Am I reading this correctly? HK Disneyland to open with 12 attractions

[YoHo]

Agreed MAtt, Excellent.

And don't forget, DL was DLR was forced to hold off on AP price increases trying to encourage people to buy them and use DCA. A policy that this year they retracted and bumped prices up, because it just wasn't working. Also, those numbers don't account for length of time in the park. Anyone that bothers to watch will note that most people hope from Dl over to DCA for a short time in order to catch the MSEP and maybe soarin and then jump back to DL. Those are counted as entries even though they hardly represent a truely robust theme park.





Oh and Greg, PM me here and maybe we can get together in Anaheim in May.

 

[Plus4206]

"that most people hope from Dl over to DCA for a short time in order to catch the MSEP and maybe soarin and then jump back to DL. Those are counted as entries even though they hardly represent a truely robust theme park."

I thought Disney only counted the first turnstill in its park tallies. Any hops during the day are ignored for annual count purpose.

 

[All Aboard]

Plus, I think you are correct. I've always used that argument when discussing AK attendance. It has the advantage of getting turnstile clicks from the many who arrive at 9am, ride the safari, ride dinosaur, see the first show of Lion King and hop, not spending a nickel on food or souvies.

And, since DCA opens an hour or two later than DL most days, I bet it is less frequently the "first-click"

Maybe Disney uses different rules out west.

 

[SoCalKDG]

The increase in revenues at DLR include DCA, price increases at DL, increases in per capita spending, revenue from the new hotels and Downtown Disney. It can't all be attributed just to DCA. So your $80 per person number is meaningless. I don't know how you get $720 for TDS.

9 mil people * $80 per person. Your right, that $80 per person could be $70-$90. Since I applied the same number to both parks(each have numerous variables) and I don't have access to an exact number, its what I worked with.

As for the investment numbers, again these are numbers thrown around the internet. Interest rates paid to secure that money and many other factors would effect the numbers. I've heard 3 billion for Tokyo and 1.8b for Disneyland.

For this discussion I included investment of Tokyo being twice that of DCA.

Ah, this is the really interesting question, and there's no way to answer it. However, I believe the numbers would be way up if TDS or its equivalent were in place in California. Firstly, how much more would it have cost to build an equivalent park and how much more revenue would it generate? Well, TDL and TDS attendance is fairly close. If DLR were bringing in another 5 million paying guests per year (and remember, you're assuming that those 5.6m for DCA aren't getting in on freebies, coupons, or APs) would that help Disney's bottom line? All those people spending more money, higher occupancy rates... I'm thinking it would have been well worth the expense, and may in the long run end up costing them that much. They've had to develop new shows, build Bug's Land, perhaps spend more on marketing...

Since people like to point out AP holders are a huge part of DLR attendance(approx. 600-650K AP holders) this would affect TDS as well. With DCA and GC added, the hotels run at a very high occupancy rate. TDS couldn't really improve this number. Thus we would be left with the need for 10 Mil visitors to go to DSea, with almost all of that 5 mil increase over DCA coming from the local population.

 

[raidermatt]

If you want to look at this from purely an income statement persepective, then you have to also realize that if "TDS Anaheim" increased the demand for the Disney hotels, rates would have gone up at said hotels, as well as rents at DTD. Increasing capacity would also come into play.

That, coupled with the greater number of admissions, as well as the higher average ticket price (due to less discounting), would have significantly changed the income side of the equation.

Then there's the issue of future revenues, even if DCA is beefed up, since guests now EXPECT ticket discounts.

Never mind that the value gained from the public's perception that Disney didn't open "less than complete" parks wouldn't even show up in the short term. But it would impact the next opening, wherever that might be.

And then there's the whole issue of the third gate not being shelved...

 

[SoCalKDG]

And on attendance...

And if you want to look at how the strategy worked with WDW... 1997 (the last year with no AK) attendance was 39.2 million. 2004 was 40.6. A whopping increase of 1.4 million total guests.

Then again 9/11 happened. If you look at 2000, attendance was up to 43.2 million. 2002 saw attendance drop to 37.5 Mil. Now its back to 40.6 and climbing once again. Without that drop of 5.7 Mil, we might see WDW around 46 Mil(based on modest growth of 2% per year from 2000).

That's not to say AK is not a worthwhile park, but the overall strategy is not working. People used to believe that when a Disney park opened, they would get a certain value. MGM began to change all of that. Now, new Disney parks are viewed with skepticism by the public. That's why DCA bombed from the beginning. The public now understands Disney's new "strategy" and they no longer give the benefit of the doubt.

I didn't get to see AK when it first opened. Just as I didn't see DL open. I spent about 5 hours at AK last Sept, and found it well worth the money, and easily the nicest themed park at WDW. That 5 hours still left me missing the Tarzan show, both exhibit trails, the parade, bird show, etc. Throw in the addition of EE and AK is right up there with Epcot and MK.

Funny how close to 5 million people for DCA is a bomb when it out draws Sea World and Universal, both of which have the most creative ticket pricing(buy 1 day, come free the whole year) in the world. Whats worse than a bomb so I can lable every other park in So. Cal. based on your criteria?

 

[SoCalKDG]

I, for one, would have long ago had my tail on a flight from MIA to LAX to experience it. In May, I'll see DCA for the first time. I'm planning to spend 1/2 day out of three there. Other than Screamin', I've already experienced all their headliners up the street from me.

I go to the DLR 20 times a year, and once a year to WDW(less than two weeks for my next trip). I don't skip any of the attractions at WDW, even the very weak POTC at the MK.

 

[SoCalKDG]

If you want to look at this from purely an income statement persepective, then you have to also realize that if "TDS Anaheim" increased the demand for the Disney hotels, rates would have gone up at said hotels, as well as rents at DTD. Increasing capacity would also come into play.

That, coupled with the greater number of admissions, as well as the higher average ticket price (due to less discounting), would have significantly changed the income side of the equation.

Then there's the issue of future revenues, even if DCA is beefed up, since guests now EXPECT ticket discounts.

Never mind that the value gained from the public's perception that Disney didn't open "less than complete" parks wouldn't even show up in the short term. But it would impact the next opening, wherever that might be.

And then there's the whole issue of the third gate not being shelved...

TDS Anaheim would have needed to bring in double the revenue. Yes it would have brought in more than DCA, but not double.

Since AP pricing has increased, DTD is expanding, room prices have went up, and GC looks to add additional rooms, discounts have been lessened, everything you mentioned is occuring without twice the initial investment.

Oh, news reporters and internet posts don't make up public perception. Money spent at resorts is the best indicater of the publics perception.

 

[raidermatt]

Its not my criteria.

Its Disney's.

THEY cut projections. THEY slashed ticket prices. THEY shelved the third gate. THEY ditched the theme.


Every other park in Southern California doesn't have Disneyland sitting right next to it, or its own self contained resort with three hotels, shopping, dining, and the world's largest parking structure.

Put DCA on its own over in Buena Park or in Hollywood, and it wouldn't even sniff 5 million.

Even so, now you're using other theme/amusement parks as the standard for Disney, which is a huge mistake.

Again, its not that DCA is nothing. Its that Disney has suffered a tremendous opportunity cost by not sticking to the strategy that set it apart from all competition. And worst of all, its not that they lacked the ability or resources to make it happen, they simply chose not to.

Without that drop of 5.7 Mil, we might see WDW around 46 Mil(based on modest growth of 2% per year from 2000).

You can't just say "without that drop". It did drop, and it was going to drop anyway due to the recession. Beyond that, even in 2000, 2 years after AK opened, with the benefit of being near the peak of an upward economic cycle and prior to 9/11, attendance was only up 4 million.

That's not what Disney expected or was shooting for, hence the cancellation of an entire land in AK, and radically reduced operating hours, even in that peak year of 2000.

I didn't get to see AK when it first opened. Just as I didn't see DL open. I spent about 5 hours at AK last Sept, and found it well worth the money, and easily the nicest themed park at WDW. That 5 hours still left me missing the Tarzan show, both exhibit trails, the parade, bird show, etc. Throw in the addition of EE and AK is right up there with Epcot and MK.

That's all well and good for you. Doesn't quite prove anything in the big picture, though, does it?

Incidentally, on a personal level, I like AK as well. Doesn't change the response it received from the public overall, or the fact that they simply chose not to make a full effort.

 

[raidermatt]

Oh, news reporters and internet posts don't make up public perception. Money spent at resorts is the best indicater of the publics perception.

Where did I site sources such as news reporters and internet posts?

And yes, money spent is a pretty good indicator and it was far less than Disney projected.

Since AP pricing has increased, DTD is expanding, room prices have went up, and GC looks to add additional rooms, discounts have been lessened, everything you mentioned is occuring without twice the initial investment.

Its occuring later and to a lesser degree.


A continuing irony is that if Disney had always followed the strategy you and some others support, we wouldn't even be discussing them in this manner today. If they had the same strategy as most everybody else from the beginning, they'd just be another entertainment company today.

They chose to take advantage of, instead of build on, the reputation they had built up over the years.

We can only hope that to at least some degree, that will change now with the change at the top.

 

[jazstar87]

I heard once somewhere, that tokyo disney dosen't have ride too extreme because when they go to the park they dress up nice to go to the parks. Maybe disney just seeing how the chinese go to a theme park and seeing the list of not too extreme like tokyo disney. Maybe there just testing of what they like and which way they should expand. Just look at other disney parks and which way they expand. Epcot is a good example , people didn't like it being an "educational" park so they expand with thrill rides and other things. I think it a good move so they don't have to many, soft rides you can call it yet and they have space mountian.

 

[YoHo]

I can't believe there is someone justifying the numbers on DCA here. (to be a smartA**, I guess I'm not surprised it's happening "here")

Disney themselves have indicated the place tanked. DisneyWar mentions the poor performance. DCA is a total waste of a perfectly good parkinglot.

 

[SoCalKDG]

Even so, now you're using other theme/amusement parks as the standard for Disney, which is a huge mistake.

The other amusement parks set a bar, Disney excedes that bar. Of course they use other parks. Of course the look at their competition. This has always been the case.

Again, its not that DCA is nothing. Its that Disney has suffered a tremendous opportunity cost by not sticking to the strategy that set it apart from all competition. And worst of all, its not that they lacked the ability or resources to make it happen, they simply chose not to.

The strategy has always been start small(yes, even DL), add additional things later. I believe when they didn't do this(DLP) they had problems.

You can't just say "without that drop". It did drop, and it was going to drop anyway due to the recession. Beyond that, even in 2000, 2 years after AK opened, with the benefit of being near the peak of an upward economic cycle and prior to 9/11, attendance was only up 4 million.

So besides a recession we had 9/11 and AK and DCA did the business they did, even more impressive. Thanks for the supporting info.

That's all well and good for you. Doesn't quite prove anything in the big picture, though, does it?

Incidentally, on a personal level, I like AK as well. Doesn't change the response it received from the public overall, or the fact that they simply chose not to make a full effort.

You liked to mention public perception, thats what I gave you. My perception. I'm part of the public in case you wondered. Your public too and you like the park.

 

[SoCalKDG]

Where did I site sources such as news reporters and internet posts?

And yes, money spent is a pretty good indicator and it was far less than Disney projected.

Its occuring later and to a lesser degree.

Actually you don't list any sources. You keep saying "people say" or the "public said". I just figured that you didn't talk to 100,000 people to come up with your views. Looking at the mighty dollar, taking into account 9/11 and the recession you mentioned, neither DCA or AK were bombs, as you put it.

A continuing irony is that if Disney had always followed the strategy you and some others support, we wouldn't even be discussing them in this manner today. If they had the same strategy as most everybody else from the beginning, they'd just be another entertainment company today.

They chose to take advantage of, instead of build on, the reputation they had built up over the years.

We can only hope that to at least some degree, that will change now with the change at the top.

I don't see the dramatic strategy change that you keep talking about. It seems to me they open a park, then add on here and there. Did DL open with 50 rides and attractions? To think I thought they opened with a small amount of rides and attractions, added on, removed some things, etc. What am I missing?

 

[SoCalKDG]

Disney themselves have indicated the place tanked. DisneyWar mentions the poor performance. DCA is a total waste of a perfectly good parkinglot.

I'd be interested in seeing the quote where Disney said DCA tanked? I've seen some quotes where they stated that they didn't meet expected attendance, but then again I see that every year with Fortune 500 companies not meeting expectations. Its the nature of business.

So you get more enjoyment from a parking lot than DCA, don't know what to say about that one.

 

[wtg2000]

I heard once somewhere, that tokyo disney dosen't have ride too extreme because when they go to the park they dress up nice to go to the parks.

Tokyo has pretty much the same thrill rides as U.S. parks, including Space, Splash, BTMR, Indy Jones. They also have Journey/Center Earth, Stormrider (where you get wet) and are getting TZTOT and Raging Spirits coaster. It's true that some men wear suits - maybe they just don't raise their arms on the coasters!

 

[crusader]

And we want to DEFEND this strategy as being the best for the Walt Disney Co?

The best for disney isn't TDS either. You can't convince me that they don't commingle the consolidated numbers in Japan; and nowhere have I been able to ascertain whether they double count a guest in their numbers. You can't even back into it by simple division because they carefully group their segments together for financial reporting.

How come, in all the arguments about the discounting and the guest looking for free admission and the failures in DCA and AK etc.......etc...........etc..... everyone failed to mention what TDL and TDS reported last year? Not only a drop in attendance - blamed on the typhoon season and the prior year anniversary campaign - but a drop in hotel occupancy and overall park revenues for which they had to launch an aggressive solicitation campaign to avert an even larger hit than they experienced.

Read for yourselves.http://www.olc.co.jp/en/ir/ir.html click on the financial link within this page to view their report.

 

[wtg2000]

The best for disney isn't TDS either. You can't convince me that they don't commingle the consolidated numbers in Japan; and nowhere have I been able to ascertain whether they double count a guest in their numbers. You can't even back into it by simple division because they carefully group their segments together for financial reporting.

I had a four-day pass, visiting TDS on days one and two and parking hopping on days three and four. I assume I was counted as four admission units, not six because I visited two parks on one day. But I don't know how they count their numbers. If you wish to believe that TDS is a failure as others are trying to convince themselves, fine - who cares really unless you have stock in the company. I'm not sure what "commingle" means, but I haven't seen anybody who knows for sure how admissions are counted in Tokyo or the U.S. parks.

How come, in all the arguments about the discounting and the guest looking for free admission and the failures in DCA and AK etc.......etc...........etc..... everyone failed to mention what TDL and TDS reported last year? Not only a drop in attendance - blamed on the typhoon season and the prior year anniversary campaign - but a drop in hotel occupancy and overall park revenues for which they had to launch an aggressive solicitation campaign to avert an even larger hit than they experienced.

I guess because it's not really relevant. It's typical for parks to take a hit the year after a big anniversary. It's happened in Florida. You could easily point to the "increase" at Tokyo from 2002 to 2003 rather than the drop from 2003 to 2004. We've been talking about general and long-term patterns and Tokyo appears to be doing very well. Also, it's smart to launch an aggressive marketing plan the following year so people don't forget about you. That's what OLC did. Despite the success of TDS, they are building TZTOT and Raging Spirits because they realize, like Cedar Point does, that you have to keep moving forward to keep guests happy. I haven't been aware of campaigns by OLC to give away free tickets, or coupons to boost attendance. My understanding was that (for a while anyway) they didn't have APs or allow TDL APs holders into TDS because the park was crowded enough. Perhaps this has changed. Does anyone know?

 

[YoHo]

From SaveDisney.com

With a strategy put together by the schemers to transform single-park sites into multi-day destination resorts (and a price tag of well over $1 Billion) Disney's California Adventure was destined to failure before ground was broken.

Frightened by the economics of EuroDisney and misinterpreting the reasons for its failure, the "numbers guys" assigned an investment cap to DCA's construction. Rather than innovating and designing the Park from the bottom-up based upon what the consumer would expect for the price of admission, DCA was designed from the top-down based on what the spreadsheets said was required to hit a return figure that has never materialized.

The continued suppression of innovation - fixing the off-the-shelf rides - is likely as the schemers desperately try to avoid any financial write-offs at this time. DCA has failed and will never come close to generating the financial return the planners forecast.

Why? Consumers are not willing to pay the same admission price for a smaller and subjectively less-special park. The excessive discounting in the last twelve months clearly supports that the consumer knows what DCA is worth. If only the schemers had listened in the first place.

Not the "proof" I was looking for, but since Roy and Stanely were in the boardroom and YOU were not, I'm going to assume they may know a bit more about this then any of you do.


Also, I'll reiterate, Move Soarin over to Disneyland and bring back the parkinglot, because Soarin is the only worthwhile thing in that offense to a Walt Disney Themepark.

 

[Plus4206]

Hey, if you're putting a parking lot back in, send Grizzly Rapids over to AK to replaced the pitifull Kali Trickle.