I have some thoughts that relate to your questions and decided you are the (un?)lucky post to receive them : )
The comments from Chapek about APs were in response to a question on how many spots were made available in the park reservation system for each type of ticket. He was saying they made more spots available for daily tickets than for annual passes. The logic behind this being that people with daily tickets tend to spend more time in the park per day and spend more money per visit than people with APs. This, expectedly, upset AP holders since we tend to be much more dedicated customers in the long term than someone who might visit the parks much less often. While this measure around per day spend may be true, the bigger picture is being ignored, which in the longer term has much more influence on Disney’s bottom line past the current financial quarter. The comments jive with the narrative about Chapek put forth by his critics that he is short sighted and favors strategies that boost revenue in the near term at the expense of long-term financial sustainability and growth. Yes, AP visits on net, might produce marginally less revenue on a per day basis, but it is also likely that the customers holding those APs consume much more Disney product than daily ticket users. Taking actions (like limiting reservations) for AP holders which make them feel unappreciated is likely to undermine their devotion to the brand. This has the potential to hurt future revenue much more than the loss incurred by admitting more APs and less daily tickets. For instance, those AP holders not able to get the park reservation they want could lead to a higher chance that they don’t renew their pass. Or, it could make out of state visitors more likely to take future vacations outside of Disney. This is not to mention the intangible value AP holders bring to the company, such as being evangelists of the brand who essentially market to their friends, family, and co-workers. There is a famous story told by Randy Pausch in The Last Lecture called the “$100,000 Salt and Pepper Shaker”, where he describes something that happened to him during a trip to DW when he was a teenager. Basically, the story goes that he bought a ceramic salt and pepper shaker from one of the shops as a gift for his parents to thank them for the trip. Upon walking out of the store he dropped it and it shattered. A guest witnessed this and urged him to tell the cast member in the store what happened. He reluctantly agreed and to his astonishment, they replaced it for free. His family was so impressed with the customer service that he says they went on to incorporate trips to DW into their charity work, bringing many other families there and estimates that Disney mostly likely gained over $100,000 in revenue as a result of that one act of kindness. His family became instant customers for life and most likely convinced many others they knew to become customers as well. Later in life, Randy works for Disney and recounts that story for executives and asks if their current policies would have allowed for a cast member to do such a thing, for which the answer was ‘probably not’. Chapek’s comments (and other prior actions attributed to him like limiting cast member hours at the expense of the guest experience) fly in the face of what a lot of Disney fans enjoy most about the company. After all, the entire brand is about “magic”. It’s about the ability to make guests feel special in little ways that separate the Disney universe from the experience of everyday life. Without that, Disney is just another theme park and movie studio. The job of a CEO is about providing the big vision around what the company is, where it is going, and how it’s going to get there. Chapek’s history of cutting corners and not being able to ‘see the forest through the trees’ worries Disney fans, and comments like this reinforce that concern.
As for your other questions, they already allow renewal of existing APs. I suspect they will continue to suspend issuing new APs for the foreseeable future. This is one reason why people may not want to cancel. In order to reinstate normal operations and thus the full value of APs, the park reservation system would need to be retired. They really cannot do that until community spread of the virus has completely stopped. This will most likely require some time after an effective vaccine is available. I personally see that being no earlier than spring/summer of 2021, but possibly even later. I think it is very likely APs will come back after this situation is over as it is still a viable revenue source for all the reasons discussed earlier.
