Dear Mr. Iger...

[nilla]

Are you advocating that we as a consumer should not demand the best from Disney for the prices they are charging?

Like I said earlier, I'm OK with them raising prices considering how busy the place is. Not OK with the cuts that are occurring. Yeah, it'll be great for their bottom line, but not great for me as a consumer.

You can demand whatever you want. However, if it looks like Disney can be more profitable by instituting the cuts, raising prices, etc., they will, and should do it. Of course, if too many people are unhappy about these things, demand will go down. It has to reach a balance. To me, Disney is taking much less of a risk in cutting out street performers and resort greeters than they would be by, say, having Space Mountain running only half of the day.

 

[nilla]

Over the past 10 years WDW has gotten so crowded nobody wants to go there anymore.

You just contradicted yourself

 

[larryz]

They really need to find a way to lessen the crowds. Over the past 10 years WDW has gotten so crowded nobody wants to go there anymore.

You just contradicted yourself

I think @DVCcurious is paraphrasing a quote from Yogi Bear.

 

[dlavender]

I'd gladly pay extra to be able to go with reduced crowds. I hate waiting in line and will pass up any attraction with more than 20-30 minute standby. Until they finish the additions to AK & DHS this may be their answer to keep crowds under control.

It's not as if they doubled the cost of everything.

You can always buy a VIP tour. No lines at all.

 

[Slapshot1188]

Here is a quote from a recent Fool.com article related to Disney theme parks profits being up 22% for the quarter and questioning the wisdom of raising prices while cutting costs:

It also leads one to wonder if Disney shouldn't be spending more instead of shaving its head count. Disney is coming off of another strong quarter. The media giant's theme parks division saw its revenue climb 9% since the prior year's holiday quarter. Perhaps more importantly, operating profits soared by 22% for the quarter. That's pretty impressive, especially with a decline in its international theme park interests weighing down the results. You don't normally see a company scramble to cut costs when margins are widening, especially in a consumer-facing industry where the measures can result in a reduction in guest satisfaction.

The online chatter points to weakness at ESPN as well as the delay and budget overruns at Shanghai Disneyland as the causes for Disney's attention to whittling down costs at its stateside theme parks. That doesn't make sense.

For starters, Disney was able to overcome lower attendance at Disneyland Paris and a spike in pre-opening expenses at Shanghai Disney to still deliver widening profit margins for its theme park division. Then we get to how the market weighs Disney itself. It posted a blowout quarter, with the only decline in its segment revenue and operating income breakdown coming from its ESPN-fueled media networks division. The stock still moved lower on the news, fearing the continuing weakness at ESPN. Improving the already widening margins at its theme parks isn't going to fix ESPN or make Mr. Market look away from the challenges at the leading sports programming network.

In a grim scenario that isn't entirely farfetched we could see the reported cost cuts at Disney World -- and Disneyland -- make matters even worse. If guest satisfaction suffers as a result of understaffed service or shortened attraction times of availability it could make people less likely to visit Disney World. With so many of Disney's more anticipated new attractions still at least a year away it could give potential visitors pause as they map out their spring and summer getaways. Even if Central Florida is in the cards, hitting up Comcast's parks a few miles away -- which unlike Disney has been adding several new attractions -- could be compelling. Comcast has seen Universal Orlando's attendance grow at a faster clip than Disney World for several years now.

There's never a good time to issue layoffs and turn trim the hours of existing works, but it certainly looks bad at a time when margins are increasing and ticket prices are likely to follow suit.

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...ld-is-cutting-costs-at-the-worst-possibl.aspx

 

[larryz]

Here is a quote from a recent Fool.com article related to Disney theme parks profits being up 22% for the quarter and questioning the wisdom of raising prices while cutting costs:

It also leads one to wonder if Disney shouldn't be spending more instead of shaving its head count. Disney is coming off of another strong quarter. The media giant's theme parks division saw its revenue climb 9% since the prior year's holiday quarter. Perhaps more importantly, operating profits soared by 22% for the quarter. That's pretty impressive, especially with a decline in its international theme park interests weighing down the results. You don't normally see a company scramble to cut costs when margins are widening, especially in a consumer-facing industry where the measures can result in a reduction in guest satisfaction.

The online chatter points to weakness at ESPN as well as the delay and budget overruns at Shanghai Disneyland as the causes for Disney's attention to whittling down costs at its stateside theme parks. That doesn't make sense.

For starters, Disney was able to overcome lower attendance at Disneyland Paris and a spike in pre-opening expenses at Shanghai Disney to still deliver widening profit margins for its theme park division. Then we get to how the market weighs Disney itself. It posted a blowout quarter, with the only decline in its segment revenue and operating income breakdown coming from its ESPN-fueled media networks division. The stock still moved lower on the news, fearing the continuing weakness at ESPN. Improving the already widening margins at its theme parks isn't going to fix ESPN or make Mr. Market look away from the challenges at the leading sports programming network.

In a grim scenario that isn't entirely farfetched we could see the reported cost cuts at Disney World -- and Disneyland -- make matters even worse. If guest satisfaction suffers as a result of understaffed service or shortened attraction times of availability it could make people less likely to visit Disney World. With so many of Disney's more anticipated new attractions still at least a year away it could give potential visitors pause as they map out their spring and summer getaways. Even if Central Florida is in the cards, hitting up Comcast's parks a few miles away -- which unlike Disney has been adding several new attractions -- could be compelling. Comcast has seen Universal Orlando's attendance grow at a faster clip than Disney World for several years now.

There's never a good time to issue layoffs and turn trim the hours of existing works, but it certainly looks bad at a time when margins are increasing and ticket prices are likely to follow suit.

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...ld-is-cutting-costs-at-the-worst-possibl.aspx

I wouldn't be surprised to see them sell off the parks... lowered headcount means less severance pay.

 

[nilla]

which unlike Disney has been adding several new attractions

Unlike Disney?

 

[Slapshot1188]

Unlike Disney?

Yes. Not many would contend that fact...

 

[nilla]

Yes. Not many would contend that fact...

So what's with all the construction equipment around Epcot, Hollywood Studios, Animal Kingdom, and Disney Springs?

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Dear Mr. Iger - Great job!

signed - Stock Holders

And our family.

 

[Slapshot1188]

So what's with all the construction equipment around Epcot, Hollywood Studios, Animal Kingdom, and Disney Springs?

You mean the construction equipment siting where attractions used to be? Where hopefully in 2 more years we will have an extra 2 Star Wars rides?

The article is talking about what HAS happened over the last few years. Has there been a major attraction added to DHS since Toy Story Mania in 2008? I'm wracking my brain but really can't think of anything unless you include the 1 new Jaku scene in the Star Wars ride...and the refurb in 2011. I do know that before Star Wars land opens they are closing more attractions though... on top of thos already closed like the Animation Studio and the Backlot Tour (and soon the Motor Cars show)

 

[larryz]

You mean the construction equipment siting where attractions used to be? Where hopefully in 2 more years we will have an extra 2 Star Wars rides?

I think 2 years is very optimistic, if the New Fantasyland Expansion and Avatarland are reliable examples...

 

[nilla]

The article is talking about what HAS happened over the last few years. Has there been a major attraction added to DHS since Toy Story Mania in 2008?

That's what they're working on right now.

 

[Micca]

I think @DVCcurious is paraphrasing a quote from Yogi Bear.

That famous Yogi Berra quote: "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

 

[limabeanmom2003]

People don't care about the price increase in tickets because they will still go to WDW.

 

[wdw4rfam]

I don't get why most people are complaining. If you buy multi day tickets, there was no increase this year

 

[JimmyV]

That famous Yogi Berra quote: "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."

People often use that quote here to dispel the notion that Disney has done something antithetical to its overall mission, proven by the fact that people are still lining up at the turnstiles in record numbers. But two things are worth pointing out. First, WDW attendance is a fuzzy thing. Most people who go, go for an extended period of time. Four days? Five days? Seven? Ten? But when you look at the attendance of the four parks, the attendance of "the other three" has been relatively flat for the past decade. Only the MK has shown steady and significant growth. So does that prove that attendance at WDW is up? We really don't know. Consider the following. A family of four went to WDW in 2011 and stayed for 5 days. On the 5 days they were there, they went to the following parks: Sunday-MK; Monday-Epcot; Tuesday-DHS; Wednesday-AK; Thursday-MK; Friday-Epcot. Total attendance for the 5 days was: MK-8; Epcot-8; DHS-4; AK-4. In 2015 the same family of four went back to WDW for 5 days and did the following: Sunday-MK; Monday-Epcot; Tuesday-DHS; Wednesday-AK and then hopped to MK; Thursday-MK; Friday-Epcot. Total attendance for the 5 days was: MK-12; Epcot-8; DHS-4; AK-4. Wow! The MK had a 50% increase in attendance in 2015. But did it? It was the same family of 4 going for the same length of time. They just turned the turnstile at the MK one more time. Unless there are people who go to WDW and only go to the MK, something like this has to be happening in order for the attendance at the three other parks to be flat while the attendance at the MK climbs.

The second point about Yogi Berra's quote is more critical. What he really was saying is that the people who used to go the restaurant in question no longer go there because it had become overrun with newbies and the "old regulars" don't want to have anything to do with that scene. Sort of like Studio 54. It was the hangout of the "in" crowd and the Andy Warhol beautiful people. Soon, it was overrun by the bridge and tunnel crowd hoping to rub shoulders with famous people. Pretty soon, "nobody" went there anymore because it was too crowded. "Nobody" doesn't mean, literally, nobody. It meant that the people who "mattered" didn't go anymore. When the famous people stopped going, the place was still packed. But pretty soon, even those people stopped going because there was no chance of seeing anyone famous. They had long since moved on. So there was a brief moment in time when the Yogi-ism proved true just as it had been at his favorite restaurant in St. Louis. Nobody [important] went to Studio 54 anymore because it was too crowded [with looky-loos]. And when the looky-loos stopped going, the place imploded.

Does this have any implication to WDW? I have no idea. The analogy would be that the people who have been loyal customers for three or more decades will stop going because it is too crowded with less passionate people who, if quality slips, will not become as loyal as the people they are displacing. So if a family that has been 20 times in 15 years stops going because there are two families clogging up their vacation, Disney still wins if the two new families get hooked and come back frequently. Lose one family. Gain two. Winning. But if the two new families are "one and done" families, then Disney loses both the loyal family and the one and done families. Eventually, that can have an impact. So....Yogi's statement that "nobody goes there anymore because it's too crowded" can be more prescient than we give it credit for. If loyal people stop going because WDW is too crowded with people who don't have any intent to come back, that can spell trouble.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

You can demand whatever you want. However, if it looks like Disney can be more profitable by instituting the cuts, raising prices, etc., they will, and should do it. Of course, if too many people are unhappy about these things, demand will go down. It has to reach a balance. To me, Disney is taking much less of a risk in cutting out street performers and resort greeters than they would be by, say, having Space Mountain running only half of the day.

People don't care about the price increase in tickets because they will still go to WDW.

A+ to both of these comments. I don't mind Disney adjusting their prices to fit their current needs. And as a summer visitor, my family will definitely be paying the price, happily.

 

[GeneralTso]

I can promise you there will be no severe backlash.
Disney will, in fact, make MORE money. Crowds will continue to grow. A few families deciding to "boycott" will not affect the company--not even a little bit.
It's just business. Those who can afford to go, will. Those who can't, don't.

 

[maxiesmom]

Yeah. Disney has built no new rides in the recent past, and has no plans in place for anything else new. Wait.............