Are any Disney guests average income people?

[CampbellzSoup]

There are plenty of "average" income people visiting Disney. They make it work somehow.

hi!

 

[Kennywood]

Disney is able to continually inflate the proverbial price balloon because they can. They honestly don't care who's spending the money, as long as the income allows for them to raise prices and cut quality. Lower income / middle income families are falling by the wayside when it comes to Disney, but they're being replaced by those with higher incomes. As long as that happens, nothing will change.

The problem with balloons is that they eventually either deflate or explode. When that happens, Disney will want to attract those lower income / middle income families again. But those families won't be able to provide the necessary income Disney will need to sustain the empire they're building. It's not going to be pretty when that eventually happens.

 

[TikiTikiFan]

I have a strong feeling that it's not a question of whether Disney has grown too expensive for the "average" family, but more has it become too expensive for "my" family, and has been stated above much of that depends on how YOU like to do Disney and how OFTEN you like to do Disney.

Agreed. We can pick a budget hotel at Disneyland and for two people for a week with 5-day PH tickets is only about $1800 because of that cheaper lodging. Now staying on-site? Triple that. I'd rather stay at budget hotels and go more often than pay for Disney hotel prices. Disneyland is also much more affordable than Walt Disney World. WDW is definitely a trip we can't do as often as Disneyland.

Growing up my parents would drive us to CA from CO and we stayed at this old motel called 'Little Boy Blue' which actually is still there but is the definition of budget. My mom would pack a cooler with sandwiches, we never ate at the table service restaurants. We went to those discount stores on Katella to get the cheap knock off Disney merchandise. And as a kid... I remember our trips being 10/10 amazing. I didn't even remember the budgeting aspects of it until I got older and my mom told me. So while it was cheaper then (90s) then it is now... it was still an significant expense. But we never resented those that could afford the nicer hotels or restaurants... we were just so happy to be there because we loved Disney.

I'm a single mom and a teacher so I'm not exactly wealthy now. Disney is important to me so I prioritize my trips over other luxury expenses. I save, I do side hustles like selling on eBay, have a garage sale, use any discounts I can find, etc. I don't have fancy credit cards with points/miles/etc. so I pay cash for everything. In some ways, those with less money pay more for travel because we can't take advantage of many of the perks offered to those with higher incomes/better credit. I can't afford to pay back a balance on a high limit card so I don't use them. But there are plenty of people that use credit to make these trips happen too.

I guess my point is there's plenty of average income folks visiting Disney, it can be done with some dedicated budgeting. Many of the perks being lamented are for those staying on-site... if you always stayed off-site, it really doesn't matter as much.

 

[TDSAXX]

Families (with children) making $68,700 don't pay taxes.

They would pay about 5K in payroll taxes alone.

 

[JodieJRanch]

Disney is able to continually inflate the proverbial price balloon because they can. They honestly don't care who's spending the money, as long as the income allows for them to raise prices and cut quality. Lower income / middle income families are falling by the wayside when it comes to Disney, but they're being replaced by those with higher incomes. As long as that happens, nothing will change.

The problem with balloons is that they eventually either deflate or explode. When that happens, Disney will want to attract those lower income / middle income families again. But those families won't be able to provide the necessary income Disney will need to sustain the empire they're building. It's not going to be pretty when that eventually happens.

With inflation out of control, what do you expect Disney to do, eat it? They're trying to stay afloat. I guess they have a choice, they can not cut quality and raise prices even further, barring even more guest, or they can have a balance between cutting nonvital services and raising prices. Disney is a reflection of what is happening to our country. We can thank ourselves for the inflation and problems Disney is experiencing now. Many of the people complaining don't need to be.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I saw the following article on reddit. Top and Bottom Theme Parks In The World by price/ride. I know "value" isn't strictly Ticket Price/#of rides, but I thought it was interesting given the discussion here.

https://etias.com/articles/which-theme-parks-offer-the-best-value-for-money
To note, only one American based Disney park made it into the Top 10 most expensive (HS). All 3 Universal parks made it into the Top 6 most expensive (including the top spot).

While annual passes at Universal are much cheaper than WDW, the daily tickets are roughly the same price. But Universal has much less attractions in each of its parks. Between having half the # of parks, less attractions per park, and much less to do outside of the parks, IMO Universal isn't designed as a 7+ day experience like WDW is.

This is the main reason I don't see UO as a clear alternative to WDW when we are talking about WDW target market.

 

[JodieJRanch]

There are plenty of "average" income people visiting Disney. They make it work somehow.

True, but many of those are once or twice in a lifetime guest. Many of those don't stay on property and spend the kind of money that pays the bills for Disney.

 

[Brett Wyman]

True, but many of those are once or twice in a lifetime guest. Many of those don't stay on property and spend the kind of money that pays the bills for Disney.

I would argue Chapek's strategy is targeting exactly the folks who only ever visit once or twice in a lifetime. Those types of folks are much more likely to just say "to heck with it" and spend the extra on lightening lane(or other up-charges).

 

[shawthorne44]

I would argue Chapek's strategy is targeting exactly the folks who only ever visit once or twice in a lifetime. Those types of folks are much more likely to just say "to heck with it" and spend the extra on lightening lane.

That is somewhat true of us. We won't be spending on IA$$$, but we will be adding G+ to the tickets, and Divequest and AK Trek and several character meals. I assume all that will be available by our trip.

 

[bsmcneil]

What was factored in the euro trip?

Flight? Hotel? Transportation? Food? Entertainment? Foreign exchange?

What was factored in the WDW trip?

Deluxe, moderate, value, or offsite hotel? Flight? Quick service, table service, signature dining, or dining plan? Single day tickets, park hoppers, after hour events, tours? Rental car, Disney transportation, parking?

Just curious because there are so many variables that go into the equation and it's important to ensure we are discussing apples to apples comparisons.

Euro - I looked at flying into a major city and traveling to one other (so, London/Paris was an option and there was another - I had a huuuuge spreadsheet). Factored in my lodging (individual), mostly hostels. Some tours - I tend to be on the cheaper side when I travel. For me, the flight was a non-issue because I had 1000 in United credit and that would cover the basic that I wanted (flight into a place - major Euro city, Hawaii, or Orlando - and back). For Europe, I planned on rail transit. Hawaii became a two island thing with a cheap SW flight to hop, and renting a car. Mostly staying at AirBNB as many of the lodging options weren't great, cost wise. Some tours/activities here. Disney - I don't recall what I immediately searched for but since I've mostly been renting points lately, that's likely where I started. I haven't done off-site, rental car, etc in a long time as I considered DME to be super helpful and a perk to use. I tend not to go for park hoppers to save money, though I may have included them since I was planning to travel alone (I won't do them with kids and have done them solo/with other adults in the past). Early March 2020 was when I planned to travel and I booked travel in October 2019. Each trip I would've added travel insurance as that's a non-negotiable for me. I don't think I still have the spreadsheet on this computer as I backup and delete things pretty often - but I can check around and see.

FWIW, I ended up traveling to Hawaii. Flew to Hilo, rented a car. AirBNB on the BI and did a fun activity in Kona, went on my own to Volcano NP, and other local places (cheap-ish entry fees). SW to Oahu, rented a car for the first day and explored (one-way from HNL to Aulani). Rented points through DVC and stayed at Aulani for a few days (I think it was 3 on each island). Hung out at the resort, took the photo class, ate at Makahiki twice and MonkeyPod once). Avoided highly tourist-y things (oh man, when I first got to Oahu and visited Waikiki/wanted to check out the Disney store at the mall - it was such a culture shock from the BI that I felt nauseous. I find that if I went back, I'd totally do the BI again and be hesitant to go to Oahu at all (everyone's milage varies). Just wasn't my style.

 

[fumanchu2488]

I would argue Chapek's strategy is targeting exactly the folks who only ever visit once or twice in a lifetime. Those types of folks are much more likely to just say "to heck with it" and spend the extra on lightening lane(or other up-charges).

I think you are 100% right. That’s the big disconnect between these boards and reality. We believe it is a grave mistake to make it harder for die hards to visit 10+ days per year. But Disney sees that the guests who make them most of the money are the 7 day guest or once in a lifetime people. They have a lot more data to support their decisions and I would bet they know what they are doing with these price increases.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I think you are 100% right. That’s the big disconnect between these boards and reality. We believe it is a grave mistake to make it harder for die hards to visit 10+ days per year. But Disney sees that the guests who make them most of the money are the 7 day guest or once in a lifetime people. They have a lot more data to support their decisions and I would bet they know what they are doing with these price increases.

It's a situation where there is under supply based on demand. In my experience, non Disney people see WDW as a hot, crowded, expensive, mess for kids. Therefore they do not want to go. Reducing the crowds would go a long way with them.

AP holders (and even guests that travel 2 to 4 times per year) spend a lot less per day. They take up supply without paying their fair share (in Disney's eyes). Disney is likely trying to convert these guests into once a year guests.

Remember, its a lot more expensive to open up more parks (to spread the crowd) than it is to reduce AP holders

 

[Jonfw2]

It's a situation where there is under supply based on demand. In my experience, non Disney people see WDW as a hot, crowded, expensive, mess for kids. Therefore they do not want to go. Reducing the crowds would go a long way with them.

AP holders (and even guests that travel 2 to 4 times per year) spend a lot less per day. They take up supply without paying their fair share (in Disney's eyes). Disney is likely trying to convert these guests into once a year guests.

Remember, its a lot more expensive to open up more parks (to spread the crowd) than it is to reduce AP holders

That math doesn’t add up. APs are an ongoing, predictable revenue stream. You know almost exactly how much you’re getting from them every year. Plus, they’re far more likely to be in DVC which has massive profit margins.

And regardless of how much a family that goes once splurges, any company would rather have recurring customers.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

That math doesn’t add up. APs are an ongoing, predictable revenue stream. You know almost exactly how much you’re getting from them every year. Plus, they’re far more likely to be in DVC which has massive profit margins.

And regardless of how much a family that goes once splurges, any company would rather have recurring customers.

Predictable is not the same thing as high.

A local AP holder who buys a pass for $500 but goes to the parks 40 times in a year is taking up a slot at $12.50 per day. That may be predictable, but its nowhere near the family of 4 that is going for 7 days, staying in a moderate hotel, and eating 3 meals a day plus snacks on property. If that vacation costs 10k, that's $2500 per person, or $350/day.

Even if you lose 10 AP holders for every 1 annual vacation holder, your still earning higher revenue, your significantly lowering your expenses, all while providing a better guest experience. Makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[Jonfw2]

Predictable is not the same thing as high.

A local AP holder who buys a pass for $500 but goes to the parks 40 times in a year is taking up a slot at $12.50 per day. That may be predictable, but its nowhere near the family of 4 that is going for 7 days, staying in a moderate hotel, and eating 3 meals a day plus snacks on property. If that vacation costs 10k, that's $2500 per person, or $350/day.

Even if you lose 10 AP holders for every 1 annual vacation holder, your still earning higher revenue, your significantly lowering your expenses, all while providing a better guest experience. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Unless you're a Florida resident, the cheapest pass available is $900 per year. Also, you assume that the APs do not stay on property (most do) and do not eat or buy ANYTHING. Bad math.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

Unless you're a Florida resident, the cheapest pass available is $900 per year. Also, you assume that the APs do not stay on property (most do) and do not eat or buy ANYTHING. Bad math.

A) at $35/day vs 12.50 per day, I left a lot of wiggle room.

B) the numbers were made up for illustration purposes.

C) your not factoring in the cost savings as well. If you have 1/10th of the people you have, we'll maybe not 1/10th the price, but a fraction of the cost.

D) I don't have inside information, and I'm going to make the assumption you don't either. But I'd take a stab that the guest that is going 40x a year is likely not staying on property for most of those days.

E) I think they are making the assumption that if someone was willing to travel to WDW, and stay on property for 20 to 40 nights per year, a few hundred dollar increase to their AP is not going to factor into their decision making.

F) at the end of the day, none of us are I'm those offices listening to them make the decisions. We are all making educated guesses at best. We also don't have the same information as them. So its hard to suggest that with our very limited information that what they are doing makes zero sense. They seem to feel that increasing the prices will lead to higher profit (note I said profit, not revenue).

 

[Jonfw2]

A) at $35/day vs 12.50 per day, I left a lot of wiggle room.

B) the numbers were made up for illustration purposes.

C) your not factoring in the cost savings as well. If you have 1/10th of the people you have, we'll maybe not 1/10th the price, but a fraction of the cost.

D) I don't have inside information, and I'm going to make the assumption you don't either. But I'd take a stab that the guest that is going 40x a year is likely not staying on property for most of those days.

E) I think they are making the assumption that if someone was willing to travel to WDW, and stay on property for 20 to 40 nights per year, a few hundred dollar increase to their AP is not going to factor into their decision making.

F) at the end of the day, none of us are I'm those offices listening to them make the decisions. We are all making educated guesses at best. We also don't have the same information as them. So its hard to suggest that with our very limited information that what they are doing makes zero sense. They seem to feel that increasing the prices will lead to higher profit (note I said profit, not revenue).

Well, there's absolutely no doubt higher profit is the goal. But the idea that LESS people in the parks is going to achieve that in the long run is unlikely the goal in my opinion.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

Well, there's absolutely no doubt higher profit is the goal. But the idea that LESS people in the parks is going to achieve that in the long run is unlikely the goal in my opinion.

Keep in mind, there is a cap to the amount of people they can have. Both from a safety point of view, right to a guest experience. I think their goal is guests with higher profit margins. They have said it themselves, AP holders provide by far the lowest profit margins.

Disneyland is a prime example. The parks are full of AP holders and very limited tourists.

 

[fumanchu2488]

Well, there's absolutely no doubt higher profit is the goal. But the idea that LESS people in the parks is going to achieve that in the long run is unlikely the goal in my opinion.

I don't think it is significantly LESS people, I think it is a little bit less but DIFFERENT people. If you look at the 2019 attendance, WDW had about 60M visitors amongst their 4 parks. If you assume the average person spends 6 or 7 days in parks, that means there are about 10M different people that visited that year. Disney knows exactly what that breakdown is. So if they know they have 500,000 AP or even 1M AP, I don't think they really care if that number gets cut in half since there spending per day is so low when compared to ticketed guests. So in total, if they lose 1M guests (10%) but make 12% more profit from each guest, then they essentially break even. However, if those guests on average spend 20% more since there are more day guests vs. AP and those guests are spending money on Genie+, IAS, multiple meals per day, merchandise, then that would be a stronger argument to increase AP costs.

DL is a different animal all together. They need to appease their AP holders because that is the vast majority of their guests. I wonder what the actual percent of AP holders vs. Day tickets is at WDW? My assumption is about 90% ticketed to 10% AP. But that could be way off. Do we think they have more than 1M annual passholders at WDW?

 

[Edeyore]

I consider myself to be of average income, if not a little below. I do not go to Disney every year and when I do go it takes some planning. I usually
make reservations up to 6 months ahead of time to pay off the trip before I get there. I haven't stayed at the Polynesian since 1998. Why do you
want to know?