Epcot, AK and DHS have been slow all summer?

[lockedoutlogic]

Except that teachers can and do give zeros for missed work/tests. At some schools, you practically need an signed order from Congress for your child to miss school, especially for a vacation.

Then you're falling into the trap...

And the trap is:

Kids are bombarded with work at an earlier age than is healthy so they can "advance"... And get a full ride to Yale (instead of the $500,000 it will cost in 15 years) so that they will get one of the 1,000 jobs available for the graduating class of 10 million in 2025...

Making $38,500 per year.

This is the insanity that our education system has become (nj is a leader in educational insanity)...and it's nuts because it ignores nature.

Brains only do what they were genetically pre-programmed to do... They ultimately fall somewhere on the spectrum and that only can be minimally modified.

So the point?

Zeros in third grade? that's real tough... Laughably so.

Take them to EPCOT and spend a half a day in morocco... Maybe something will actually be learned.

 

[pilferk]

Except that teachers can and do give zeros for missed work/tests. At some schools, you practically need an signed order from Congress for your child to miss school, especially for a vacation.

That largely depends on your school system...and not every school system does it. I know some do, but I will tell you very few of them do in our state.

You can't apply localized anecdotal observation across a national...and even international...consumer base. There is just too much variation. We hear it n these boards constantly. People are taking their kids out of school..and for every report of a draconian board of Ed policy, there is at least one report of the opposite OR someone working around the policy.

My point isn't to refute that some have to travel only in the summer. I know that to be true. My point is that i don't think, and haven't seen evidence,that its the "vast majority".

 

[pilferk]

Well, maybe I shouldn't have used the word "vast" but I would think that the majority of families take their vacations when children from varying grades and ages are all out of school. Not to make a judgement about your fine family...but many(if not most) families do not want(or cannot) to interrupt school for a family vacation.

That *is* after all, why the summer is considered a *peak season* and January is not. Yes, over time vacation patterns have changed quite a bit...but I wouldn't think it would be to the degree we are seeing at WDW this year.

Like many of us have already stated it will be interesting to see this year's attendance numbers when they are finally released. Unfortunately, we aren't privy to Disney's occupancy rates at their hotels or specific restaurant numbers. We have to read between the lines as far as the dollar-per-guest rate.

I think you might be surprised at how many are perfectly willing to remove their grade school kids from school for a week in early December, mid January, or February...especially in the ne part of the country. Middle school and high school (especially) become much more dicey...but even then there are some opportunities to do it. You need look no further than these forums to see it, and not just amongst the disney hardcore. "Should we take take the kids out of school" is a frequent flyer amongst the newbies who find the dis looking for advice. That, in itself, should tell you that there's a good sized population who at the very least consider it.

Just fyi:The times of year I can travel, for example, are limited to when its not busy at work. Those are not vacation times for our kids. If we want a family vacation...it's on my terms, not the school systems. And, for my way of thinking, that week of family bonding time is far more important than what they pick up in the classroom that week. We avoid the standardized testing periods, but other than that...

As for summer being peak season, I think that's my point. You're saying its slowed down, and we've seen pick ups in other parts of the year. Maybe it's not quite as peak as it once was. I agree summer provides a larger market pool of opportunity. But I suspect that exclusive summer pool is shrinking...both because families are making different choices and because disney is actively working to draw people in the slower months. Whether its equivalent or not...we will have to wait and see.

 

[pilferk]

"Lots and lots of families" may be taking their kids out of school for vacations, but it's not practical for us or most of the other families we know. Almost all take their vacations either during the summer or holidays like Christmas or Spring Break(which unfortunately is staggered with children at different ages). Summer is when the vast(yes, I used that word in this case)majority of our friends and families take their vacations.

In a bit on anecdotal tit for tat:

Every family we know "in real life" including coworkers, family and friends ( in and out of our school system)...that have been to wdw in the past 3 years have done it in the off season, except one. And the one went in late June, not because of school commitments, but because the "dad" of the family likes really hot weather..and they couldn't do August because of his work commitments. Heck, we know 2 families down there now, and one more leaving in about 2 weeks. Even the families we know who are planning trips are all planned around off season visits...

Which doesn't mean much, because its anecdotal and regionalized...but that's largely the point. Everyone thinks they are "the norm", and that their particular school rules are the same ones everyone has to abide by. The truth is, there is a LOT of variance.

 

[PEC]

I have read various places that Disney's busiest time is actually Christmas break. I believe the time around Easter is commonly second (I may be wrong on that). The point is Disney does very well in periods of the year outside of the Summer. I can think of a couple of reasons for this. Rain and Heat. Just look at Orlando's average temparature and rainfall and you will quickly see why Spring Break and or December-early January is a better time for a family to plan a week long vacation during those times instead of the Summer. Heck if I have very young children I would schedule during a very off crowd week to not worry about crowd levels and with Elementary Children I agee that missing a week from school is not a big problem (older children often have sports so it can be an issue).
That said the non-MK parks are probably hurting because when is the last time they have really done something new. Let us look at each park. AK - It added EE in 2006 and at some time the Nemo show replaced the tarzan show. Epcot - Soarin I believe in 2005 and EO replaced Honey I Shrunk the Audience. Hollywood Studios added Light Motor Action in 2005 or 2006 and Toy Story Mania in 2008. Hmm no changes in the 2010s except in MK. With that let us look at another big Summer influx group. Locals. Keep in mind most areas have an amusement park that is a day trip in the summer ie Six Flags, Hershey Park, Carowinds etc. People within a couple of hours drive go for one day. If you were in that group and MK added new stuff and the other parks were the exact same for 5 plus years it is logical you would go to MK and or Universal. Doesnt sound like a lot but I dare say there are thousands in the list I just named especially considering Florida's Population within 2 hours of Disney. If each of the non-MK parks added a thousand or 2 thousand a day to their crowd we probably would not be having this discussion. Especially considering these individuals would likely spend at least 10 hours at the park and not just be there early morning and then late afternoon.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Epcot, DHS and AK should be half the price of MK. That would help attendance.

(I know it would require a whole reworking of their current ticket structure)

 

[holiday22]

the week between xmas and NYE IS the busiest time of the year and the week before easter IS the second busiest of the year.

 

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

Since Disney just said they are having very strong attendence this summer, I think it's just that people's observations are a little off. Disney not in trouble any time soon.

 

[Robbi]

That largely depends on your school system...and not every school system does it. I know some do, but I will tell you very few of them do in our state.

You can't apply localized anecdotal observation across a national...and even international...consumer base. There is just too much variation. We hear it n these boards constantly. People are taking their kids out of school..and for every report of a draconian board of Ed policy, there is at least one report of the opposite OR someone working around the policy.

My point isn't to refute that some have to travel only in the summer. I know that to be true. My point is that i don't think, and haven't seen evidence,that its the "vast majority".

My post was in response to another general observation that " Nothing happens in the 3rd grade in October that can't be missed...".

It can and does in certainschool districts as their schools have become more like mini prisons than places to educate children.

 

[pilferk]

Epcot, DHS and AK should be half the price of MK. That would help attendance.

(I know it would require a whole reworking of their current ticket structure)

Except I would guess most people in the parks, on any given day, are on multi day passes.

Reducing the price of day passes would probably not offset the drastic decrease in per day pricing offered by multi day passes. And I'm guessing disney has no interest in per park pricing on multi day passes...ie one day at mk, one at Epcot, etc.

 

[Robbi]

Except I would guess most people in the parks, on any given day, are on multi day passes.

Reducing the price of day passes would probably not offset the drastic decrease in per day pricing offered by multi day passes. And I'm guessing disney has no interest in per park pricing on multi day passes...ie one day at mk, one at Epcot, etc.

I wonder how many people will still purchase multi day passes once FP+ is in effect. If Disney limits the FPs to 3/day in only 1 park, people may not want to park hop as they do now. They're pretty expensive and if the computer spits out times that are spaced hours apart during the day, it might not even allow enough time for people to go from one park to another.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Except I would guess most people in the parks, on any given day, are on multi day passes.

Reducing the price of day passes would probably not offset the drastic decrease in per day pricing offered by multi day passes. And I'm guessing disney has no interest in per park pricing on multi day passes...ie one day at mk, one at Epcot, etc.

Oh I know, they would have to rework their whole ticket structure. They could do this somehow, anything is possible, even for a multi-day pass, but it's not likely.

My point was that I think that the other parks are worth half the price of MK. If people spent less money on tickets by spending more days at DHS or EP or AK, it might help with the crowd problems at MK. It's the same idea behind the park hopper pricing...they price it rather high to discourage people from hopping...which usually means hopping over to MK.

 

[pilferk]

I wonder how many people will still purchase multi day passes once FP+ is in effect. If Disney limits the FPs to 3/day in only 1 park, people may not want to park hop as they do now. They're pretty expensive and if the computer spits out times that are spaced hours apart during the day, it might not even allow enough time for people to go from one park to another.

To be clear: Multi day passes (as in, passes that cover multiple days in the parks...ex: 5 day base tickets) are likely to still sell like gang busters because the per day cost is much cheaper than, say, buyin 6 single day passes.

PARK HOPPER options (multi park per day) on multi day passes I can certainly see being less popular with FP+.

 

[pilferk]

Oh I know, they would have to rework their whole ticket structure. They could do this somehow, anything is possible, even for a multi-day pass, but it's not likely.

My point was that I think that the other parks are worth half the price of MK. If people spent less money on tickets by spending more days at DHS or EP or AK, it might help with the crowd problems at MK. It's the same idea behind the park hopper pricing...they price it rather high to discourage people from hopping...which usually means hopping over to MK.

The problem is the "half the price of MK". If you're buying a 5 day ticket...you're already paying roughly half the MK day guest price per day. Take the 5 day ticket, subtract $95..the price of a single day at MK..and take the remainder and divide it over 4 days.

You can amortize it anyway you want...but it functions basically the same way.

And I'd be shocked to see Disney change that thinking...because it gives the appearance of flexibility and discount, while still "holding hostage" your vacation time (meaning, you're committed to be somewhere on Disney property for, say, 5 days).

 

[Robbi]

To be clear: Multi day passes (as in, passes that cover multiple days in the parks...ex: 5 day base tickets) are likely to still sell like gang busters because the per day cost is much cheaper than, say, buyin 6 single day passes.

PARK HOPPER options (multi park per day) on multi day passes I can certainly see being less popular with FP+.

Sorry, I misunderstood. I agree multi day passes will still be popular.

I agree park hoppers might go bye bye.

 

[OklahomaTourist]

We took what wiil probably be a last trip to WDW for a good while this past summer, and I'll toss in a few observations...

1. Prices limited our stay. Good or bad, right or wrong, we didn't stay as long this time as we have in the past, and that's because of where prices have gone. For the first time, we seriously considered staying off-property, but opted to shorten the stay.

2. Disney's appeal is still largely based on a 1970's demographic model that has girls loving princesses and growing up with Snow White, and guys being something like Huck Finn. That isn't a realistic 21st century model. Although I personally loathe it, I can't ignore the fact that contemporary tastes for young people are drastically different now. I don't know that Disney can evolve that basic product notion entrenched in most people's heads without becoming...well, not Disney. And the changes they've tried are...less than successful, as has been evidenced by some of their more conspicuous theatrical failures and newer content on their themed cable offerings. Some of the Disney stuff out there aimed at teenagers is painfully stupid - and that's not my opinion, it's that of my own teenagers.

3. Disney has sat on its hands. DHS is a park in desperate need of a (finally pending?) overhaul. Epcot has had only selective refreshes. Innoventions has exhibits that were out of date on our first visit over a decade ago, while others were just broken. Replacing time-honored stops with Starbucks locations isn't what I'm talking about. The massive refresh of Fantasyland has been a real disappointment. Again, not my opinion, but that of my daughter. When we'd run the gamut of New Fantasyland - which she was very excited to visit - her ten-cent review that spoke volumes was this: "That's it??"

4. Commoditization save money at the expense of quality and loyalty. Meals this time around at WDW were easily the worst of any of our visits. Bar none. And Disney has no one but itself to blame. It was not that long ago that Disney meal quality was circumspect - but not anymore. There's hardly any hiding the absolutlely ghastly freeze-dried, pre-baked breakfast sandwiches that adorn the menus of many of the quick service places. How many places offered the same versions of the same Congealed Dough Substance under the guise of something Disney special?? The result for us? We had only three dinner ADR's this time around, and only one of them was truly excellent. The others were....meh. As for the rest, we ate in-room or off-site. There's a point where you no longer justify the expense because, on an increasing basis, the food just isn't that good anymore. How many places have you marked as a destination for a specific treat or meal that doesn't offer it anymore, or offers only a changed version that isn't nearly as good, at the same or higher price? That's startlingly similar to something else offered at another restaurant? Offering commodity items to achieve lower costs for increasing profit clearly tells me you want my money. I'd like Disney to convey to me they want my business. And the fact some businesses don't understand that there's a difference is a huge part of the problem. Mind you, I have no problem with Disney making business decisions to make a profit. But the choices made in that pursuit reflect what you think of the ones who generate that profit - the customers. If you make it clear, over time, that all you want is their money, you may find it manifestly difficult to get them back once you lose them.

5. If Disney were focusing on customer retention, FP+ wouldn't be necessary. Yeah, you read that right. Read all the backstory about FP+, and it boils down to this: Disney doesn't want people leaving properties, because they're not spending money at Disney if they leave. So what's the answer? Force them to stay. It completely ignores the broader question of why people are choosing to go elsewhere in the first place. The old-guard mentality of "I can charge anything, I'm Disney" works for a while, but as many other large businesses have found, you cannot do that forever. You eventually wring out the value of the brand, and meanwhile a competitor has come along and engaged your customers for their product, and convinced them they want that precious business -- bringing their money along for the ride. Right now, Disney is just opting to take the easy route - creating an environment where the audience is captive -- because Disney knows they will leave otherwise. Why this isn't compelling TBTP at Disney to rethink what they're offering as a product is just all too telling of where a lot of businesses are - they think they're inevitably successful. We'll see how long the strategy works for Disney.

Sorry for the long post. I love going to WDW, loved taking my kids there, and hope I'll go back someday, but I also know that by the time my kids have kids, a trip there will be so staggeringly expensive I'd be amazed if they could even realistically plan for it. Granted, that's (hopefully) years down the road, but it doesn't take a genius to see where things are heading. Who knows how it will work out.

 

[farah]

@Farah

All the parks...or just the MK?

I was shocked at how the Epcot retaurants were so empty with servers standing around with nothing to do at dinner service when July is supposed to be "peak season". We were at Sci-Fi at 5:30 PM and half of the "cars" empty throughout our experience. We were looking ar each other and saying "What's happening to Disney"? The answer can't be good. Sci-Fi used to be the hottest ticket around(that'ds why we got ADR's 4 months ahead of time).

We ate at Akershus and it was full. Tangerine cafe for dinner was not too busy. AK, HS CS restaurants were packed, lines were long but we took advantage of FP.

 

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

We took what wiil probably be a last trip to WDW for a good while this past summer, and I'll toss in a few observations...

1. Prices limited our stay. Good or bad, right or wrong, we didn't stay as long this time as we have in the past, and that's because of where prices have gone. For the first time, we seriously considered staying off-property, but opted to shorten the stay.

2. Disney's appeal is still largely based on a 1970's demographic model that has girls loving princesses and growing up with Snow White, and guys being something like Huck Finn. That isn't a realistic 21st century model. Although I personally loathe it, I can't ignore the fact that contemporary tastes for young people are drastically different now. I don't know that Disney can evolve that basic product notion entrenched in most people's heads without becoming...well, not Disney. And the changes they've tried are...less than successful, as has been evidenced by some of their more conspicuous theatrical failures and newer content on their themed cable offerings. Some of the Disney stuff out there aimed at teenagers is painfully stupid - and that's not my opinion, it's that of my own teenagers.

3. Disney has sat on its hands. DHS is a park in desperate need of a (finally pending?) overhaul. Epcot has had only selective refreshes. Innoventions has exhibits that were out of date on our first visit over a decade ago, while others were just broken. Replacing time-honored stops with Starbucks locations isn't what I'm talking about. The massive refresh of Fantasyland has been a real disappointment. Again, not my opinion, but that of my daughter. When we'd run the gamut of New Fantasyland - which she was very excited to visit - her ten-cent review that spoke volumes was this: "That's it??"

4. Commoditization save money at the expense of quality and loyalty. Meals this time around at WDW were easily the worst of any of our visits. Bar none. And Disney has no one but itself to blame. It was not that long ago that Disney meal quality was circumspect - but not anymore. There's hardly any hiding the absolutlely ghastly freeze-dried, pre-baked breakfast sandwiches that adorn the menus of many of the quick service places. How many places offered the same versions of the same Congealed Dough Substance under the guise of something Disney special?? The result for us? We had only three dinner ADR's this time around, and only one of them was truly excellent. The others were....meh. As for the rest, we ate in-room or off-site. There's a point where you no longer justify the expense because, on an increasing basis, the food just isn't that good anymore. How many places have you marked as a destination for a specific treat or meal that doesn't offer it anymore, or offers only a changed version that isn't nearly as good, at the same or higher price? That's startlingly similar to something else offered at another restaurant? Offering commodity items to achieve lower costs for increasing profit clearly tells me you want my money. I'd like Disney to convey to me they want my business. And the fact some businesses don't understand that there's a difference is a huge part of the problem. Mind you, I have no problem with Disney making business decisions to make a profit. But the choices made in that pursuit reflect what you think of the ones who generate that profit - the customers. If you make it clear, over time, that all you want is their money, you may find it manifestly difficult to get them back once you lose them.

5. If Disney were focusing on customer retention, FP+ wouldn't be necessary. Yeah, you read that right. Read all the backstory about FP+, and it boils down to this: Disney doesn't want people leaving properties, because they're not spending money at Disney if they leave. So what's the answer? Force them to stay. It completely ignores the broader question of why people are choosing to go elsewhere in the first place. The old-guard mentality of "I can charge anything, I'm Disney" works for a while, but as many other large businesses have found, you cannot do that forever. You eventually wring out the value of the brand, and meanwhile a competitor has come along and engaged your customers for their product, and convinced them they want that precious business -- bringing their money along for the ride. Right now, Disney is just opting to take the easy route - creating an environment where the audience is captive -- because Disney knows they will leave otherwise. Why this isn't compelling TBTP at Disney to rethink what they're offering as a product is just all too telling of where a lot of businesses are - they think they're inevitably successful. We'll see how long the strategy works for Disney.

Sorry for the long post. I love going to WDW, loved taking my kids there, and hope I'll go back someday, but I also know that by the time my kids have kids, a trip there will be so staggeringly expensive I'd be amazed if they could even realistically plan for it. Granted, that's (hopefully) years down the road, but it doesn't take a genius to see where things are heading. Who knows how it will work out.

And with that they still made a ton of money , had record attendence ! Seems with every disgruntled WDW "veteran" ther are 2 families behind you chomping at the bit to go ! My 2 daughters LOVED the New Fantasyland. When Mine Train opens it will only get that much better. Disney hasn't wanted people to leave thier properties for a looooonnnggg time now, not just with the FP+ system. Who can blame them ? Same with any store owner , the longer you stay the more likely you'll spend. Sounds like you need a couple years away, to refresh . When I went in the 70's no way could I afford $50 for the Poly so staggeringly expensive is all relative.

 

[Robbi]

We took what wiil probably be a last trip to WDW for a good while this past summer, and I'll toss in a few observations...

1. Prices limited our stay. Good or bad, right or wrong, we didn't stay as long this time as we have in the past, and that's because of where prices have gone. For the first time, we seriously considered staying off-property, but opted to shorten the stay.

2. Disney's appeal is still largely based on a 1970's demographic model that has girls loving princesses and growing up with Snow White, and guys being something like Huck Finn. That isn't a realistic 21st century model. Although I personally loathe it, I can't ignore the fact that contemporary tastes for young people are drastically different now. I don't know that Disney can evolve that basic product notion entrenched in most people's heads without becoming...well, not Disney. And the changes they've tried are...less than successful, as has been evidenced by some of their more conspicuous theatrical failures and newer content on their themed cable offerings. Some of the Disney stuff out there aimed at teenagers is painfully stupid - and that's not my opinion, it's that of my own teenagers.

3. Disney has sat on its hands. DHS is a park in desperate need of a (finally pending?) overhaul. Epcot has had only selective refreshes. Innoventions has exhibits that were out of date on our first visit over a decade ago, while others were just broken. Replacing time-honored stops with Starbucks locations isn't what I'm talking about. The massive refresh of Fantasyland has been a real disappointment. Again, not my opinion, but that of my daughter. When we'd run the gamut of New Fantasyland - which she was very excited to visit - her ten-cent review that spoke volumes was this: "That's it??"

4. Commoditization save money at the expense of quality and loyalty. Meals this time around at WDW were easily the worst of any of our visits. Bar none. And Disney has no one but itself to blame. It was not that long ago that Disney meal quality was circumspect - but not anymore. There's hardly any hiding the absolutlely ghastly freeze-dried, pre-baked breakfast sandwiches that adorn the menus of many of the quick service places. How many places offered the same versions of the same Congealed Dough Substance under the guise of something Disney special?? The result for us? We had only three dinner ADR's this time around, and only one of them was truly excellent. The others were....meh. As for the rest, we ate in-room or off-site. There's a point where you no longer justify the expense because, on an increasing basis, the food just isn't that good anymore. How many places have you marked as a destination for a specific treat or meal that doesn't offer it anymore, or offers only a changed version that isn't nearly as good, at the same or higher price? That's startlingly similar to something else offered at another restaurant? Offering commodity items to achieve lower costs for increasing profit clearly tells me you want my money. I'd like Disney to convey to me they want my business. And the fact some businesses don't understand that there's a difference is a huge part of the problem. Mind you, I have no problem with Disney making business decisions to make a profit. But the choices made in that pursuit reflect what you think of the ones who generate that profit - the customers. If you make it clear, over time, that all you want is their money, you may find it manifestly difficult to get them back once you lose them.

5. If Disney were focusing on customer retention, FP+ wouldn't be necessary. Yeah, you read that right. Read all the backstory about FP+, and it boils down to this: Disney doesn't want people leaving properties, because they're not spending money at Disney if they leave. So what's the answer? Force them to stay. It completely ignores the broader question of why people are choosing to go elsewhere in the first place. The old-guard mentality of "I can charge anything, I'm Disney" works for a while, but as many other large businesses have found, you cannot do that forever. You eventually wring out the value of the brand, and meanwhile a competitor has come along and engaged your customers for their product, and convinced them they want that precious business -- bringing their money along for the ride. Right now, Disney is just opting to take the easy route - creating an environment where the audience is captive -- because Disney knows they will leave otherwise. Why this isn't compelling TBTP at Disney to rethink what they're offering as a product is just all too telling of where a lot of businesses are - they think they're inevitably successful. We'll see how long the strategy works for Disney.

Sorry for the long post. I love going to WDW, loved taking my kids there, and hope I'll go back someday, but I also know that by the time my kids have kids, a trip there will be so staggeringly expensive I'd be amazed if they could even realistically plan for it. Granted, that's (hopefully) years down the road, but it doesn't take a genius to see where things are heading. Who knows how it will work out.

Excellent post and you made excellent points. I 100% agree that the Fntasyland expansion is a disappointment. Lame doesn't even begin to describe it.
I'm ok with the 70's appeal but I agree they could change up some stuff.

My favorite points were:
It completely ignores the broader question of why people are choosing to go elsewhere in the first place.

Offering commodity items to achieve lower costs for increasing profit clearly tells me you want my money. I'd like Disney to convey to me they want my business. And the fact some businesses don't understand that there's a difference is a huge part of the problem.

 

[amberpi]

And if that becomes a trend...they'll be forced to adjust.

Disney has always, deep down, hoped that the "upper class" will step in and do multiple visits a year to fill the void of the "middle" class.

But that isn't a good marriage. One of the reasons the Four Seasons is user construction is an acknowledgement of that.

Disney is champagne pricing on a beer quality level...those that can spend what they want... Typically see right through it and aren't impressed.

Exactly! I'd rather (and do!) for the money stay at the Swan or the Waldorf any day! Disney could make a lot more money off me if they'd step up their game...I'd be willing to pay a premium for premium service. I can get an amazing suite and town care service from the Grand Cypress for less than a stay at CR, which is a shame. I grew up there and would be willing to pay premium if it was a premium...still love WDW!