Attendance Down, Revenue Up

[Roxyfire]

Agree with all of this. And on the "risky" side, I think this is why the fireworks dessert party had always been tucked into the Tomorrowland Terrace. Little risk of ticking off the masses. But with new access at the hub, Disney is pushing the risk factor a bit higher.

You could say it builds interest for those on the bubble. People like my parents who don't spend a lot but will spend money to solve a problem. "Too crowded at the hub? Well let's buy this package, we can afford it. We don't have to worry about losing our family in the crowd." There's a lot of people willing to pay for comfort/access. Also, seeing people have snacks, standing in a separate area might encourage someone to try it down the line, maybe even the next night. The same day wishes party is probably a great idea for the bottom line.

 

[MinnieSweetheart]

I think that the proliferation of fenced off area events is simply Disney's nod to the fact that WDW attracts visitors of every income and interest level, and that the upper end of the income strata was being underserved. I don't say the following to insult anyone, and it is not me projecting my views, but it is reality in the travel industry, and that is: Disney figured out that there is a healthy slice of the population who can afford to stay in Deluxe resorts and will accept nothing less. And many of these same people do not like the fact that once they cross through the turnstile, they "join the masses" and get no better or no different experience than any other person who drove in from their Day's Inn earlier that morning. They want an upgraded experience that includes add-ons and exclusive access. And other than a few tours, up until a couple of years ago, Disney offered very few such opportunities. It is simply capturing that underserved market. And there is also a slice of the population that wants an upgraded experience with add-ons and exclusive access and is willing to pay for it, even if that means that they have to stay in less expensive resorts, or even off site, in order to afford those experiences. There are people who do not want to be "one in 50,000" once they enter the park. They want their experience to be unique, more exclusive, and (in their minds), "better". Disney was leaving a lot of money on the table not sucking money out of these people's pockets. In 1990, anyone who wanted a "great" viewing spot for the parade camped out for two hours to get it. Now, you pay a fee to get it. None of this is suggestive of a business strategy that "is only interested in an upscale customer." Rather, it is suggestive of a business strategy where Disney realized that there are vacationers who value "buying their way out of the crowd" and that it was failing to separate those people from their money. Not at all unlike the American Express Platinum events or experiences. I will admit to spending quite a few shekels on some of those. But not nearly as much as Amex would like! So far I have resisted doing that at WDW because I find that the "pedestrian experiences" that I am getting are sufficient. But I can't say that this will always remain the same.

I agree with this, but this is where it's coming off more as a money grab: most of the experiences aren't really a PREMIUM. There is not much more magical about watching the fireworks from a table on tomorrowland terrace where you STILL have to worry about getting a front table and can eat some thawed out frozen cupcakes.

I think if they want upscale customers, they need to get some new marketing consultants who know how to create the products that customer wants.

We are part of the plebes at Disney and that doesn't bother us a bit. Disney maybe COULD get more of our money with some premium experiences, but they need to be truly a premium.

 

[Pemeberly]

I won't fight too hard for TSMM. But where I was coming from is that it seems to be a pretty impressive bit of technology that impresses the pre-teen crowd even if adult engineers are unimpressed. The young demographic deserved something better than spinning elephants, dinosaurs and carpets.

I remember when TSMM came out when I was in high school I thought it was SO groundbreaking and awesome. A theme park ride that you have the ability to manipulate and interact with in a 4d way? That was pretty exciting. I think it's easy to write it off now just because VR is growing, but back then...

 

[JimmyV]

I agree with this, but this is where it's coming off more as a money grab: most of the experiences aren't really a PREMIUM. There is not much more magical about watching the fireworks from a table on tomorrowland terrace where you STILL have to worry about getting a front table and can eat some thawed out frozen cupcakes.

I don't disagree. Advertising a Premium experience doesn't make it a Premium experience. But this takes us back to P.T. Barnum. He became a wealthy man with this exact premise and it still works today.

I think if they want upscale customers, they need to get some new marketing consultants who know how to create the products that customer wants.

I think the issue is not getting the upscale customer. It is keeping them. But your point is well taken either way. Folks who I know who always vacation in "luxury" are simply not interested in going back to WDW when they can rent a 4 bedroom villa on the beach at St. Barts for less money. But they only figure that out after they have been to WDW once only to learn that their money wasn't very well spent. But they did spend it.

 

[TiggerManiac]

If Disney is so crowded that they are trying to keep crowds down why did I get my third pin code since December today? I've never had so many so quickly.

I agree with the comments that the constant cutting back is the biggest problem. It's hard to accept paying more when they seem so determined to cut wherever they can at the same time.

Also, if the parks are so full of people, why are they only running rides at partial capacity? Those crowds will disperse a lot if attractions are running at full capacity. People would be off the streets in queues moving much faster.

I think the stated desire for decreased attendance is nothing more than corporate spin to make the results they got seem intentional.

 

[Irish_Mike]

I think the stated desire for decreased attendance is nothing more than corporate spin to make the results they got seem intentional.

^

No matter what Iger or other CEOs say, they don't want attendance to go down - that's further revenue lost for the company.

 

[sheetz]

Increasing prices to lower crowds kind of makes sense for DLR where the infrastructure is already strained to the limits, but they failed there too because attendance is up!

 

[WillAustin]

I don't disagree. Advertising a Premium experience doesn't make it a Premium experience. But this takes us back to P.T. Barnum. He became a wealthy man with this exact premise and it still works today.

Especially when the "premium experience" is something that was largely attainable for free previously.

 

[Darcy03231]

I realize this is reaching REALLY far back in the thread, but I just had to comment: this is what happened to us this year. We were all set to take a WDW trip in September again and even reserved our dining. But, then we realized that between WDW prices increasing and the euro-USD exchange rate remaining favorable, it really doesn't cost THAT much more to go to Paris. So au revoir, WDW trip and bonjour, Paris.

This is us too. Last trip for us was in 2013. I've been finding I can get a better bang for my buck going other places (and prior to 2013 we were at least a once a year visitor, sometimes 2-3x per year). I never thought the day would come that we didn't have a WDW trip in the works, but we were very disappointed on our last trip and decided to take a one year break. So far one year has turned into three and I don't even see us going back in 2017 because of other planned trips (Sandals LaSource Grenada for 11 days and 15 +/- days in Europe). We plan to go back again once the new attractions are open (DH loves Avatar and really wants to see it when done), so maybe 2018 or 2019. I just don't see it becoming a yearly destination for us again. It seems that once we burst the Disney "bubble" it has become easier and easier to find other destinations that are more attractive to us.

 

[Josh Hendy]

A working theory is that they want to streamline their clientele into only high bracket income to support more free spending with less overhead costs...

That is reasonable considering the types of moves they have made.

That may be true and good luck to them. But will they really make more money by trying to appeal to wealthy but also very demanding customers who have plenty of taste and discrimination and plenty of choices of where to spend their vacation dollar?

I think this is the reign of the spreadsheet geeks, yet again.

It's easy to plug in the current booking rate and gross margin numbers for Grand Floridian, or Poly bungalow sales, and say "Wow, what we need is a lot more of this!"

But where is the tab on the spreadsheet for entering, "Capacity for overexposure to Disney by well heeled customers". Or, "Number of non-Disney luxury vacation choices available within a 4 hour flight."

The main benefit there is less employee requirements - which they hate - but higher purchases per capita.

Are wealthy customers really less demanding of employee attention? Seems to me if they're on concierge level, and they don't get a lot of prompt concierge action, they're going to look at their non-Disney vacation options a lot harder. And bellhops, desk clerks, valets, housekeeping, room service, ...

 

[focusondisney]

Theme park*

Other than that, I agree.

Yep, I know it's a theme park. My point was that people's main objective in planning trips there is to be amused & entertained. I don't know anyone who has gone on a WDW vacation (& spent thousands of dollars to do so) with the main objective of shopping. Sure, most people do some shopping. But I don't know anyone who said: I'll plan for months on end, endure the cost & hassle of flying, pay top price for average food & accommodations & pay hundreds for admission tickets so I can go shopping.

 

[JimmyV]

I've been finding I can get a better bang for my buck going other places (and prior to 2013 we were at least a once a year visitor, sometimes 2-3x per year).

For us, our visits to WDW were always trips that we would take in between other, more "substantial" vacations. But now, the prices have gotten to the point where we can no longer do WDW in addition to other trips. It has to be one or the other. Sometimes we choose WDW. But many times we don't. We are definitely finding that WDW is just as expensive as an Alaskan cruise (on a cruise line not named DCL), and just expensive as trips to Europe and just as expensive as really nice, upscale trips to resorts in the Caribbean. It becomes harder and harder to book a trip to WDW when it isn't an added trip and is instead our one big vacation for the year.

 

[JimmyV]

Theme park*

Other than that, I agree.

"Theme Park" is just Disney's marketing term. It isn't a term that has any real meaning. A theme park is just an amusement park that is built with a cohesive theme. And that is what the Disney parks are. But first and foremost, they are amusement parks with the possible exception of Epcot which is more of an Expo.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yep, I know it's a theme park. My point was that people's main objective in planning trips there is to be amused & entertained. I don't know anyone who has gone on a WDW vacation (& spent thousands of dollars to do so) with the main objective of shopping. Sure, most people do some shopping. But I don't know anyone who said: I'll plan for months on end, endure the cost & hassle of flying, pay top price for average food & accommodations & pay hundreds for admission tickets so I can go shopping.

That whole "theme park" thing doesn't mean what it did when the amusement rennasaince started in 1989...

Many if not most have closed the gap.

I was impressed in March at sea world Orlando after not being there for 15 years...much more of a theme park now.

Disney still does the theme the best...but it isn't as glaring as it once was.

And Disney is falling so far behind in ride system development/implementation that it's getting near laughable.

 

[jade1]

"Theme Park" is just Disney's marketing term. It isn't a term that has any real meaning. A theme park is just an amusement park that is built with a cohesive theme. And that is what the Disney parks are. But first and foremost, they are amusement parks with the possible exception of Epcot which is more of an Expo.

IMO the big separation in "Theming" WDW makes is shows, night shows, M&G's etc. That and park open hours.

Yes some shows have been around a long time, but they are new to many visitors and favorites of many visitors.

Many IMO are better than 90% of rides (some better than any ride).

Fantasmic, Wishes, Illuminations, ROL (soon), Star Wars Fireworks, Celebrate the Magic, Elsa Castle Lighting, Jungle Book, Star Wars Jedi, Frozen Forever, B&B, VOTLM, FOTLK, Nemo, Parades.

The line up for Meet & Greets is very popular as well, and some very well themed areas.

Baymax, Chewy, Kylo, Jawas, Buzz, Woody, Merida, A&E, Cinderella, Rapunzel, Anastasia, Tiana, Aladdin, Jasmine, Talking Mickey, Tink, Ariel, Belle, Gaston, Joy, Sadness, and the usuals.

 

[JimmyV]

And Disney is falling so far behind in ride system development/implementation that it's getting near laughable.

What?? You don't find this to be revolutionary?

Or this??

Surely this must pass your test of system development.

Ladies and gentleman...I give you exhibits A, B and C of Disney's profound laziness of late. Really hoping that Avatar breaks that string.

 

[JimmyV]

IMO the big separation in "Theming" WDW makes is shows, night shows, M&G's etc.

Keep in mind that most of those things that you listed came about long after the term "Theme Park" started to be used and applied to WDW. The term was used when the MK was the only park, and there were no M&Gs--only walk up handshakes with characters who roamed the park. And there were no night shows beyond fireworks. Or shows at all, for that matter. The closest thing to a "show" was the Bear Jamboree and the Mickey Mouse Revue.

 

[jade1]

Keep in mind that most of those things that you listed came about long after the term "Theme Park" started to be used and applied to WDW. The term was used when the MK was the only park, and there were no M&Gs--only walk up handshakes with characters who roamed the park. And there were no night shows beyond fireworks. Or shows at all, for that matter. The closest thing to a "show" was the Bear Jamboree and the Mickey Mouse Revue.

I get that, its still a big separation from the rest at this point, and a large part of the reason many families even go.

 

[JimmyV]

its still a big separation from the rest at this point

A big separation from Busch Gardens Williamsburg; Busch Gardens Tampa; Universal Studios and Islands of Adventure? Not sure what definition of "separation" one has to use to make that claim. US/IOA was largely built by laid off Imagineers, or Imagineers who got better offers up the road. I don't think that they lost their flair for theming during the 10 mile drive up the highway.

 

[jade1]

A big separation from Busch Gardens Williamsburg; Busch Gardens Tampa; Universal Studios and Islands of Adventure? Not sure what definition of "separation" one has to use to make that claim. US/IOA was largely built by laid off Imagineers, or Imagineers who got better offers up the road. I don't think that they lost their flair for theming during the 10 mile drive up the highway.

Yes all of the above.

Just saying that "theming" can include a lot more than rides. These things listed are not offered at other non Disney (esp WDW) amusement/theme parks in nearly as much quality, quantity, popularity and detail.

Closing at 6PM tends to reduce night theming and shows and fireworks.

As themed as AK is in the day, it will now be a entire new themed experience at night as well.