For those that say "Disney doesn't spend money on the parks"

[skier_pete]

I'm sorry several of us are unable to make our points clear enough for you to understand.

I realized after I wrote it that the thread title is slightly misleading...but only slightly. I am arguing that those that complain that money isn't be spent on the parks there is a VALID reason why its not being spent on the parks...it's being spent elsewhere. Perhaps I should have more clearly named the thread:

For those who say "Disney doesn't spend money in their parks division"

This whole thing has gotten off-track with the whole DVC portion of the thread. The cost of DVC is a minor point to the capital spend in 2009. BLT was completed already, and the new property in Hawaii wasn't started. Really the extra spend (again 31 % above the previous years) is going towards DCL and DCA.

(Though I'm not sure why I keep bothering to argue my initial point, if someone doesn't agree with me by now, their not gonna.)

 

[eliza61]

I realized after I wrote it that the thread title is slightly misleading...but only slightly. I am arguing that those that complain that money isn't be spent on the parks there is a VALID reason why its not being spent on the parks...it's being spent elsewhere. Perhaps I should have more clearly named the thread:

For those who say "Disney doesn't spend money in their parks division"

This whole thing has gotten off-track with the whole DVC portion of the thread. The cost of DVC is a minor point to the capital spend in 2009. BLT was completed already, and the new property in Hawaii wasn't started. Really the extra spend (again 31 % above the previous years) is going towards DCL and DCA.

(Though I'm not sure why I keep bothering to argue my initial point, if someone doesn't agree with me by now, their not gonna.)

Because the goal of any discussion should not be to "convert" some one to your side. The goal should be exchange of information with the hope of gaining new information or perspective. Why should I have to agree? Opposing points of view are not any less valid or the discussion any less relevant.

 

[Lewisc]

So, I was looking through the 2009 Financial Report for the Walt Disney Company (looking for something else) and noticed this under "Investing Activities":


2008 Capital Expenditures - Parks & Resort Domestic : $793 million
2009 Capital Expenditures - Parks & Resort Domestic : $1,039 million

Disney INCREASED capital expenditures last year by 31 %! That is huge! This figure is described as being "principally for theme parks and resort expansion, new rides and attractions, cruise ships recurring capital and capital improvements." They indicate the rise "reflected spending on Disney's California Adventure expansion and construction progress payments on two new cruise ships". Note none of this counts as the Fantasyland expansion.

My point is, those that complain about Disney World not putting in enough new rides, or not putting in a new country in Epcot, or expanding AK, or whatever, and saying the reason is "Disney is too cheap!" is not looking at the numbers properly.

Looks like all of the increase went to DCL and DCA.

I realized after I wrote it that the thread title is slightly misleading...but only slightly. I am arguing that those that complain that money isn't be spent on the parks there is a VALID reason why its not being spent on the parks...it's being spent elsewhere. Perhaps I should have more clearly named the thread:

For those who say "Disney doesn't spend money in their parks division"

This whole thing has gotten off-track with the whole DVC portion of the thread. The cost of DVC is a minor point to the capital spend in 2009. BLT was completed already, and the new property in Hawaii wasn't started. Really the extra spend (again 31 % above the previous years) is going towards DCL and DCA.

(Though I'm not sure why I keep bothering to argue my initial point, if someone doesn't agree with me by now, their not gonna.)

The title isn't slightly misleading, It's 100% wrong.

 

[skiingfast]

The title isn't slightly misleading, It's 100% wrong.

"Walt Disney Parks and Resorts"

This is the name (quote from disney.com) Disney uses for the division that the first post is about. In the first post is also the words ' "They indicate the rise "reflected spending on Disney's California Adventure expansion and construction progress payments on two new cruise ships" '.

This implies a total division's spending that includes DVC and DCL along with DLR and WDW.


Lewisc your statement above is 100% wrong.

 

[Lewisc]

I didn't word my post properly. You said:

My point is, those that complain about Disney World not putting in enough new rides, or not putting in a new country in Epcot, or expanding AK, or whatever, and saying the reason is "Disney is too cheap!" is not looking at the numbers properly.

Your title, in conjunction with the body of your OP, is clearly referring to the parks at WDW.

Your title is 100% wrong since your figures don't break out how much of the money was spent for DCL. Your figures don't provide any information regarding how much is spent for theme parks in Florida or California.

"Walt Disney Parks and Resorts"

This is the name (quote from disney.com) Disney uses for the division that the first post is about. In the first post is also the words ' "They indicate the rise "reflected spending on Disney's California Adventure expansion and construction progress payments on two new cruise ships" '.

This implies a total division's spending that includes DVC and DCL along with DLR and WDW.


Lewisc your statement above is 100% wrong.

 

[movie77]

The problems I have with the Disney company are entirely within their management. They don't run the place as if they have any vision or insight. So much of it now seems like it is right out of an MBA curriculum. Walt Disney didn't have one and MBA school doesn't teach you how to be a Walt Disney. They've been raising rates, sometimes at twice inflation, for a few years now. They continue to slash costs by reducing quality of merchandise and the variety of it. They've turned to more part-time CMs than ever before, just to save the overhead of fulltimers.

I am still very much a Disney fan, but it is becoming clear to me that it is much more of an appreciation of the history than what they are doing today.

right on!

 

[FireDancer]

DCL and DVC are both in the Parks and Resorts division so when Disney spends money on either they are spending money on the parks. Parks, for the purpose of this discussion, is the parks division, not the physical theme parks. I would rather Disney spend the money on improving some aspects of WDW but from a corporate POV I understand why they spent the money where they did. The Fantasy Land and DCA refurbs are addressing the physical parks more directly.

 

[skier_pete]

The title isn't slightly misleading, It's 100% wrong.

OK, now your getting nasty. The title is what I intended to say...I only tried to rephrase it to make people that didn't seem to grasp my intention get it. If you don't think so, that's fine by me, but you don't need to insult me, thank you very much. You can disagree with what I say (and you do and that's fine) but saying I don't know what I'm talking about or I'm 100 % wrong in stating a couple of facts (documented in the annual report) and an opinion is insulting and you know that.

All I pointed out was quoted directly from Disney's report. I didn't infer it. They stated the increase, and indicated that the added money is going towards DCL and DCA...both right there in the report. My point...yet again...was that Disney IS spending money...just not in Florida. The is saying that, if you are arguing that they aren't spending money on the parks (@ WDW), well you may be right, but it ISN'T BECAUSE THEY ARE CUTTING BACK, but they are spending it elsewhere....which I have a hard time finding a valid argument against why that should be a problem (and haven't seen one posted here yet.)

Now, if you can respond without insulting my intellegence again, that would be more appreciated. You had some cognitive arguments in your post, around the insults.

 

[skier_pete]

DCL and DVC are both in the Parks and Resorts division so when Disney spends money on either they are spending money on the parks. Parks, for the purpose of this discussion, is the parks division, not the physical theme parks. I would rather Disney spend the money on improving some aspects of WDW but from a corporate POV I understand why they spent the money where they did. The Fantasy Land and DCA refurbs are addressing the physical parks more directly.

THANK YOU...at least someome gets what I'm saying!

 

[mousermerf]

Why is spending elsewhere bad? You're seriously asking that?

Because it's a finite pot of money and no one looks at the division and says "Well, they are adding cruise ships to the parks and resorts area so lets give them just as much for the actual parks on top of the cruise ship money."

No, not at all how it works. If they spend money on the cruise ships the actual parks get screwed out of the money.

 

[skiingfast]

No, not at all how it works. If they spend money on the cruise ships the actual parks get screwed out of the money.

I'm not sure how much of the thread you have read.

The aren't getting screwed out of any money. If Disney wants to give the Park division money for WDW it would. In this case it decided to allocate money to DCL. If it hadn't there is no evidence that it would of gone into WDW instead.

 

[mousermerf]

Do you even realize you goto the parks and it in no way benefits you to defend corporate mentalities and decisions which are detrimental to the things you supposedly love?

Disney sees it as DCL and DVC as ways to make money, not investments in the parks. There is a fundamental flaw in their logic - them not realizing they haven't see the ROI from the parks lately due to shoddy quality and poor showmanship - but there's still no reason to have it as your reason for posting to these forums.

Why on earth would you want the company to not put money into the parks? Why would you goto great lengths to defend them lowering the bar on quality? Why do you feel compelled to justify things that are negatively impacting your vacation?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Disney's last 10 years of "investment" in the parks have fallen into a couple of generalized categories:

1. Shoddy, fast tracked "second gates" at existing Disneyland locations to attempt to make "multi-day destinations" as with WDW (Tokyo DisneySea...which somebody else footed the bill for - being the big exception)

2. Thinly veiled attempts at maximizing profit by doing "low overhead" development....outsourcing food and merchandise...dvc...one shameless repetitive giftshop selling mass produced chinese junk after another

3. Corrections to mistakes above (cali adventure, studios paris, hong kong, chester and hesters dinorama....and on and on and on)...or purely merchandise motivated "improvements" (i.e. outsourcing pleasure island...and the magical fairyland of giftshops and bibidi boppity boutiques in the Magic Kingdom...downtown disney anaheim...downtown disney paris...downtown disney west side...downtown disney topeka....downtown disney __________)



I know i sound harsh....unfortunately its the truth


i would say that the only real exceptions (aside from the aforementioned tokyo disneysea) are the incessant tinkering to EPCOT. which probably hasn't worked out that great anyway. what do we got? a hurl-a-tron...a pavilion that went from best to complete decay and now has to be bailed out by Jacko...a "thrill" ride where you sit in a convertible car and go 65 miles an hour (roughly 2/3 the speed of normal traffic flow on the new jersey turnpike on a given day)....
i'll give them credit for trying...but it just hasn't been that good.

oh yeah...and they closed wonders of life and turned it into millenium village part deux....
...i'm sure the hedge fund conventioners are living it up in there as we speak

(disclaimer: i - for one - don't necessarily think that all these things are "bad"...just pathetically thinly veiled. a definite lack of "imagineering" when it comes to profit hounding)

 

[nytimez]

Disney's last 10 years of "investment" in the parks have fallen into a couple of generalized categories:

1. Shoddy, fast tracked "second gates" at existing Disneyland locations to attempt to make "multi-day destinations" as with WDW (Tokyo DisneySea...which somebody else footed the bill for - being the big exception)

2. Thinly veiled attempts at maximizing profit by doing "low overhead" development....outsourcing food and merchandise...dvc...one shameless repetitive giftshop selling mass produced chinese junk after another

3. Corrections to mistakes above (cali adventure, studios paris, hong kong, chester and hesters dinorama....and on and on and on)...or purely merchandise motivated "improvements" (i.e. outsourcing pleasure island...and the magical fairyland of giftshops and bibidi boppity boutiques in the Magic Kingdom...downtown disney anaheim...downtown disney paris...downtown disney west side...downtown disney topeka....downtown disney __________)



I know i sound harsh....unfortunately its the truth


i would say that the only real exceptions (aside from the aforementioned tokyo disneysea) are the incessant tinkering to EPCOT. which probably hasn't worked out that great anyway. what do we got? a hurl-a-tron...a pavilion that went from best to complete decay and now has to be bailed out by Jacko...a "thrill" ride where you sit in a convertible car and go 65 miles an hour (roughly 2/3 the speed of normal traffic flow on the new jersey turnpike on a given day)....
i'll give them credit for trying...but it just hasn't been that good.

oh yeah...and they closed wonders of life and turned it into millenium village part deux....
...i'm sure the hedge fund conventioners are living it up in there as we speak

(disclaimer: i - for one - don't necessarily think that all these things are "bad"...just pathetically thinly veiled. a definite lack of "imagineering" when it comes to profit hounding)

I don't disagree with much of what you've said, but I actually do think they've done a pretty good job of updating Epcot over the past decade. I think Mission: Space and Soarin' (even if it's from another park) and terrific attractions. While I don't love Test Track, it's very popular among visitors, especially kids who simply love the "thrill" of being in a "speeding car." Again, it doesn't do much for me -- but it does appeal to a good demo.

The Nemo attraction at The Living Seas is a very nice update of a traditional dark ride, and I find Turtle Talk to be quite groundbreaking. And I think they've done a nice job with the Spaceship Earth update.

Again, I see your overall points. But Epcot isn't the place to make it, IMO.

 

[Donut23]

Tonight we were working on our plans for our post-Thanksgiving trip to WDW. I took a few minutes to checkout YouTube.....watched the soldiers in the Christmas Party....and the Castle lighting. <<<<THERE was the comparison I have been looking for!


For all of us who LOVE disney and are not happy with erroding quality.....

The Castle Lighting each holiday seaon is the quality Disney used to be known for.

They have produced far fewer home runs like that in the last few years.

 

[Oglet]

The problem is that 20 or 30 years ago they really only had DL and MK to Spend Money on, Epcot was still very new and still had that wow factor so any money spent was spent over 1 or 2 places. Money spent on something new is far more noticeable than money spent on keeping something looking new.

Now MK is 40 years old, DL is over 50, Epcot is around 30 and they have a whole load of other things DAK, DHS, DVC, Water Parks, Other International Parks and Resorts and a whole lot of other investments that also need updating etc.

People, myself included want the parks to look as good as they can and a big part of the problem IMHO is for many years Disney was about mass expansion of their brand while many things that were starting to show their age were passed over and now its really starting to catch up with them.

Do they spend money on parks? the answer is yes, its obvious they do. Do they spend enough money on them? the answer is no.

With a monorail system that has gone from in 1982 having than 10 hours downtime over a whole year to a system that has 10+ hours downtime a week its obvious that something needs changed. Disney just announced a small expansion of the line out near Epcot so they can park a work tractor for when breakdowns occur.

WDW is almost 40 years old, It needs a lot of work done to it both cosmetically and internally. The monorail system had way too much downtime, Space mountain breaks down 20+ times a day it seems (even after a major overhaul last summer), Cast Member costumes look old and wore out as well. Backstage contruction/work areas are eyesores and in many cases are not even attempted to be hidden from general view (Grand Flo to MK on the left hand side)

Maybe I am being too harsh but I expect nothing short of close to perfection from Disney, its what they made their name on and it is why over 50+ years they are thriving and going strong while many others have just gone away.

 

[skier_pete]

Why is spending elsewhere bad? You're seriously asking that?

Because it's a finite pot of money and no one looks at the division and says "Well, they are adding cruise ships to the parks and resorts area so lets give them just as much for the actual parks on top of the cruise ship money."

No, not at all how it works. If they spend money on the cruise ships the actual parks get screwed out of the money.

Yup, you are right - money is going into things besides WDW...I'm arguing that it's not a bad thing. You think it is...that's cool...we agree to disagree.

Disney's last 10 years of "investment" in the parks have fallen into a couple of generalized categories:

1. Shoddy, fast tracked "second gates" at existing Disneyland locations to attempt to make "multi-day destinations" as with WDW (Tokyo DisneySea...which somebody else footed the bill for - being the big exception)

2. Thinly veiled attempts at maximizing profit by doing "low overhead" development....outsourcing food and merchandise...dvc...one shameless repetitive giftshop selling mass produced chinese junk after another

3. Corrections to mistakes above (cali adventure, studios paris, hong kong, chester and hesters dinorama....and on and on and on)...or purely merchandise motivated "improvements"

I'll agree with this is mostly what they've done, though to call it thinly veiled...it's not veiled at all, they've come straight out and said they are doing it. DTD in particular seems to be blunder after blunder.

BUT - Many people on here are posting about the correciton of DCA as a "negative", which I don't quite get...doesn't this indicate that they are moving onto a better track if they are trying to fix things that are broken?

i would say that the only real exceptions (aside from the aforementioned tokyo disneysea) are the incessant tinkering to EPCOT.

Disagree on Epcot. Looking at the last 10 years, I think they've done some good stuff. Mission Space is an upgrade over Horizons. Soarin' is excellent. The Seas overhaul was great. Even SSE update I think was nicely done, though many disagree with me. Wonders of Life was kind of bizarre that they let it fall apart, obviously budget cuts there. I don't count Imagination - which has been a mess since the '90s.

The Castle Lighting each holiday seaon is the quality Disney used to be known for.

They have produced far fewer home runs like that in the last few years.

The Castle Lighting is awesome. But, I would put a few more home runs of the last few years.
1) Soarin' is definitely a knockout.
2) Expedition Everest is only marred by the Yeti problems, which the average guest has no clue about and therefore doesn't effect...so I'd argue that's a homer because it is an awesome ride from queue to tail end.
3) TSMM is way more fun than it deserves to be. Simple yet effective, and with the ability to change the ride over time it is brilliant.
4) I think the Laugh Floor is a great addition at MK. Yes, it's a second tier attraction, but it replaced a second tier attraction, and made it 10 times more entertaining than old 9-eye.
5) Haunted Mansion refurb was awesome, and the PotC and Space Mountain refurbs were also improvements.
6) Can we count the Space Mountain refurb in California? Was that in the last 10 years?
7) Star Tours 2.0 won't be on-line for 10 months, but it's a much needed upgrade as well.

Now MK is 40 years old, DL is over 50, Epcot is around 30 and they have a whole load of other things DAK, DHS, DVC, Water Parks, Other International Parks and Resorts and a whole lot of other investments that also need updating etc.

I'm going to switch argument sides here...yes they've added new things...but when they add a new park...they add a new revenue stream as well. Each of the parks should be able to maintain themselves with their own revenue. In fact, I don't know how it works, but how it SHOULD work is each park should have a constant stream of money for maintenance and unkeep. Then - the capital improvements get allocated overall, and distributed across the groups where they are needed. This bucket should also be much bigger than 20 years ago, again because incomes are so much bigger.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I would think that a logical take would be that you have to include the billion dollar band-aid to California Adventure as a resounding negative....

Why should any disney enterprise need such a drastic and quick realignment program? that's against everything that they claim the "brand" symbolizes.

It may be a great park someday...perhaps soon...but the fact that it even was built and opened as it was indicates that somebody had let the train go off the rails a little bit.

But we know the reason: the desire to build gigantic, ridiculous cash generating cows as in Florida. But florida has dirtcheap labor, low taxes, and as disney himself said "the blessing of size". the fact that eisner even dared think they could pull something off like that so haphazardly should have warranted his immediate removal in 2002 when the mistake was glaring.

but whatever...more outlets to sell mickey plushes....as disney said "It all started with selling plushes of a mouse"

 

[ChrisFL]

Mission Space is an upgrade over Horizons. Soarin' is excellent. The Seas overhaul was great. Even SSE update I think was nicely done, though many disagree with me. Wonders of Life was kind of bizarre that they let it fall apart, obviously budget cuts there. I don't count Imagination - which has been a mess since the '90s.

Disagree 100% on Mission:Space. Horizons was a much better overall attraction and should never have received the fate that it did. It defined EPCOT.

 

[skiingfast]

How bad is AK?

I ask because if you look at the amount spent on AK compared to DCA it is almost directly propotional to the visits.

Most of the bad reviews of DCA are because it is compared to DL, the best domestic park that is a hundred yards away. If it wasn't compared to DL people may of said it certainly seems amazing and busy compared to Magic Mountain, (AKA wallyworld), or Knotts.

Next April when we see the 2010 attendance it may have the biggest jump for a Disney park because World of Color is very popular and I don't desire to think about the crowds Carsland will build.