Comcast CEO: Universal will compete aggressively with Disney

[rteetz]

Why? Because you don't like the fact they don't always support the party line? It is not speculation that the rollout of Magic + has been problematic. If you need a reminder of just how problematic, a visit to the attractions forum will do the trick. Feel the love of those standing in long lines at Guest Services! And it's not speculation that new attraction development at WDW has slowed to what can only be described a crawl. And it isn't specious to conclude the above two elements are directly related. Lastly, it's not speculation that a competitor down the street is now poaching guest time and money away from Disney because they are offering what Disney isn't: major new attractions with deep theming and cutting edge technology.

It is speculation is cannot be a failure yet because it has not been fully rolled out. Not everyone has has the ability to use it at full capacity yet. Mice chat at this point is just speculating. Yes there are problems, there were problems with the first system yes there are going to be bad experiences and there are good ones. We here on the dis are a very small percentage of what is in the parks on a daily basis. We will find out if it is a failure in the next two years not yet you can't tell just not enough evidence there. If universal was seriously drawing people away then Disney would do something there has been no serious change in park attendance to show that universal is really hurting Disney. Yes universal is building a lot of new attractions yes they are good attractions but that doesn't mean Disney is never going to build a good attraction again nor does it mean that Disney is going to stop development because of a new system that isn't fully implemented yet. Yes Iger is unhappy because the system has had some bumps but that is only going to make the system better in the long run. Nothing is perfect no one is perfect Disney nor universal is perfect and they never will be. Growth will continue at both parks for a long time in the near and distant future and that's a proven fact.

 

[DRDISNEYMD]

That is untrue. We LOVED IOA and it had nothing to do with HP. The Marvel and Seuss land were Amazing, they offer so much more than HP. The show with the superheroes so fun. I got tears in my eyes at CRT when my dd met the princesses....but the picture of my son with Captain America brought just as many tears. Disney hold on the market is slipping...slowly, but one tiny little snowball crumbling down can eventually cause an avalanche. I don't know what the future holds...but I see some snowballs starting to fall! I have had several friends go to uni/IOA in the last couple of years and have yet to hear anything about how much they want to go back and will spend less time at WDW. Do I think this is an accurate sample...not necessarily, but 10 years ago I heard very little raving about Universal and now everyone I know is going there and spending a lot of time and money there.

~We'll just have to agree to disagree. I have yet to see any evidence to demonstrate that Disney's "hold on the market is slipping." Just because some may want this to happen doesn't make it true. The numbers simply don't support this notion.

~With that said, you are preaching to the choir. I'm a coaster junkie, we visit Disney for the rides first and see no big deal about adding a new ride every year or two. But, I've come to terms with the fact that Disney will never be Cedar Point. I really had to assess and find value in what I really loved about WDW and that hasn't changed. I acknowledge Disney could do much more but at least there is some focus placed on WDW.

~Again, I'm not quite ready to jump on the Universal is better bandwagon -- in part, because Disney was only responding to what the public demanded. For some odd reason, Disney's holiday crowds made national headlines, this was strange to me because Disney's crowds are like that every year. There was no mention of Universal anything. It doesn't mean much because the crowds were present there as well. But, I don't agree that Disney is suffering any "loss" because of Universal. The only thing I sense is Disney may be a little resentful about investing in the parks just to keep up with Universal.

~I'm not saying IOA is a terrible park at all. I'm just saying, that the huge increase in attendance at IOA is attributed to WWoHP not the Universal brand. In contrast, Disney's attendance has always been attributed to the Disney brand, not specifically tied to one IP. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but I do find this trend interesting. It did scare Disney into a deal with James Cameron for Avatar.

~I think Disney is hoping to weather the storm and ride this Harry Potter phase out until the novelty wears off. But, only time will tell, unfortunately. If interest wanes in Harry Potter and if Universal's numbers don't surpass at least one of Disney's Parks (DHS or AK) we can forget about a new Star Wars land at WDW. So, I hope the public responds and supports Universal in a huge way because Disney is closely watching.

~I love a good theme park war because we all win! I intend to enjoy both Disney and Universal!


~Yahoo Finance names Disney company of the year~ ~Yahoo Finance 2013 Company of the Year~

Disney (DIS) is a 90-year-old company that's also the first brand most two-year olds learn to love. The company was built on hand-drawn cartoons, yet its interactive Disney Animated program was Apple Inc.’s (AAPL) “2013 App of the Year” for the iPad.

The Walt Disney co. has honored the past, delivered in the present and positioned for the future better than any other American company. It's the company's successful striking of this rare balance – while focusing on careful financial stewardship and great customer experiences – that helped Disney edge out all others to be named this year's Yahoo Finance Company of the Year.

For the second year, our editors and writers used a blend of quantitative and subjective standards to recognize one company for its financial performance, shareholder friendliness, strategic focus, employee relations and customer loyalty.

Disney did not have the most stellar stock performance in the Dow Jones industrials or even its industry. Other big companies had greater gains in earnings or more headline-winning product launches. Netflix (NFLX), Tesla Motors Inc. (TSLA) and Facebook Inc. (FB) all captivated growth investors’ attention more dramatically, to name just three worthy of consideration.

We closely considered two other companies that performed well against big perceived challenges: Mattel Inc. (MAT) continues to exploit the growing overseas toy market and shares its copious cash flow with investors, despite worries traditional toys are on the wane. And Boeing Inc. (BA) overcame threatening quality issues with batteries on its crucial new Dreamliner jet to secure bountiful new orders and stand as a huge investor winner.

But no company other than Disney delivered so much consistent quality in its products, produced more-balanced growth with global reach or shared more cash with investors while also investing for future growth.

Here are highlights from Disney’s 2013:

- Revenue and profits reached new highs for a third straight year. Disney shares have gained 38% for the year, more than ten percentage points better than the broad market, and have doubled over the past two years.

- Film releases generated the best box-office results in Disney history, with $4 billion in ticket sales heading into the holiday-movie season.

- Company theme parks in California, Florida, Tokyo and Hong Kong posted record attendance.

- The consumer-products division posted its first $1 billion profit year – without fully benefiting from the Star Wars bonanza to come following its Lucasfilm acquisition.

- Disney cable networks led ratings for kids aged 2 to 11.

- The company repurchased $4.1 billion in shares in fiscal 2013 and raised the common-stock dividend by 15%.

- Disney once again ranked third among 60 leading U.S. companies in Harris Interactive’s Reputation Quotient survey, which encompasses factors including product quality, trust, social responsibility and treatment of employees. In a small but significant gesture, as Obamacare took effect, Disney offered full-time positions to select part-time park employees so they could get health benefits.

- In addition to the Disney Animation app for iPad, six of the ten most popular downloads on the Amazon Kindle were Disney apps. ESPN’s user traffic on mobile devices exceeded that on desktop.

These hardly represent a lucky run of good luck or the economic cycle merely turning in Disney’s favor. In fact, Disney’s strong 2013 is best-viewed as a culmination of the strategies put in place since Bob Iger took over as CEO in 2005.

It's been a tenure marked by an avid focus on Disney’s unmatched character franchises, shrewd acquisitions of unique entertainment brands, anticipation of new digital-media habits, bold investment in theme parks and cruise ships, and balanced allocation of capital between growth initiatives and shareholders.

In an interview this week, Iger agrees 2013 was something of “a payoff year.”

The year’s top film releases trace back to Iger’s clever studio acquisitions of recent years, and his insistence that most Disney movies recognizably embody a Disney brand: “Thor: The Dark World” and “Iron Man 3” from Marvel, Pixar’s “Monsters University” and “Frozen,” an animated blockbuster Iger says represents the rejuvenation of the core Disney Animation studio with the help of Pixar talent. Yes, “Lone Ranger” was a dud, continuing the spotty performance of Disney’s traditional live-action studio. But the long-running “franchise” movie series are powerful assets in the current global film market.

Even through the depths of the Great Recession, Disney was busy spending aggressively to upgrade its parks. This was the first full year of a revamped California Adventure at Disneyland California, and a new Fantasyland in Florida debuted. The company is now finishing an ambitious expansion of Animal Kingdom in Florida, based on the science-fiction world of the film “Avatar.”

Bigger payoffs to come

Disney and its shareholders reaped the benefits in 2013. Yet Iger quickly pivots ahead: “On the other hand, I view [this year] as a payoff ahead of other, even bigger, payoff years.”

The way Disney has arrayed its media properties gives the company rare predictability for years to come. Iger describes meeting this month with Pixar impresario John Lassiter and other creative executives to lock in the company’s animated-film slate through 2019. It's building toward Star Wars 7 in late 2015, the same year the monumental Shanghai Disneyland park – more than a decade in the making – opens. At ESPN, its major cable-distribution agreements and sports-rights contracts are wrapped up for years.

The quality of Disney’s brands and reliability of its financial performance typically affords its shares a valuation premium to other media names based on their earnings. But as media research firm MoffettNathanson recently noted, after a great year for media stocks, Disney is now valued on par with peers, rather than at its “customary 10% premium” – which makes it a relatively good buy.

In terms of initiatives not currently built into Street assumptions, Iger alluded to percolating plans for a “Disney store for digital,” perhaps by next year. “We’re very focused on creating a digital, mobile experience, to take all the great I.P. [intellectual property] we own as a company and create digital products in the space, to give people more access to all digital media now,” he says.

One knock on Disney from some traditional media skeptics is that its fortunes are too dependent on the “pay-TV bundle” in which subscribers pay for dozens of channels bundled by cable and satellite companies, which in turn pay a per-subscriber fee to the likes of ESPN and Disney Channel. Disney’s cable networks generate a majority of company profits.

Iger has tried to get the company to a point of being relatively agnostic as to how viewers access its programming. He and other Big Media executives continue to point out the cable bundle delivers good value for most subscribers while nourishing a broad array of content.

Yet Disney was also an original investor in the Hulu digital-distribution consortium and is creating a made-for-Netflix streaming video series around its Marvel superhero characters. Its ESPN 3 and ESPN Watch streaming-video products are among the most popular “go anywhere” media products out there. Iger, a friend of the late Steve Jobs, who sold Pixar to Disney, has served on the Apple board for two years – not a bad place to stay attuned to the digital-media frontier.

Invoking an instructive case he's no doubt noted before, Iger compares the flourishing demand for Disney products through ubiquitous distribution platforms with the first wave of soda vending machines, which made Coca-Cola tremendously more popular than before. Something people already like, accessible with extreme convenience, makes for a pretty good business.

Just consider the trove of irreproducible and enduring characters who live at Disney: Winnie the Pooh, the Muppets, Mickey Mouse and friends, Disney Princesses, Marvel heroes, Pixar’s quirky crew, the Star Wars factions and (for all future movies) Indiana Jones.

An investor should take comfort that such a cast of generation-spanning touchstone brands will be invited into customers’ lives for a long time beyond the “payoff year” that was 2013.

~Harry Potter phenomenon is gone with the proverbial wind~

May 12, 2013|By Patrick C. Fleming | Guest columnist

Universal Orlando last week announced Diagon Alley, an expansion to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, which opened in 2010.

Coming on the heels of the new Transformers ride, the expansion will no doubt be a success. But if the students in my college writing classes are any indication, then the Harry Potter phenomenon is beginning to wane.

When I began teaching freshman composition in 2008, my students had grown up with Harry. Born in the early 1990s, they were children when Harry left for Hogwarts in the series' first installment and in high school when he finally defeated Voldemort. In a very real sense, these students grew up alongside Harry, Ron and Hermione.

Knowing that composition classes tend not to be student favorites, I leveraged students' interest in the series. For several consecutive semesters, every student who came into my class had read at least four of the novels. Most had read all seven.

Beginning with books they already knew, I taught these 19-year-old students to express their own views, to engage with the opinions of others (even if they disagreed), to consider arguments from scholars in different disciplines and to support their claims with evidence.

Just as important as students' interest, for my purposes, was the fact that experts in a variety of fields had written about the books. This breadth of interest is what made the Harry Potter fad into a phenomenon, something different from other popular children's book series.

Literary critics, religious pundits, marketing firms — everyone was interested in Harry. I assigned readings about intellectual property law, and we discussed how author J.K. Rowling was sued by another writer for trademark infringement and how she defended her own copyright.

I assigned readings about psychoanalysis, and we discussed a psychologist's use of Harry Potter to encourage children to participate more actively in group-therapy sessions. Most of my students had no particular interest in literature for its own sake, but they were able to connect Rowling's books to something they were interested in — be it business, law, therapy or sociology.

For these students, Harry Potter was a bridge to academic writing and intellectual rigor.

Lately, though, the excitement hasn't been there. Now that the book series has finished and the films are all released, students are less invested in Harry Potter. It's not that they haven't read the books — most have. And it's not that they don't enjoy them — they do. But the emotional investment that made the Harry Potter phenomenon special has disappeared.

In 2000, Rowling's books had been topping The New York Times bestseller list, and in response the Times relegated children's books to a separate list. Literary critic Harold Bloom saw the books' popularity as a symptom of a nationwide "dumbing down," and asked why anyone would read something that didn't enrich their mind, spirit or personality?

I've given Bloom's column to dozens of students. In 2008, the response was outrage: students felt their minds, spirits, and personalities had been enriched. Who was Harold Bloom to tell them otherwise? They wouldn't abandon their attachment to the books, and were willing to defend their enjoyment. They were even willing to write about it.

Now, though, the response is apathy. Students see the Harry Potter series as just kids' books: fun to read, and that's it. These students haven't gone to book-release parties, or written fan fiction, or had Wizard-themed birthday parties. They are quite ready to abandon their attachment to Rowling's books, unwilling to follow that attachment into new arenas.

Diagon Alley will be successful, and thousands will flock to Orlando to visit it. And maybe another series will give rise to a similar phenomenon (though fans of "Twilight" and "The Hunger Games," two popular series that followed in Rowling's wake, aren't nearly as invested.)

But once, Harry Potter was something special, something that could connect childhood reading to adult critical thinking. That time has passed.

Patrick C. Fleming is a visiting assistant professor of English at Rollins College, where he teaches courses in British literature and children's literature.

~Theme park attendance report shows Potter's spell starts to fade~

The spell that Harry Potter cast on Universal Orlando has begun to wear off after two years of spectacular growth in attendance.

The stratospheric jumps in attendance triggered in 2010 and 2011 by the Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Universal's Islands of Adventure theme park eased last year, according to a closely watched industry report on annual park attendance worldwide.

Attendance at Islands of Adventure which added the $265 million Wizarding World in 2010 grew 4 percent in 2012 to nearly 8 million visitors, compared with gains of 30.2 percent in 2010 and 29 percent in 2011.

Last year's growth, while much reduced, was still enough to make Islands the fastest-growing major theme park in Central Florida.

And Universal Orlando has already announced its follow-up act: Next year, the company intends to open a London-themed expansion of Wizarding World, called Diagon Alley, in its Universal Studios theme park next door to Islands.

The growth leader last year among North American theme parks, according to the industry study, was Disneyland's California Adventure, where attendance jumped an estimated 22.6 percent to 7.8 million people.

The Walt Disney Co. recently spent $1.2 billion on renovations there, including the addition of a 12-acre "land" based on the company's "Cars" movie franchise.

Disney's Magic Kingdom remains the most-popular theme park in the world, with an estimated 17.5 million visitors in 2012, up 2.3 percent from a year earlier. Disney's three other Orlando parks each boosted attendance by 2.2 percent, for the following totals: Epcot, 11.1 million people; Disney's Animal Kingdom, 10 million; and Disney's Hollywood Studios, 9.9 million.

The attendance estimates are compiled each year by the Themed Entertainment Association, an industry trade group, and the economics practice of AECOM Technology Corp., a Los Angeles-based conglomerate. Although the estimates are unofficial none of the major theme-park operators publicly discloses annual attendance figures they are widely referenced throughout the business.

The report's authors attributed the North American attendance gains to new spending by theme-park companies.

"It is our view that, given the economic conditions, theme parks have done a good job this year in maintaining single-digit [percentage] growth in major markets," the report concluded. "The market in North America was, this year as last year, driven by major reinvestment at major operators' parks.

"Last year, Orlando led the way with the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios Florida. This year, it was Southern California, with substantial increases at Disney California Adventure (where additions included Cars Land) as well as Universal Studios Hollywood (which added Transformers: the ride 3-D)."

Universal, Disney and SeaWorld Orlando would not comment on the attendance report.

Orlando's other theme parks also had improved attendance last year compared with 2011, according to the report: Universal Studios attendance grew 2.5 percent, to 6.2 million guests; and SeaWorld Orlando attracted an estimated 5.4 million people, up 3 percent.

The only theme park among the top 10 in North America with an estimated decline in attendance: Disneyland, in Anaheim, Calif., where attendance fell 1.1 percent to a little fewer than 16 million people.

Some of Orlando's major theme parks have raised their prices in recent weeks. Universal Orlando increased the cost of its single-day ticket to $92, while Walt Disney World increased the cost of a single day in the Magic Kingdom park to $95 and in its other parks to $90.

~We'll see.

 

[manning]

Good. Good old competitive capitalism at work. Now we will get more for our money.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Why? Because you don't like the fact they don't always support the party line?

You caught me red handed...towing the company line is what I strive to do on this board

 

[jade1]

While Universal innovates and grows, Disney throws resources into technology aimed at forcing guests to micro-plan everything months in advance. That's a huge strategic mistake. You grow a theme park by offering new attractions and experiences, not by forcing people to spend time on their cellphone trying to access systems that don't work half the time.

Great for us, now our day visit to IOA can include a US HP stop as well-then back for the evening FP+'s at the MK Mountains and Wishes.

No way we will stay at US hotels, with FP+ available at WDW for the evenings without having to be in the park earlier to get them.

 

[Ofinn]

We will be at Universal in 6 days. It will be our third trip to Universal. I like the rides at Universal better, but you can't beat the atmosphere and Magic of Disney. My biggest gripe with Disney at the moment is they really aren't adding anything to appeal to older kids. Fantasyland is great if under 5, and you like princesses, but my preteen boys won't step foot in it. I have a feeling in a couple of years my kids won't want to go to Disney anymore.As it is there are only a few rides at each park that interest them anymore. IMHO Universal does a better job of appealing to kids over 10.

 

[OldsDr]

I don't think anyone expects Universal to Displace WDW. It would just be great if Universal could get to the point where they could exert a good amount of pressure on WDW. I fear that WDW is trying so hard to squeeze that last penny out of everyone that they will erode the customer loyalty that was built up over Decades. Once a loyal customer is turned it is very hard to get them back. If it gets to the point where enough people feel they are not getting their monies worth then that is bad for all consumers, because there is no longer the money to make improvements and the dominoes start to fall.

WDW is at a crossroads and has been for years. My earlier analogy to GM still stands. GM did not fail overnight. They failed over four decades by losing one customer at time to a point where they could not make enough money to pay the bills (a little oversimplification, but the point is valid).

Maybe Universal studios actively trying to become the destination as opposed to the side trip would be a good kick in the pants for WDW

 

[Yellowstonetim]

The problem for us here on the "DISboards"... Is that they make more money even when the mismanagement gets worse...

As much as people may dislike it, it is hard to call it mismanagement when attendance and profits are both up. That sounds like pretty good management in anybody's book.

The problem for Disney is that it's going to be so long before these are in place that Disney's market share may take a hit for the next few years.

That actually might be wise. HP is not something you'll be able to stop. HP fans will visit HP regardless of what Disney does. So let them have their time, it doesn't really impact Disney anyway, then open Pandora and then Star Wars over several years. The cobwebs at HP will be very realistic.

Actually I dislike this because I want Uni to succeed. BUT there is another possibility...

I ran into this article that a Sea World guru doesn't thing the new HP will have as big an affect. The article notes that Sea World DID take a pretty good hit when HP first opened.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-seaworld-harry-potter-impact-20140109,0,2495128.story

There are other parks around: Sea World, Lego, Bible, and that park in Tampa, can't remember the name. Maybe Uni is going to pull from them. I'm going to spend 10 days at Disney and will go for 1 maybe 2 days somewhere else. Now it will be Uni instead of SW or another place.

While Universal innovates and grows, Disney throws resources into technology aimed at forcing guests to micro-plan everything months in advance. That's a huge strategic mistake. You grow a theme park by offering new attractions and experiences, not by forcing people to spend time on their cellphone trying to access systems that don't work half the time. But Iger doesn't get it: as the failed rollout of "Next Gen" continues to eat up resources, he is throwing more money at it and cutting back attraction development to the bone:

http://micechat.com/49401-my-magic-plus-failure/

That micechat article is hilarious. It is written with the biased rhetoric you expect on this board. It is yellow journalism at it's best - and worst - which in the case of yellow journalism is the same thing.

That is untrue. We LOVED IOA and it had nothing to do with HP. The Marvel and Seuss land were Amazing, they offer so much more than HP. The show with the superheroes so fun. I got tears in my eyes at CRT when my dd met the princesses....but the picture of my son with Captain America brought just as many tears. Disney hold on the market is slipping...slowly, but one tiny little snowball crumbling down can eventually cause an avalanche. I don't know what the future holds...but I see some snowballs starting to fall! I have had several friends go to uni/IOA in the last couple of years and have yet to hear anything but how much they want to go back and will spend less time at WDW. Do I think this is an accurate sample...not necessarily, but 10 years ago I heard very little raving about Universal and now everyone I know is going there and spending a lot of time and money there.

Couldn't disagree more. What did you like about Seuss land? I saw some cool shaped buildings and not much else. Seuss was a beloved genius with so many great works! Where were the rides and wild Imagineering?! I also ask that question seriously. I have only been to Uni once so I may have missed something.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

Can we stop quoting "micechat"?

That article is complete speculation and was written on a level worthy of crayon

Why? Because you don't like the fact they don't always support the party line?

Oh yes, everyone knows how lockedoutlogic is such a Disney koolaid drinking, mouse eared apologist.



Actually, as one who falls on the supportive side on these boards, thank you lockedoutlogic for acknowledging the limitations of that article.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

While Universal innovates and grows, Disney throws resources into technology aimed at forcing guests to micro-plan everything months in advance. That's a huge strategic mistake. You grow a theme park by offering new attractions and experiences, not by forcing people to spend time on their cellphone trying to access systems that don't work half the time. But Iger doesn't get it: as the failed rollout of "Next Gen" continues to eat up resources, he is throwing more money at it and cutting back attraction development to the bone:

http://micechat.com/49401-my-magic-plus-failure/

It is not speculation that the rollout of Magic + has been problematic. If you need a reminder of just how problematic, a visit to the attractions forum will do the trick. Feel the love of those standing in long lines at Guest Services!

And it's not speculation that new attraction development at WDW has slowed to what can only be described a crawl.

And it isn't specious to conclude the above two elements are directly related.

Lastly, it's not speculation that a competitor down the street is now poaching guest time and money away from Disney because they are offering what Disney isn't: major new attractions with deep theming and cutting edge technology.

The whole idea that MM+ is a failure or is in big trouble is ridiculous. Anyone familiar with such huge technology projects (as I happen to be, unfortunately) they never come in on time and always have cost overruns. AND this board is hardly a place to look to objectively evaluate its success! There seems to be plenty of people that love MM+ and magic bands. Also Uni is poaching SW not Disney.

But there is a much more interesting question here:

There is a constant assumption that a successful theme park company will build new innovative rides every few years.

I reject that idea. In fact the current trend among some theme parks to build and build and build every few years is probably unsustainable. And even if it is, it isn't desirable. It is only necessary if you have to improve your product.

Disney is smart. They cannot promise a new ride every few years. They already have 4 successful parks with high attendance.

The real job is to create a great experience that includes lots of fun things to do and only once in a great while are those things updated or changed. For proof, MK is the most successful theme park in the world and it doesn't add new rides every few years. Doesn't need to. It is great to begin with.

(BTW - on a side note, I think the mine train may be an awesome ride. A fun rollercoaster with the new idea of swinging cars AND it can be ridden by a wide range of ages.)

I live near Hershey park which has turned itself into a great coaster park in a limited space, but it has been adding new coasters every few years now for a while and two things have happened: One, it is out of space, two, everyone expects a new ride now.

Yes Disney needs something more at AK and changes at HS, but I think Fantasy Land is great and MK doesn't need a great deal more. I am not a coaster junky, although I love them, I am a park aficionado. I don't think Disney should get in a spitting contest with a new ride every few years - too expensive and they don't need to.

I know that thinking would infuriate many here who WANT, want, WANT new rides, but it isn't necessary nor is it good business sense. Nor do I as a Disney fan need it.

Let the rest fight it out trying to attract attention every year or two to increase their share. Disney doesn't need to. I am not saying Disney should sit back and pay no attention to what is going on or that they shouldn't build new attractions, I am saying that the vitriol visited upon them for not doing new rides now and every few years for the last X number of years is unwarranted.

Epcot could be updated, but I enjoy it right now. I love the Land, the Sea, Mission Space, Energy, Test Track, and all of World Showcase. So some things are closed. Big deal. I have a blast. I don't have to have something new. Would I like it? SURE! Will I get it eventually, yes. But I love Epcot now. And MK. As is. And I am not mad at them.

Disney should (from a fan and business perspective) take its time and do Pandora right, then do SW right, and then move on to Epcot... all in good time. While watching attendance numbers and other factors. In so doing, slowly and carefully, they will do fine and may even cause the other parks a great deal of trouble.

 

[disneylovin24]

The whole idea that MM+ is a failure or is in big trouble is ridiculous. Anyone familiar with such huge technology projects (as I happen to be, unfortunately) they never come in on time and always have cost overruns. AND this board is hardly a place to look to objectively evaluate its success! There seems to be plenty of people that love MM+ and magic bands. Also Uni is poaching SW not Disney.

But there is a much more interesting question here:

There is a constant assumption that a successful theme park company will build new innovative rides every few years.

I reject that idea. In fact the current trend among some theme parks to build and build and build every few years is probably unsustainable. And even if it is, it isn't desirable. It is only necessary if you have to improve your product.

Disney is smart. They cannot promise a new ride every few years. They already have 4 successful parks with high attendance.

The real job is to create a great experience that includes lots of fun things to do and only once in a great while are those things updated or changed. For proof, MK is the most successful theme park in the world and it doesn't add new rides every few years. Doesn't need to. It is great to begin with.

(BTW - on a side note, I think the mine train may be an awesome ride. A fun rollercoaster with the new idea of swinging cars AND it can be ridden by a wide range of ages.)

I live near Hershey park which has turned itself into a great coaster park in a limited space, but it has been adding new coasters every few years now for a while and two things have happened: One, it is out of space, two, everyone expects a new ride now.

Yes Disney needs something more at AK and changes at HS, but I think Fantasy Land is great and MK doesn't need a great deal more. I am not a coaster junky, although I love them, I am a park aficionado. I don't think Disney should get in a spitting contest with a new ride every few years - too expensive and they don't need to.

I know that thinking would infuriate many here who WANT, want, WANT new rides, but it isn't necessary nor is it good business sense. Nor do I as a Disney fan need it.

Let the rest fight it out trying to attract attention every year or two to increase their share. Disney doesn't need to. I am not saying Disney should sit back and pay no attention to what is going on or that they shouldn't build new attractions, I am saying that the vitriol visited upon them for not doing new rides now and every few years for the last X number of years is unwarranted.

Epcot could be updated, but I enjoy it right now. I love the Land, the Sea, Mission Space, Energy, Test Track, and all of World Showcase. So some things are closed. Big deal. I have a blast. I don't have to have something new. Would I like it? SURE! Will I get it eventually, yes. But I love Epcot now. And MK. As is. And I am not mad at them.

Disney should (from a fan and business perspective) take its time and do Pandora right, then do SW right, and then move on to Epcot... all in good time. While watching attendance numbers and other factors. In so doing, slowly and carefully, they will do fine and may even cause the other parks a great deal of trouble.

VERY VERY well said

 

[rteetz]

I must say those last few posts by yellowstonetime were right on point it could not have been said any better. Everything he said I agree with and I know I'm not that only that also has that view point.

 

[Borishack]

That micechat article is hilarious.

Yes, I 'm sure the imagineers out in Burbank who are now wondering if they will still have a job in six months are just rolling in the aisles over it!

 

[rteetz]

Yes, I 'm sure the imagineers out in Burbank who are now wondering if they will still have a job in six months are just rolling in the aisles over it!

Why are they wondering if they will have a job they are developing rides all the time whether or not they need them in the parks or not or if we will ever see some of those rides. Imagineers is a broad category they don't just design and build rides they work on practically everything disney does. An imagineer can work with rides, shows, character experiences, websites, app development, the jobs are endless in imagineering. As long as there is a disney world there will be imagineers because they will always work on something. As yellowstonetim said they don't need a lot of new rides right now they are going to take there time until they feel threatened disney doesn't feel threatened. Fantasyland is doing fine it's not like no one is going on any of the rides people are going on all of them, and once the mine train opens that will be a huge hit that will drive some people there just to check that out. Avatar is the next project for disney they are going to take there time to get it right they are not just going to put something together in a year like universal. Disney has never operated like that and they never will. Disney is a much stronger parks company than universal and they are going to be that strong for a long time in the future. As long as people still go to the parks and disney still makes money disney as every business intends to do they will be fine.

 

[mvk]

Yes, I 'm sure the imagineers out in Burbank who are now wondering if they will still have a job in six months are just rolling in the aisles over it!

You seem to be the only one who believes this article is near accurate.

Yellowstonetim is knocking it out of the park here. Great posts.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

If anyone would lose jobs it would be one or two tech project leaders, not imagineers. And what are the names or facts regarding these layoffs? A micechat article claiming that someone is getting fired and the THINK it is for this reason?

One thing that article did, that all good conspiracy theorists do, is take facts and claim they obviously mean X (stated very strongly like it is something everyone knows) and then run all over robin hood's barn about X, which was never actually established, making all kinds of claims based on X.

It is interesting to note that the increase Universal saw didn't impact Disney. It didn't even impact Universal Studios! Here is 2012 and 2013 numbers.

2011
1. Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom 17.1 million +1.0%
2. Disneyland 16.1 million +1.0%
3. Epcot 10.8 million, Flat
4. Disney's Animal Kingdom 9.8 million +1.0%
5. Disney's Hollywood Studios 9.7 million +1.0%
6. Universal's Islands of Adventure (+1 position) 7.7 million +29.0%
7. Disney California Adventure (-1 position) 6.3 million +1.0
8. Universal Studios Florida 6.0 million +2.0%

2012
1. Magic Kingdom: 17,536,000 (+2.3% change)
2. Disneyland Park: 15,963,000 (-1.1% )
3. Epcot: 11,063,000 (+2.2%)
4. Disney’s Animal Kingdom: 9,998,000 (+2.2%)
5. Disney’s Hollywood Studios: 9,912,000 (+2.2%)
6. Islands of Adventure: 7,981,000 (+4%)
7. Disney California Adventure: 7,775,000 (+22.6%)
8. Universal Studios Orlando: 6,195,000 (+2.5%)

Note how IOA went up 29% in 2011 but MK and DL both went up 1% like most parks and USO only went up 2%! (THAT is why Diakon alley is necessary!)

Then in 2012 IOA goes up another healthy 4% BUT all 4 Disneyworld parks go up 2+%! Disney isn't hurting at all!!

I wonder if people did like we did: We went for a longer trip to Disney but did a day at IOA to see HP. We stayed at Disney however, so they got more money out of us anyway!

And this poor faltering company is Yahoo's business of the year as was already noted!

 

[rteetz]

Yellowstonetim just hit it out of the park with that one!

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yes, I 'm sure the imagineers out in Burbank who are now wondering if they will still have a job in six months are just rolling in the aisles over it!

Woah...
Early detection radar just tracked
A "disgruntled nametag" bearing 090...

I don't utterly disagree with alot of what you said...but it sure sounds like textbook "boss hate" with the tone.

Ease it off a little

 

[Borishack]

My biggest gripe with Disney at the moment is they really aren't adding anything to appeal to older kids. Fantasyland is great if under 5, and you like princesses, but my preteen boys won't step foot in it. I have a feeling in a couple of years my kids won't want to go to Disney anymore.As it is there are only a few rides at each park that interest them anymore. IMHO Universal does a better job of appealing to kids over 10.

BINGO!!! Our kids are now even older and we face the same issue. We visited back in November; at Hollywood Studios my seventeen year old son had no interest in anything other than RNR, Star Tours and TOT. That meant we were pretty much done with the park in less than 2 hours. Pretty much the same experience at Epcot (Soarin and Test Track and then onto the WS which was a useful distraction for about two hours).

In comparison, we had to drag him out of Universal after a day that started at 8 and went to closing. That complex overall has a much broader and better mix of attractions relative to the age factor. Plenty of stuff for the small fry but you can keep the thrill seekers happy too. Citywalk also was of more interest to our son than DTD.

 

[Borishack]

You seem to be the only one who believes this article is near accurate.

Apples to grapefruit: you are comparing someone with a critical perspective to a bunch of Disney cheerleaders. Go read the the hundreds of posts on Micechat that follow the article and you will see I am by no means alone. Here are some examples:

Dusty Sage
November 26, 2013 at 7:25 am

We all saw this coming a million miles away. You can not add significant value to a theme park by building a better way to squeeze money out of your guests. At least build some rides before you shake them upside down to see whats in their pockets.

Ideally, MyMagic+ should have rolled out with a massive expansion like Star Wars Land instead of pretending to be its own draw (which it will never be on its own).

The sad news here is that instead of rapidly redirecting his attention to other projects and firing everyone involved with the MyMagic+ decision, Iger is instead canceling the thing that will really drive revenue and increased attendance (new attractions) so they can pump even more money into MyMagic+. My hope is that he will get over his anger and sort out the priorities logically. You cant grow a theme park empire without new attractions!!!

Thats Billions (with a B) of wasted money for Disney while Universal rapidly builds Massive Harry Potter expansions in both California and Orlando. At least Universal will have something new for Disneylands 60th anniversary. Perhaps thats the message Iger should be taking to his shareholders.

Mousecat
November 26, 2013 at 8:54 am Rationing versus capacity building

The current WDW model. Like a cruise ship, ration experiences to maximize internal capacity. Where else can the visitor go? If the glass is not full then you are wasting capacity.

The Walt Disney model: Create an environment so compelling you just want to be there. Build a high capacity signature attraction then support it with secondary attractions, stores, and shops that reinforce why you just want to be there.

Funny that Universal is committing $500 million (thats close to $900 in Disney money) a year to do it Walts way.

Yellowstonetim is knocking it out of the park here.

Those posts are articulate and thoughtful, but the the only thing they are really hitting are "status quo is great" softballs. For some reason, they conjur up imagery of someone with a violin overlooking a flaming city...