For $2 Billion Disney could have built 16 major attractions instead of fast pass+

[Tonka's Skipper]

Not the only reason but since introducing FP+ Dis stock is up over 30%.

Hello Redarrow,

Somehow I think that stock going up has more to do with Frozen and the many other Disney movie hits, and all Disney properties doing well, especially parks around the world attendance, including WDW.

The many additions going on to many parks including WDW, show the company as a whole is moving forward. Disney magic, theming and characters and stories is what appeal's to the millions of guests. The wide range of themed rides/ attractions are what is important at Disney The thrill rides add of course, but they are low on the list..

All of this is what is driving the stock up. Mine included!

AKK

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

1. Elsa's Let it Go Luge
2. Anna's Love at First Sight Wedding Pavilion
3. Han's Best Kept Secret Kiosk
4. Kristof's Inappropriate Talking Petting Zoo
5. Marshmallow Blasters
6. King and Queen of Arendelle Sea Voyage Premium Package
7. Walking on Thin Ice Magicband Functionality Test
8. Pick a Pearl for Elsa's Crown
9. Hang in there Joan Glider Experience (Soarin Overlay)
10. Enchanted Tales with Annoying Arendelle Citizens
11. A Bit of a Fixer Upper Troll Speed Dating Experience
12. Coronation Dinner Package...Reserved Seating for Gate Opening Ceremony
13. Warm Hug Obstacle Course
14. Those Mountains Are Filled With Environmental Friendly Fossil Fuels with Ellen
15. Where's Rapenzel? The Ultimate Challenge to find Anything Non Frozen Related in a Gift Shop
16. All Mickey Shapes to be replaced with Snowman...Snowman Ice Cream bBar, Snowman Rice Krispie Treats, Snowman Cookies, Snowman Chicken Nuggets, Snowman Antennae Toppers, Snowman Ear Hats, Snowman Magicband Sensors (1billion dollar upgrade), Snowman Beignets, Snowman Waffles, Snowman Pancakes, etc, etc, etc

I agree about Frozen. I am not against the Frozen items, but dam Iger, tell marketing that Tangled and Brave, etc., all have a following as well!

AKK

 

[Reddog1134]

True, but I think you missed my metaphor. The theme park customers want meat but Disney's monumental effort is to distribute hummus.

Even more simplistic: "You invested $2B into the parks? Awesome! When can I start riding?"

Just because a company throws massive amounts of resources into a forward thinking, cost minimizing, revenue enhancing, technological marvel doesn't mean it was the best thing to do and their customers will automatically accept it based on those merits alone.

"Where's the BEEF?"

Not every dollar can or should be spent on rides.

Just like because someone wants meat, doesn't mean you should give them just meat every day for every meal.

Unfortunately, it seems that everyone ONLY wants rides.

"We built a new shop"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new hotel"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new ride"
"Meh, I wanted an e-ticket ride."

 

[Laketravis]

Unfortunately, it seems that everyone ONLY wants rides.[/I]

Because in the end, it's a theme park.

 

[Laketravis]

Not the only reason but since introducing FP+ Dis stock is up over 30%.

But the primary reason is because I didn't buy any. Dangit.

 

[jtowntoflorida]

Not the only reason but since introducing FP+ Dis stock is up over 30%.

OMG, this is one of the most ridiculous things I have read on this board, ever.

This is from Disney's FY2014 10K:

Revenue growth of 8% at our domestic operations reflected increases of 5% from higher average guest spending and 2% from higher volumes. Increased guest spending was primarily due to higher average ticket prices for admissions at our theme parks and for sailings at our cruise line and increased food, beverage and merchandise spending.

Also, Disney's operating income in its Studios segment increased by OVER 100%, to $1.5 Billion. Parks & Resorts income was up as well, but both segments combined are still dwarfed by Media Networks, which account for $7.3 billion of Disney's total income of over $12.2 billion. Most of Disney's income doesn't come from the parks, it comes from ESPN.

 

[Hokie2000]

I wonder how much it cost Disney to install the ticket turnstiles and remove the individual ticket booths back in the day? To install new locks on hotel doors to accommodate KTTW cards? To install FP- kiosks, FP- ride signage and reconfigure queues? To print all those little pieces of paper? To maintain their website? We can think of a lots of ways Disney has spent money over the years keeping up w/ technology before MM+, if we were to add all of that up just imagine the ride possibilities!!

DHS needs some serious work, but it looks like they're addressing it soon. AK gets Avatarland. I haven't seen the movie, but the concept art looks pretty cool. MK got New Fantasyland, which plays to mixed reviews but the investment was made. Epcot...I have nothing to say, it seems to be serving mostly as festival space lately, but hopefully it will get some serious investment soon. Yes, if they had dumped all the MM+ money into Epcot and DHS I'm sure it would be spectacular, but how can anyone be certain that spectacular things are not on the way regardless?

 

[ilovemk76]

Because in the end, it's a theme park.

Amusement parks are about only rides. Theme parks are about a complete experience that follows a theme. Theme parts cost more to build and require more space.

It is a resort not just a theme park.

 

[poppinspenguins]

Do you not like technology in general, and just favor making more of what we have?

For example. Say 40 years ago someone made a paper airplane. They could keep making paper airplanes forever. Then someone had the foresight to invent a computer. And they were awful clunky beasts that were mocked. It would take you 1000 x longer to program, print, fold a paper airplane on a computer than you could simply fold by hand. So why should people spend thousands (and eventually billions upon billions) of dollars developing computer technologies when we can already build paper airplanes without them?

Because, 10, 20, 30, and 40 years later, they change the world for the better. We can now build technological wonders that are the dreamliners that fly things all over the world. Because while other ppl were thinking they just want to build more of what they had, someone else thought to invest in building technology -- technology that seemed silly, unnecessary, and wasteful to those who did not also have the same foresight.

This technology for Disney is the same. Yes they could have made more rides (and in all seriousness they are putting in rides left and right). But this technology will set them apart from all their competition for many years, who will now play catchup to try to get similar systems to be competitive.

Even tho technology is expensive, I'm glad we have ppl running Disney that embrace it instead of someone who would only put in more rides. I think they're taking a very balanced approach! They are putting in new rides, new lands, opening new theme parks, and renovating others, while also furthering their technology.

Putting rides left and right???? Huh?

AK and any unannouncd changes to HS withstanding; they have added 2 rides at MK. so, what 3 rides in 10 years? in that same time half of HS has closed down and epcot has lots of empty buildings.

 

[tim123]

Amusement parks are about only rides. Theme parks are about a complete experience that follows a theme. Theme parts cost more to build and require more space.

It is a resort not just a theme park.

Agreed,
I go to hang at the Poly or Wilderness Lodge on my balcony. I love to eat on top of the Contemporty. I like to cruise around the Lagoon in a little boat.
I like to ride the monorail nowhere. I like to walk around Ft Wilderness.
WDW was always a RESORT destination FIRST and for most. Golf anyone, horseback riding….shopping and dining….
It is not at the end of the day "just a theme park".
DisneyLand? OK….
But Walt designed and envisioned WDW as a RESORT with muti-use from the get go.

 

[BrianL]

Not every dollar can or should be spent on rides.

Just like because someone wants meat, doesn't mean you should give them just meat every day for every meal.

Unfortunately, it seems that everyone ONLY wants rides.

"We built a new shop"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new hotel"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new ride"
"Meh, I wanted an e-ticket ride."

How true! Some folks will just never be happy.

 

[MrInfinity]

True, but I think you missed my metaphor. The theme park customers want meat but Disney's monumental effort is to distribute hummus.

Even more simplistic: "You invested $2B into the parks? Awesome! When can I start riding?"

Just because a company throws massive amounts of resources into a forward thinking, cost minimizing, revenue enhancing, technological marvel doesn't mean it was the best thing to do and their customers will automatically accept it based on those merits alone.

"Where's the BEEF?"

It's easy to forget Disney does not "do anything for the customer". Disney is a company, it is trying to maximize profit from customers.

Disney is not showing you the BEEF. They are taking it from you, and figuring out ways to get your money more efficiently.

I don't fault them for this. They have the dominant product that people want. They have enough rides that guests will pay to go. Now they need to focus on keeping their brand leaps and bounds ahead of the competition. Last thing they want to do is reduce their parks to a Six Flags or Universal type park. They lead by constantly reinventing. Not by adding more rides. Universal and Six Flags -- have to add rides. That is what their draw is. They are a rides park. If they didn't add rides they would die cuz that's all they are.

And, once again, you fail to see that while creating their "forward thinking, cost minimizing, revenue enhancing, technological marvel" (good description! ) they are at the same time adding rides, lands, and parks left and right.

They have such incredible cash flow that they can expand their two flagship parks with Carsland and the Enchanted Forest, rebuild an entire quarter of the AK, BUY Lucasfilm outright, buy Marvel out from under Universal, build an entirely new park over seas, revamp EuroD, pour $2B into their technological marvel, and STILL raise their dividend to investors by 30%. That is just plain amazing.

You have to look at the massive spend they're doing EVERYWHERE. Oh... but Universal added a new ride... ooooooo.....

 

[tim123]

It's easy to forget Disney does not "do anything for the customer". Disney is a company, it is trying to maximize profit from customers.

Disney is not showing you the BEEF. They are taking it from you, and figuring out ways to get your money more efficiently.

I don't fault them for this. They have the dominant product that people want. They have enough rides that guests will pay to go. Now they need to focus on keeping their brand leaps and bounds ahead of the competition. Last thing they want to do is reduce their parks to a Six Flags or Universal type park. They lead by constantly reinventing. Not by adding more rides. Universal and Six Flags -- have to add rides. That is what their draw is. They are a rides park. If they didn't add rides they would die cuz that's all they are.

And, once again, you fail to see that while creating their "forward thinking, cost minimizing, revenue enhancing, technological marvel" (good description! ) they are at the same time adding rides, lands, and parks left and right.

They have such incredible cash flow that they can expand their two flagship parks with Carsland and the Enchanted Forest, rebuild an entire quarter of the AK, BUY Lucasfilm outright, buy Marvel out from under Universal, build an entirely new park over seas, revamp EuroD, pour $2B into their technological marvel, and STILL raise their dividend to investors by 30%. That is just plain amazing.

You have to look at the massive spend they're doing EVERYWHERE. Oh... but Universal added a new ride... ooooooo.....

oh boy your are in for it now….

 

[johde]

I'm basing this off of Wikipedia which states that Everest cost around $100MM to build. Adjusting for inflation that would be around $120MM in today's dollars so spending $2B could have instead meant 16 major attractions (16.7 to be exact!)

$2B is a lot of coin. Think about what the Imagineering crew could have done with that. Endless possibilities. But we got an app. What a waste...

To use more modern cost example. The DCA remodel cost $1.1 Billion and for that money we got a new immaculately themed land with 1 E-ticket attraction and 2 B-ticket attractions and a remodeling of the entrance plaza/Buena Vista St. The estimated $2 Billion is nearly 2 of those.

Avatarland, with 2 rides (hopefully) is expected to cost $500 million. New Fantasyland with 2 rides is estimated at $425 million. $2 Billion is about 4 of this scale project.

Yes, Disney could have done a lot with that money. But, it today's top tier theme park environment, not as much as your thinking.

 

[Laketravis]

Agreed,
I go to hang at the Poly or Wilderness Lodge on my balcony. I love to eat on top of the Contemporty. I like to cruise around the Lagoon in a little boat.
I like to ride the monorail nowhere. I like to walk around Ft Wilderness.
WDW was always a RESORT destination FIRST and for most. Golf anyone, horseback riding….shopping and dining….
It is not at the end of the day "just a theme park".
DisneyLand? OK….
But Walt designed and envisioned WDW as a RESORT with muti-use from the get go.

We're talking about the parks here, not the resorts.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

Not every dollar can or should be spent on rides.

Just like because someone wants meat, doesn't mean you should give them just meat every day for every meal.

Unfortunately, it seems that everyone ONLY wants rides.

"We built a new shop"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new hotel"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new ride"
"Meh, I wanted an e-ticket ride."

I think this is somewhat true. Even if they built rides this board would be full of complaints about how they should have built different rides than the ones they did build...no matter what they ended up building.

 

[tim123]

We're talking about the parks here, not the resorts.

I see all of WDW as a resort.
And was under the impression that when we talk about the negatives of Magic Bands etc…their impact as per discussion here…is resort wide…company wide for that matter….seems to me….apps for bus schedules…dining, shopping, hotel room entry etc..…..
Isn't that the conundrum persistent here?

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Agreed,
I go to hang at the Poly or Wilderness Lodge on my balcony. I love to eat on top of the Contemporty. I like to cruise around the Lagoon in a little boat.
I like to ride the monorail nowhere. I like to walk around Ft Wilderness.
WDW was always a RESORT destination FIRST and for most. Golf anyone, horseback riding….shopping and dining….
It is not at the end of the day "just a theme park".
DisneyLand? OK….
But Walt designed and envisioned WDW as a RESORT with muti-use from the get go.

YEAP THIS!

Walt even envisioned Epcot as a living and breathing city.

AKK

 

[jade1]

Who says they wont?

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Not every dollar can or should be spent on rides.

Just like because someone wants meat, doesn't mean you should give them just meat every day for every meal.

Unfortunately, it seems that everyone ONLY wants rides.

"We built a new shop"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new hotel"
"Where's my new ride?"

"We built a new ride"
"Meh, I wanted an e-ticket ride."

WELL Said Sir!. It's not everyone with the next thrill ride thing....more just the vocal few.

AKK