Galactic Starcruiser Hotel to Close in September

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

Does anybody know is the member cruise sold out? Considering trying to book it when sales return.

 

[tjkraz]

Unfortunately, this was a money grab, plain and simple. The concept was fantastic, but when they got greedy and charged such an exorbitant amount for it, the internet exploded. The cost became the talking point (negative) which grossly outweighed the superior experience (positive). When it first opened, all you would read about was how EXPENSIVE it was, but buried deep into the articles was how well it was presented. Perhaps if they had started out at a reasonable price point, and had it sold out for 1-2 years, it would have been touted as a great EXPERIENCE and worth the cost (we all know Disney is expensive), THEN they could have slowly started to increase the cost to entice new guests. By the time they realized that bookings were down, discounts were not going to help because there had already been so much negative press about it, even though it was based on the cost, not the experience.

I don't think "greed" is a particularly fair descriptor of why it failed. Dating back to the original concept, Disney had an idea of the type of experience they wanted to deliver. Elements like heavy interaction with performers and all-inclusive meals were very expensive. And you've only got a maximum of 100 parties present at any time to deliver those services. Like everything else in the world, the last 2+ years have sent cost skyrocketing. Disney undoubtedly had to spend more for staffing, meals and all other aspects than it originally projected.

Yes, it ended up being too expensive to gain mass acceptance. And those high costs were driven by what Disney was forced to spend just to operate the hotel. 25% discounts seemed to work on some level--the DVC "voyage" sold out pretty quickly. But apparently a 25% reduction in revenue long-term isn't enough to sustain the operation. The fact that they didn't even try to re-tool and present a lesser experience for lower cost says a lot, IMO.

As a Disney parks fan, personally I WANT Disney taking big swings like this. Not everything is going to pan out. This one is particularly embarrassing on many levels--and costly. Many news sites have reveled in the headline "Disney hotel fails!" But the alternative is for Disney to continue creating a vanilla experience of hotels, attractions and shows which are tried and true, deemed failure-proof. I'd rather see them continue to take risks from time to time. They'll learn from this experience, and hopefully the next one will play out better.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Yes, it ended up being too expensive to gain mass acceptance. And those high costs were driven by what Disney was forced to spend just to operate the hotel. 25% discounts seemed to work on some level--the DVC "voyage" sold out pretty quickly. But apparently a 25% reduction in revenue long-term isn't enough to sustain the operation. The fact that they didn't even try to re-tool and present a lesser experience for lower cost says a lot, IMO.

I don’t think the model really left any room for practical discounts. If you look at discounts at “regular” Disney hotels, they only apply to certain room types, leaving other room inventory at regular or rack rates. Also, those discounts only apply to the room, and not for every meal or activity associated with your trip. 25% off an (mostly) all-inclusive experience meant a 25% reduction in revenue across the board, and that’s not sustainable given the the extent of the immersion and the very small number of rooms.

 

[DisTravels]

I don't think "greed" is a particularly fair descriptor of why it failed.

I agree, not about greed (this time). It was a good concept, but the math/financials just didn't work - As others pointed out, even with it being expensive the costs were also high that left not a lot of margin for discounting.

Also probably too big of an investment and ongoing cost to be a "loss leader." Back in the day in 'Vegas, the free drinks and cheap stays were loss leaders which properties/house would make up for gambling.

 

[Chuck S]

I'm guessing they learned that even Disney fans don't have unlimited travel funds, and people really DO go to Disney for the parks. Something they should have learned from The Disney Institute (Now SSR).

It was certainly an interesting concept, and with a cheaper price, and a different location, it may have worked. There are a lot of cosplayers out there, but given the choice between the next door Disney parks and cosplay, the parks won. It would need to be a totally free standing thing, away from Walt Disney World, like maybe in Austin or San Antoniio. There are freestanding destination parks in Texas, like Kalahari (A very fancy resort and water park in Round Rock) and several free standing safai type parks. So Galactic Star Cruiser maybe would have workd in that sort of scenario.

 

[corpcomp]

As a Disney parks fan, personally I WANT Disney taking big swings like this.

Well Management just said they were planning to spend $17 Billion in the next few years at WDW. That's a lot of upgrades and new buildings including a potential new land near Thunder Mountain replacing Tom Sawyer Island which I just saw:

Themed Lands in Development for ‘Coco’, ‘Encanto’, Disney Villains at Magic Kingdom​

I did not see the movies for the first two listed. Villains sounds VERY interesting. Maybe Darth Vader will transport from the Starcruiser to that spot.

 

[Spivey378]

Anyone know if discounts are still available? I can’t tell from the website.

 

[AmishGuy91]

Anyone know if discounts are still available? I can’t tell from the website.

Nope

 

[Spivey378]

Nope

 

[mikeuno]

Sales resume today?

 

[CraigInPA]

Thinking outside the box...

Disney could build out Galaxy's Edge towards the hotel using some of that $17B. Galactic Starcruiser is only 1000' away from the back stage access gate next to the Millennium Falcon. That's about the same distance from the First Order Cargo shop to Rise of the Resistance. They could theme up a corridor with additional restaurants, shops, and end it at "the port" where Starcruiser is docked. Or, they could build a railroad like Universal did with Harry Potter, with LCD displays as windows, and have that "ride" to "the port" area, which could be dressed up with restaurants, shops, and thinks to gawk at. The area is already pretty flat, since it's parking lots and a ring road around the outside of Hollywood Studios, both of which can be re-located easily enough.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

Sales resume today?

Yes, wasn’t able to get on the line before dawn and as of a few minutes ago, everything after July 16 is sold out.

 

[greeneyedchick]

Thinking outside the box...

Disney could build out Galaxy's Edge towards the hotel using some of that $17B. Galactic Starcruiser is only 1000' away from the back stage access gate next to the Millennium Falcon. That's about the same distance from the First Order Cargo shop to Rise of the Resistance. They could theme up a corridor with additional restaurants, shops, and end it at "the port" where Starcruiser is docked. Or, they could build a railroad like Universal did with Harry Potter, with LCD displays as windows, and have that "ride" to "the port" area, which could be dressed up with restaurants, shops, and thinks to gawk at. The area is already pretty flat, since it's parking lots and a ring road around the outside of Hollywood Studios, both of which can be re-located easily enough.

They could add a dark ride attraction (with the continuous loading cars like haunted mansion-a crowd eater) that takes you through a Batu historical museum where they show you historic scenes and famous people in history including great Jedi's like Yoda, Luke Skywalker, Anakin, etc. and talks about the Clone Wars and stuff. It would be a great way to incorporate the original IP but still keep the timeline of Galaxies' Edge.

 

[greeneyedchick]

Disney could make a fortune building a Star Wars themed hotel, especially if it included the original IP. They could still make it interactive but model it after the Great Wolf Lodge Resorts that have the cool Magiquest quests all through the resorts. Instead of wands, kids can buy lightsabers and solve quests/ puzzles while waving their light sabers at all of the little things that make animatronics move or items light up. Imagineers could really use their skills for something like that and they wouldn't have to pay live actors to maintain the interactive portion.

 

[kristenrice]

I don't think "greed" is a particularly fair descriptor of why it failed. Dating back to the original concept, Disney had an idea of the type of experience they wanted to deliver. Elements like heavy interaction with performers and all-inclusive meals were very expensive. And you've only got a maximum of 100 parties present at any time to deliver those services. Like everything else in the world, the last 2+ years have sent cost skyrocketing. Disney undoubtedly had to spend more for staffing, meals and all other aspects than it originally projected.

Yes, it ended up being too expensive to gain mass acceptance. And those high costs were driven by what Disney was forced to spend just to operate the hotel. 25% discounts seemed to work on some level--the DVC "voyage" sold out pretty quickly. But apparently a 25% reduction in revenue long-term isn't enough to sustain the operation. The fact that they didn't even try to re-tool and present a lesser experience for lower cost says a lot, IMO.

As a Disney parks fan, personally I WANT Disney taking big swings like this. Not everything is going to pan out. This one is particularly embarrassing on many levels--and costly. Many news sites have reveled in the headline "Disney hotel fails!" But the alternative is for Disney to continue creating a vanilla experience of hotels, attractions and shows which are tried and true, deemed failure-proof. I'd rather see them continue to take risks from time to time. They'll learn from this experience, and hopefully the next one will play out better.

I agree, not about greed (this time). It was a good concept, but the math/financials just didn't work - As others pointed out, even with it being expensive the costs were also high that left not a lot of margin for discounting.

Also probably too big of an investment and ongoing cost to be a "loss leader." Back in the day in 'Vegas, the free drinks and cheap stays were loss leaders which properties/house would make up for gambling.

I will agree with the point that "greed" is too strong of a word to use. I think Disney just really overestimated the size of their target audience. I wonder if "introductory pricing" (starting it lower to get paying customers on board) would have generated more positive buzz about the quality of the experience. This may have widened their audience, generated interest from casual fans and then given them the opportunity to slowly raise prices while keeping the resort filled. Unfortunately, the almost immediate negative press about the high pricing significantly overshadowed any positive reviews about the quality of the experience.

 

[iheartglaciers]

I don't think "greed" is a particularly fair descriptor of why it failed. Dating back to the original concept, Disney had an idea of the type of experience they wanted to deliver. Elements like heavy interaction with performers and all-inclusive meals were very expensive. And you've only got a maximum of 100 parties present at any time to deliver those services. Like everything else in the world, the last 2+ years have sent cost skyrocketing. Disney undoubtedly had to spend more for staffing, meals and all other aspects than it originally projected.

Yes, it ended up being too expensive to gain mass acceptance. And those high costs were driven by what Disney was forced to spend just to operate the hotel. 25% discounts seemed to work on some level--the DVC "voyage" sold out pretty quickly. But apparently a 25% reduction in revenue long-term isn't enough to sustain the operation. The fact that they didn't even try to re-tool and present a lesser experience for lower cost says a lot, IMO.

As a Disney parks fan, personally I WANT Disney taking big swings like this. Not everything is going to pan out. This one is particularly embarrassing on many levels--and costly. Many news sites have reveled in the headline "Disney hotel fails!" But the alternative is for Disney to continue creating a vanilla experience of hotels, attractions and shows which are tried and true, deemed failure-proof. I'd rather see them continue to take risks from time to time. They'll learn from this experience, and hopefully the next one will play out better.

I’m also worried about this making Disney more likely not to take risks and potentially do really cool things as a result. Starcruiser was such a unique experience and the Imagineers did an amazing job. I really wish they could’ve found a way to make it work.

I think the bottom line is they were stuck with the high cost of running the whole thing, but they also didn’t do a good job at marketing it. When that first ABC promo special came out, even I was like maybe we should cancel our voyage…

I know they want to end this before the fiscal year ends, but I really wish they gave everyone a little more heads up. The remaining dates sold out by the afternoon yesterday, and so many people (myself included), got shut out .

 

[kristenrice]

The fact that it sold out as soon as they announced that it was closing tells me that marketing (and possibly to a lesser degree pricing) was the reason it failed so miserably. Obviously, people WANT to participate in this very unique, ambitious experience and they *have* the money for it....now that has become that "once-in-a-lifetime" experience. If the price had been more affordable from the onset, perhaps more of the casual fans would have booked it to "try it out", in addition to the hard-core fans who may have taken repeat voyages. Then, word spreads about how special and unique the experience is and how it's "worth every penny". This leads to more interest from the casual fans, and maybe adds some new fans to the fold who are just curious to see what the buzz is all about. Now, Disney can justify raising the prices because the demand is there. With only 100 rooms, it is hard to believe that they built this experience with the expectation that it would have to run at full capacity year round at $2000+ per room/night to make a profit. Maybe "greed" is a strong term, perhaps "maximizing profit" is a more desirable phrase....

 

[iheartglaciers]

The fact that it sold out as soon as they announced that it was closing tells me that marketing (and possibly to a lesser degree pricing) was the reason it failed so miserably. Obviously, people WANT to participate in this very unique, ambitious experience and they *have* the money for it....now that has become that "once-in-a-lifetime" experience. If the price had been more affordable from the onset, perhaps more of the casual fans would have booked it to "try it out", in addition to the hard-core fans who may have taken repeat voyages. Then, word spreads about how special and unique the experience is and how it's "worth every penny". This leads to more interest from the casual fans, and maybe adds some new fans to the fold who are just curious to see what the buzz is all about. Now, Disney can justify raising the prices because the demand is there. With only 100 rooms, it is hard to believe that they built this experience with the expectation that it would have to run at full capacity year round at $2000+ per room/night to make a profit. Maybe "greed" is a strong term, perhaps "maximizing profit" is a more desirable phrase....

That’s a really good point/idea. I think they did a horrible job with marketing across the board, but also understand it was a hard thing to advertise without spoilers. But I really like your idea of starting with special introductory pricing and raising it later. They tried twice to advertise it by filling a voyage with influencers, which apparently didn’t get the results they were looking for (but I also don’t understand why they did it twice if it didn’t work the first time).

After calling so many times yesterday chasing cancellations, it’s really setting in that we probably won’t get to go again one last time .

 

[Bearval]

They likely will just not as a star cruiser. Imagine how popular this will be for access to HS... an entrance outside the front door with fast easy access to star wars land that is a HUGE selling point.... There was always talk about a DVC hotel years ago ironically right where this thing is located. Lesser walk to the sky liner then BW or BC for super easy EPCOT access. I would book a melenium Falcon view. Cant beat that for view even if you not a star wars fan.

The may just repurpose this as the Hollywood Studios DVC lounge.

 

[Bearval]

The fact that it sold out as soon as they announced that it was closing tells me that marketing (and possibly to a lesser degree pricing) was the reason it failed so miserably. Obviously, people WANT to participate in this very unique, ambitious experience and they *have* the money for it....now that has become that "once-in-a-lifetime" experience. If the price had been more affordable from the onset, perhaps more of the casual fans would have booked it to "try it out", in addition to the hard-core fans who may have taken repeat voyages. Then, word spreads about how special and unique the experience is and how it's "worth every penny". This leads to more interest from the casual fans, and maybe adds some new fans to the fold who are just curious to see what the buzz is all about. Now, Disney can justify raising the prices because the demand is there. With only 100 rooms, it is hard to believe that they built this experience with the expectation that it would have to run at full capacity year round at $2000+ per room/night to make a profit. Maybe "greed" is a strong term, perhaps "maximizing profit" is a more desirable phrase....

The demand isn’t there. It only sold out because it is closing and you have that subset of people who have FOMO for this experience. The price was just way too high to generate the required number of bookings to financially support the costs of keeping this open.