. That is where the profit is made (a shockingly high percentage) - at the gift shop.
So the choice has been made...go back to catering to the more "privileged" clientele...decrease the attendance a little...and know what exactly you're getting when somebody books a trip.
So it was nice while it lasted...now they want full price...which is the history of WDW. Full price is standard (people think that that isn't/wasn't possible...but it is/was)

so there you go

whilst I agree for the most part with what you said, it seems the merchandise side of WDW hasnt been told this is the plan because what they're doing just isnt going to work with guests who do have the money to spend in the gift shops when there is no choice in the shops.

The merchandise teams are still on their drive to standardise everything (removal of resort specific items for example) and its not even quality items they're putting out in all the shops - its pretty cheap stuff compared to the quality Disney used to sell.

So, if there is the same cheap shirt in every single shop on property people with money might say "Im not buying that it looks so cheap!" where as if they'd go back to unique quality items they might have guests that would buy 2 or 3 different shirts.

 

[crocko]

Disney is expanding or reinvesting currently at a high rate. It just not all going into WDW. Iger or Staggs noted that they don't forsee future spending at any high rate once current projects are done.

Disney though has done plenty to our benefits as a stock price driven coporation. This is why there are resorts and parks in WDW. I think Disny (DIS) was listed on the NYSE in the late fifties. At least post buiding DL, and much of the money was to buy DL from it's original owners.

What should be kept in mind about how Disney invests is that it is not a park company. It is first and foremost a film company.

Actually.....according to the annual report, Disney is foremost a TV company.
$16.2 billion in Media Networks revenues (only area to increase in revenues in 2009). $4.8 billion in Media Networks operating income.

Parks & Resorts is 2nd -- $10.7 billion revenues, $1.4 billion income
Studio (movies) is 3rd -- $6.1 billion revenues, $0.2 billion income
Consumer Products -- $2.4 billion revenues, $0.6 billion income


I would say that in most people's minds, Disney is a parks/resort place and they rely on new movies (generally) for the creation of new characters/franchises to fuel the parks and the products.
BUT....TV is what is currently making Disney its big bucks....and I would point to ESPN as probably being a cash cow for the company. The affiliate fees that ESPN can demand is impressive. Despite a few other sports networks that have popped up and do okay, ESPN seems to get bigger & better and pretty much holds a monopoly on sports entertainment/news.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Disney is expanding or reinvesting currently at a high rate. It just not all going into WDW. Iger or Staggs noted that they don't forsee future spending at any high rate once current projects are done.

Disney though has done plenty to our benefits as a stock price driven coporation. This is why there are resorts and parks in WDW. I think Disny (DIS) was listed on the NYSE in the late fifties. At least post buiding DL, and much of the money was to buy DL from it's original owners.

What should be kept in mind about how Disney invests is that it is not a park company. It is first and foremost a film company.

i agree with your premise...especially the last sentence.

Disney is a media company...which means the parks are somewhat of a nuisance - and let's face it: they still exist because they provide huge amounts of operating capital for other endeavours.

Which doesn't paint a good picture for park enthusiasts moving forward now, does it?

Where we differ is "reinvestment"
As far as "reinvestments"...they aren't really reinvesting save for perhaps the fantasyland expansion (and that is gift shop driven for sure). Timeshares pump more patrons into the gift shops...errr...."parks". third party development makes them glorified landlords and profit sharers. Parks in China are (to my best estimate) not about turnstiles but rather about getting sweet longterm manufacturing/ trade deals - the parks are PR for the chinese government (again..my opinion...but it makes alot of sense). And "fixing" bad parks built from 1989 - 2005 really can't get you alot of credit. simply making horrible construction "acceptible" shouldn't really get you a prize.

Resorts were built first to keep patrons more days...then shopping areas were added around the resorts to draw discretionary money from the consumers. These are pretty well documented facts at this point.

 

[ConcKahuna]

Al Weiss always was a fan of outsourcing. He was starting that trend long before Eisner left.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

whilst I agree for the most part with what you said, it seems the merchandise side of WDW hasnt been told this is the plan because what they're doing just isnt going to work with guests who do have the money to spend in the gift shops when there is no choice in the shops.

The merchandise teams are still on their drive to standardise everything (removal of resort specific items for example) and its not even quality items they're putting out in all the shops - its pretty cheap stuff compared to the quality Disney used to sell.

So, if there is the same cheap shirt in every single shop on property people with money might say "Im not buying that it looks so cheap!" where as if they'd go back to unique quality items they might have guests that would buy 2 or 3 different shirts.

yeah...i'm with you

unfortunately, our position is that of wishful-thinking disney park nuts

the sheer profit of the bulk operation (the wal-mart model) in retail is way more to offset the "losses" due to lack of product diversity.

and as others have pointed out: most travelers aren't like us: they're there once or twice during their children's entire childhood. that means it doesn't matter if they sell boardwalk t-shirts or wilderness lodge robes (my alltime favorite item)

there was an estimate that a $24 mickey plush cost disney less than 1-2 dollars to manufacturer, package, and ship in bulk from the far east (this was around 2000 or so that i saw the theory)....that makes the rough return (after labor and other operational costs were added) to be somewhere in the 600% range...there is no way to fight that - none.

So this "trend" isn't an experiement...it's a proven cash cow formula.

now, the suggestion that "specialized" merchandise should cost more is a great one. I sure as heck would buy it...they could even do it through their online website to cut out operational costs and just have it shipped to me. I'm all for it.

But as it stands i buy less and less when we go (2-3 times a year on average)

The only way this will change is if people stop buying...so there goes that plan.

maybe if say...the dvc rooms...would stop room charging...a flag would go up and they might think a little about it. that could happen.

or if they continue to expand their info gathering net around their customers (their almost sole consistent program for 20+ years) and they see what types of things are bought by which types of customers...then a secondary market of merchandise could be implemented. that could happen.

but no...as of now...we won't see a return the to glory days of the 80's & early 90's when you didn't mind being bombarded by shops because everything was different and THAT was part of the "magic"

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Al Weiss always was a fan of outsourcing. He was starting that trend long before Eisner left.

Al Weiss was a "face". Somebody who was put their under the auspices of being a florida "friendly" native.

he was/ is an ineffective manager who "presided" over several misteps in the property's development and who was an active participant in decimating the workforce and with it - the quality standards in favor of cost accounting.

He, Paul Pressler, and Lee Cockerell are the first 3 pictures on the "rogue's gallery" at the WDW wall of shame

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Actually.....according to the annual report, Disney is foremost a TV company.
$16.2 billion in Media Networks revenues (only area to increase in revenues in 2009). $4.8 billion in Media Networks operating income.

Parks & Resorts is 2nd -- $10.7 billion revenues, $1.4 billion income
Studio (movies) is 3rd -- $6.1 billion revenues, $0.2 billion income
Consumer Products -- $2.4 billion revenues, $0.6 billion income


I would say that in most people's minds, Disney is a parks/resort place and they rely on new movies (generally) for the creation of new characters/franchises to fuel the parks and the products.
BUT....TV is what is currently making Disney its big bucks....and I would point to ESPN as probably being a cash cow for the company. The affiliate fees that ESPN can demand is impressive. Despite a few other sports networks that have popped up and do okay, ESPN seems to get bigger & better and pretty much holds a monopoly on sports entertainment/news.

what you say it completely correct...


...unfortunately, that is bad for the future of the amusement side. disney continues to move further and further into digital and "virtual" products while the attention and value of the tangible properties are pushed to the backpage by the suits (as it should be...i can't really say that isn't how it should be)

The problem is that having employees, benefits, utilities, and mechanics to keep the "fantasylands" open is not as important as it once was.

disneyland was unique and highly profitable when it was created...as was WDW.

now the real money is moving elsewhere...and left behind is the "drive" to build new and better things in the parks...because there isn't as much money to be made in it.

this we know: if they hadn't laden the parks/ resorts with gift shops decades ago...Disney would not bother with the headache of operating the parks. they would have been leased/ sold to outside operators for percentages and licensing fees awhile ago.

but the gift shop business is still very profitable. help us all if it ceases to be so in the future

 

[skiingfast]

Where we differ is "reinvestment"
As far as "reinvestments"...they aren't really reinvesting save for perhaps the fantasyland expansion (and that is gift shop driven for sure). Timeshares pump more patrons into the gift shops...errr...."parks". third party development makes them glorified landlords and profit sharers. Parks in China are (to my best estimate) not about turnstiles but rather about getting sweet longterm manufacturing/ trade deals - the parks are PR for the chinese government (again..my opinion...but it makes alot of sense). And "fixing" bad parks built from 1989 - 2005 really can't get you alot of credit. simply making horrible construction "acceptible" shouldn't really get you a prize.

Resorts were built first to keep patrons more days...then shopping areas were added around the resorts to draw discretionary money from the consumers. These are pretty well documented facts at this point.

Disney investing in it's parks division is currently huge. It's not just Fantasyland that's a small piece of the puzzle. DCA is getting a big chunk and attendance is rising there.

I'll admit DCA was a plan B for doing something when Westcot didn't materialize. Team Disney Anahiem spent a lot building it but it included a hotel, a refurb of a hotel and DTD. Still DCA the gate is becoming a real park real quick. It may double its gate entries when all is said and done.

But Disney is expanding on and building another gate in Hong Kong plus another hotel. It's expanding Paris and it's building two new cruise ships.

Investment in China is so far small. Honestly they may end up with another TDL in Shanghai. A Disney park they don't own. But many people aren't aware that China already has two miserable Disneyland like parks based around a Castle like the other Disneylands. I'm sure the audience is there, but who knows if they care about quality.

 

[crocko]

Disney investing in it's parks division is currently huge. It's not just Fantasyland that's a small piece of the puzzle. DCA is getting a big chunk and attendance is rising there.

I'll admit DCA was a plan B for doing something when Westcot didn't materialize. Team Disney Anahiem spent a lot building it but it included a hotel, a refurb of a hotel and DTD. Still DCA the gate is becoming a real park real quick. It may double its gate entries when all is said and done.

But Disney is expanding on and building another gate in Hong Kong plus another hotel. It's expanding Paris and it's building two new cruise ships.

Investment in China is so far small. Honestly they may end up with another TDL in Shanghai. A Disney park they don't own. But many people aren't aware that China already has two miserable Disneyland like parks based around a Castle like the other Disneylands. I'm sure the audience is there, but who knows if they care about quality.

Very true. As an overall company, the big chunk of Disney's investing capital cash outflows goes to Parks & Resorts -- for 2009, the big cash outages were DCA and the 2 new cruise ships.

Disney brings in about $5 billion in cash each year, of which $1.5+ goes to Parks & Resorts capital spending. Another $2+ billion typically goes to pay off debt or buy back stock.

 

[ConcKahuna]

He, Paul Pressler, and Lee Cockerell are the first 3 pictures on the "rogue's gallery" at the WDW wall of shame

For the time I was a cast member and Lee was working at WDW, he was great with the cast. I can't say much about his business decisions, but he was one of the only execs that made it a point to wander the parks and resorts and find out what was important to the CMs.

On the few occasions where i had dealings with Al (including a "company sponsored" Christmas party at his house for local politicians where i worked valet), he was condescending to the cast members and didn't seem to care at all about their working conditions or happiness.