Chip, I'm always the minority...but my answer is "Yes" they still have enough weight/wait and market share to basically ignore universal if they choose. Not forever, perhaps...but right now yep. There is no evidence that they've ever "responded" or built park infrastructure due to a competitor. The best argument that it might have happened is the studios... Disney was financially down and under new management. They had to move fast so they took and EPCOT concept and blew it up to get a new gate/ draw with universal on the drawing board. I could see it. Of course wells and Eisner were Hollywood guys...so the park wasn't really too much of a hard sell for them. But not the others...the expansions at WDW was a consolidated plan to build a longterm single stay/patronage location. It is all calculated and worked. Parks, hotels, timeshares, retail and cruise lines. Simple. The other example of "response" that I can think of? Magical express. They pay Mears what amounts to a drop in the can and in one swoop flicked their chin at Uni and Seaworld and had a vast majority of their customers bypass them willingly for two cheap bus rides. Flicked away like gnats. Perhaps deep down part of the reason that universals operators have paid for lots of construction and licensing and their numbers lagged was due to that? Wouldn't be surprised at all. We'll agree to disagree. It's ok...nothing wrong with that. I do think the one competitor build that has always gotten under Disney's skin and still does? Discovery Cove...something they have no answer for and yields a huge expenditure per person ratio. Things might be changing...but you can't trust that Disney feels threatened, can you? Are people not going to Disney in favor of universal in large numbers? The data will say no. Are the losses of days annoying to Disney? Yes you would think - but not eroding the profits. Are they paying attention? Absolutely. Do they feel the need to counter? No. At least not for that reason...they feel the need to explore new revenue streams and increase profits. But they have always done that since "walts guys" lost control. I just see Disney/universal as a developing false equivalency... And there are many: coke/Pepsi....ups/FedEx...walmart/target. The reality is that the latters in those couples can't touch the formers...they are 75-25% statistical comparisons...one rides the coat tails of the other with the illusion of equivalency. And so with universal...who benefits Disney when they expand...as the statistics always show.(overall gate ticks are 47 million to 14...or 77% to 23%...see above) They built uni studios and then stagnated....then built IOA and stagnated...now doing big expansions...will they stagnant? It's a possibility...especially as Harry potter fades...and it is. Just My take on it.