I think that you are focusing too much on the "Rev Up" portion of this without disentangling Parks and Resorts from DIS in general. Overall, Rev is up. Thank the movie studio. Rev is not up at Parks and Resorts in any way not attributable to price increases and revenue increases based on price increases are ultimately unsustainable. That is not "growth". Seen in another light, imagine that there is a chat Board for ESPN lovers. (Or Disney Infinity lovers). I doubt anyone there would be trumpeting the fact that "Rev is up. Viewership is down" and calling that good news that is likely to keep expansion moving forward.
**********************************
A few other random thoughts...
The "insiders" take on Disney wanting to shrink attendance, (posted twice in this thread), is perplexing. For years POP sat as an unfinished, vacant project looking all the while like a state penitentiary. Then they finished it and added thousands more rooms on line. Not done yet, they added AoA, adding thousands more. And while that was going on, more and more DVC rooms were being added to existing resorts. And all of a sudden Disney wakes up and concludes that there are too many people visiting the parks? Not buying it. Also, there is an easy solution to this "problem" assuming that one exists, and it benefits Disney in many ways. If Disney truly wanted to move turnstile attendance downward, all it would have to do is shift the Code Orange (or whatever they call it) numbers downward and close the park to off site guests at attendance numbers far lower than they do now. Staying on site? Good for you! You get in no matter what. Staying off site? Sorry. It's 11:00 a.m. and are park has 30,000 people in it. No Dumbo for you! BAM! Lower crowd levels and higher hotel occupancy rates as people not willing to risk getting shut out fill up Disney's rooms. But are we seeing anything of the sort? No. Instead, we hear unsubstantiated reports from insiders who say that raising prices was Disney's brilliant strategy to decrease attendance. All I can say to that is, if that is true, then this company is run by the dumbest group of execs on the planet and they deserve to fail and will fail.
What I see now is what I have seen over the past 2-3 years. People who are habitual guests continue to be so, but find ways to spend less money (or the same amount as before, resulting in a "downgraded" experience), and come home longing for the "good old days". People who are first time guests come home and say "never again!", or, "it was OK, but I am in no rush to go back." Those are painful words to hear if you are a Disney exec. And it cannot be denied that pricing is a major factor. Those of us who used to pay $49 for a room at the Contemporary and have seen the price climb to $150, to $225, to $300, to $425, and upward to $650 have slowly adjusted to the increases and accepted them, (or not). But for a first time visitor paying $650? Their point of reference is that it is really, really, really hard to find a hotel that charges $650 per night anywhere in the country (not named New York City or San Francisco), and when you do pay $650 for a room while on vacation, you get a level of quality and service that blows the Grand Floridian or Poly out of the water. I think that current pricing might be accepted begrudgingly by repeat guests, but I don't see it being tolerated by first time guests. Yes, Value resorts are still a good value. But the gap in price between the Values and the rest of the resorts has gotten to the point where it is really hard to justify paying Disney's prices unless you have already been won over by the Mouse. I am not seeing "new growth" in the customer base the way I used to.
