Increased ticket prices coming soon?

[mshanson3121]

lol. Am I the only one who wishes they'd just hurry up and announce the frigging increase/change and get it over with so they could move on with their plans?

 

[Eoghann]

I'm just a bit confused on this part of the article could you help out with that?:

"Demand-based pricing would help smooth the stigma of Disney's pricing being out of touch. There may be some bellyaching about one-day tickets during Christmas shooting up to $140, or up to $125 during the summer; but if that paves the way for $70 tickets during the slow season, it can always point to those offerings for cost-conscious travelers."

I haven't heard anyone speculate that the tickets would be lower than they already are if they went to tiered pricing. I've only heard that for the "off-peak" season they may or may raise the prices from what they currently are (with the other parts of the year being higher than they currently are). Maybe I'm just not looking at enough resources so I don't have all the details from the multiple surveys/information on the possible tiered pricing for WDW.

What is your take on the possibility of the lowest time period of the year actually being lower than what they are now?

Sounds like wishful thinking to me, perhaps based on the fact that some of the overseas parks (whose attendance is much lower than Disney World) do that. I think we can safely assume we won't see a price below $105 (or possibly higher) at any point in the year.

 

[doconeill]

Did they not also make park hopping a $$$ upgrade at or around the same time?

Yes, I forgot that pretty much all tickets except for 1-day tickets were park hoppers as well, but I think the MYW PH was still cheaper than the old Park Hopper.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Interesting... 2 things to point out. 2001 was terrorist related and dramatically affected travel. 2009 was the obvious "Great Recession"... so 2 anomalies there. Still interesting to see...

Nah huh huh...

You made a mistake on that one.

look at the graph again. 2002 was definitely terrorist related (actually the reaction was silly then in real time and looks even moreso now)...

But look at the steep climb and drop between 1999 and 2001...being on the ground and looking at the numbers then - I can tell you it represented an entirely different phenomena.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Ok, thanks! That's what I thought too. I was like Whoa $70 down from $97 or $105...but I'm under no impression that the prices will go down unfortunately the way things, in general, mostly are prices go up up up not down.

Not gonna happen...

If we're talking 3 tiers - the increases are gonna be "slight", "significant" and "huge" starting at $105

 

[BELLE'SMYGIRL]

On single-day tickets, the increases have been in the 5% range for a while. That's not all that large considering inflation, etc. We groan about it every year, but mainly because we don't by single tickets, and the $$ amount on the larger tickets goes up more, even if the percentage is less. We don't say, "Man, it's costing me 4% more for the tickets this year!" we say, "Man, it's costing me $35 more per ticket this year!"

But, if in a demand pricing model, say, the "unlimited" single day ticket went up $20, while the most limited stayed at the current level, I'd still call that a major increase as the limited tickets have a limited audience as well.

But that's just my opinion on the matter.[/Q

I would hope they would put off any increases until at least some of the new attractions are in place. I just booked a trip in March and now see that there is no point going to DHS at all, and I am only going to Epcot to see the flower show, since Soarin' is closed. I know it will never happen, but Disney should offer discount tickets during construction at DHS. There's nothing left except Star Tours!

 

[Nabas]

Interesting to see how little impact adding DAK had, when compared to DHS or Epcot. Makes me wonder - has it been worth it for them?

Well that's kind of the point I keep getting at when I say a 5th Gate isn't happening. AK basically cannibalized the existing customer base. People just don't have more vacation days to use.

Yes it did allow them to spread the guests out a little more, but let's be honest the number of people who will visit AK rather than MK is tiny.

DAK was slow to catch on. Early in its history, travel agents were describing DAK as a zoo. WDW fans knew that it wasn't but it got typecast as one to much of the public. Disney was well aware of this and created the "Notazu" (not a zoo) campaign to combat it.

DAK didn't shed its "zoo" label until after Expedition Everest opened in 2006. Since then, DAK's attendance has climbed steadily according to TEA, surpassing DHS in 2010.

According to TEA's latest report, all 4 of WDW's theme parks rank among the 8 busiest theme parks in the world. When one resort has four of the world's business theme parks, it just might be time for a 5th theme park.

 

[rteetz]

According to TEA's latest report, all 4 of WDW's theme parks rank among the 8 busiest theme parks in the world. When one resort has four of the world's business theme parks, it just might be time for a 5th theme park.

But do you see the major problem with the attendance between the four parks? MK is getting nearly 20 million a year, then you have a large drop off. Epcot is getting around 12 million, than both AK and DHS in the 10s. MK is almost double two of the other parks, that's insane. They need to spread that out before they build a 5th gate.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Sounds like wishful thinking to me, perhaps based on the fact that some of the overseas parks (whose attendance is much lower than Disney World) do that. I think we can safely assume we won't see a price below $105 (or possibly higher) at any point in the year.

Yup, that's why I was confused because I just couldn't see it going DOWN especially by that much.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Not gonna happen...

If we're talking 3 tiers - the increases are gonna be "slight", "significant" and "huge" starting at $105

Yeah and looking at at least one of the surveys I saw it showed a gold at $40 more than a bronze and a silver at $20 more than a bronze at least for a 5-day pass before hopper. Now obviously those were just numbers put in a surveys not the numbers they would actually charge but still gave an idea how much they may place value on a gold ticket over a bronze one IF they went to a tiered.

 

[Nabas]

But do you see the major problem with the attendance between the four parks? MK is getting nearly 20 million a year, then you have a large drop off. Epcot is getting around 12 million, than both AK and DHS in the 10s. MK is almost double two of the other parks, that's insane. They need to spread that out before they build a 5th gate.

I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Both have to happen eventually. Disney needs to fix 3 of its theme parks and plan for higher attendance in the future.

The lands being added to DAK and DHS will help. So will the Frozen rethemed Maelstrom. However, those new lands and attractions are going to draw even more Guests, the way the 2 Harry Potter lands drew more people to Universal.

Universal's attendance was down in the dumps when this started, averaging 5.1 million per park before the first Harry Potter land opened. They had room to grow.

Disney World does not. Even excluding the Magic Kingdom, Disney World's other 3 parks averaged more than double that in 2014, 10.7 million. Disney reported even higher attendance in 2015. The additions already announced by Disney will attract millions more on top of that.

Disney needs to plan for the future. Disney needs to start thinking about a 5th Gate.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Both have to happen eventually. Disney needs to fix 3 of its theme parks and plan for higher attendance in the future.

The lands being added to DAK and DHS will help. So will the Frozen rethemed Maelstrom. However, those new lands and attractions are going to draw even more Guests, the way the 2 Harry Potter lands drew more people to Universal.

Universal's attendance was down in the dumps when this started, averaging 5.1 million per park before the first Harry Potter land opened. They had room to grow.

Disney World does not. Even excluding the Magic Kingdom, Disney World's other 3 parks averaged more than double that in 2014, 10.7 million. Disney reported even higher attendance in 2015. The additions already announced by Disney will attract millions more on top of that.

Disney needs to plan for the future. Disney needs to start thinking about a 5th Gate.

What's gonna happen is there will be a significant uptick at studios (hence the reorganization of the entry point and the parking area) and a decent one at dak in the next few years. The problem is that will also drive magic kingdom to batty numbers in proportion with it and the place is gonna suck.

Somehow...they managed to make mk the star and Epcot the useless duckling. How did that ever happen?

Well...perhaps the Eisner led disasters
From 95-2005 and Iger just turning it into a ghost town since?

The problem there is that the operational cost is so high at Epcot. Animal kingdom is most lb for lb, but Epcot is second.

And they know that's a problem. Epcot is the emerging "big issue" of Disney parks. And they don't seem to want to do much about it. Can they convert to princessland? No...that's not gonna work longterm. But the model it was built on - countries and companies paying for exposure to an elite audience - was busted with the Information Age.

Does anybody really need to see a fake replica of the Eiffel Tower to find out about France now? That was the point and they were financed for it.

And they don't wanna pay. At least the current group of Hollywood cheap Suites doesn't.

The reality is that dak, MGM, and Epcot are all significant problems right now for a division that now has to bring in more cash in a big way.

And Disney is to blame...sticker shock on dak (and they let idiots do it again there as we speak)...no vision for MGM...and General cheapskatery in Epcot.

Wishes, dreams,Magic, wonder

 

[doconeill]

According to TEA's latest report, all 4 of WDW's theme parks rank among the 8 busiest theme parks in the world. When one resort has four of the world's business theme parks, it just might be time for a 5th theme park.

How busy they are isn't going to be a factor in a 5th gate. Busy (per these reports) != Crowded, although the two are related in a way.

What WILL prompt building a 5th gate will be when Disney can no longer guarantee the terms of admittance to a degree that guest tolerance reaches an all time low. If I go to Disney ANY time of the year, and two of the four parks are frequently closed to capacity such that I might not be able to get IN to the MK at all during my vacation, THEN WDW will build a fifth gate.

 

[Eoghann]

DAK was slow to catch on. Early in its history, travel agents were describing DAK as a zoo. WDW fans knew that it wasn't but it got typecast as one to much of the public. Disney was well aware of this and created the "Notazu" (not a zoo) campaign to combat it.

DAK didn't shed its "zoo" label until after Expedition Everest opened in 2006. Since then, DAK's attendance has climbed steadily according to TEA, surpassing DHS in 2010.

According to TEA's latest report, all 4 of WDW's theme parks rank among the 8 busiest theme parks in the world. When one resort has four of the world's business theme parks, it just might be time for a 5th theme park.

But it is a zoo. If you eliminate the zoo elements how many rides and attractions are left for people to do?

Beating DHS (essentially a faltering park that they are going to spend billions to reboot) is not a great achievement.

And nothing you have said addresses the cannibalization issue. Growth in guests and Disney World is currently entirely driven by the Magic Kingdom. Visits to other parks are secondary (or tertiary) and people only have so many vacation days to spend. Simply shoving more parks in there doesn't solve the attendance problem.

 

[Eoghann]

I don't think it's an either/or proposition. Both have to happen eventually. Disney needs to fix 3 of its theme parks and plan for higher attendance in the future.

The lands being added to DAK and DHS will help. So will the Frozen rethemed Maelstrom. However, those new lands and attractions are going to draw even more Guests, the way the 2 Harry Potter lands drew more people to Universal.

Universal's attendance was down in the dumps when this started, averaging 5.1 million per park before the first Harry Potter land opened. They had room to grow.

Disney World does not. Even excluding the Magic Kingdom, Disney World's other 3 parks averaged more than double that in 2014, 10.7 million. Disney reported even higher attendance in 2015. The additions already announced by Disney will attract millions more on top of that.

Disney needs to plan for the future. Disney needs to start thinking about a 5th Gate.

What are you talking about? Disney World has a tonne of room to grow. All of their parks (even MK) have acres of currently unused space. And when have Epcot, AK or DHS ever closed because they were too crowded?

Unless people visit Disney World and don't go to the Magic Kingdom, adding a 5th gate fixes nothing. And I don't find that a credible scenario at all.

 

[Josh Hendy]

Does anybody really need to see a fake replica of the Eiffel Tower to find out about France now? That was the point and they were financed for it.

And they don't wanna pay. At least the current group of Hollywood cheap Suites doesn't.

I think the point isn't information about France, it's about having some reasonably cheap, mindless fun in a fake land of kitschy foreign cliches.

And the Hollywood suits aren't cheap ... they're really expensive. They're very wealthy men and they don't see the point of kitschy replicas. They don't identify with middle class tastes and aspirations because they're not middle class.

It's also about selling tourism to foreign lands and enhancing exports. it's ludicrous that Disney claims it can't interest enough foreign governments, exporters or tourist authorities to fund really lavish and frequently-updated pavilions. Tourism and exports of handicrafts are like manna from heaven for countries. If oil revenues are down then what else does Norway have going for it except chunky sweaters and tourism? Nada.

The same comments apply to the vendors who should be sponsoring Future World. If the internet has placed all requisite information at everyone's fingertips then why are hands-on experiences like tech trade shows and Apple stores so huge?

I think that the expensive suits in Burbank have a really intense emotional response to financial innovations, balance sheet tricks, and so on ... but are fairly ignorant and contemptuous of their customers and also ignorant or at least dismissive of their potential business partners.

 

[Eoghann]

It's also about selling tourism to foreign lands and enhancing exports. it's ludicrous that Disney claims it can't interest enough foreign governments, exporters or tourist authorities to fund really lavish and frequently-updated pavilions. Tourism and exports of handicrafts are like manna from heaven for countries. If oil revenues are down then what else does Norway have going for it except chunky sweaters and tourism? Nada.

Sure tourism is valuable to countries, but did a pavilion at Epcot actually do much to promote tourism? It's possible I guess, but color me highly skeptical.

I suspect that most countries have just found better ways to spend their advertising dollars, like... actual advertising, or tv shows or basically anything that doesn't require people to spend hundreds of dollars just to see it in the first place.

 

[doconeill]

The purpose of the World Showcase wasn't merely to promote tourism - it was meant to be a more permanent form (or a mimic) of the World's Fairs, where countries would showcase not just themselves but their industries, etc. - especially based on the 1964-1965 New York World's Fair, which was already a part of Disney history.

Tourism just happens to be heavily promoted at some of the pavilions, depending on who helped fund them (and if they still do). Norway's was the most notable, as the Norwegian government directly contributed money from 1992-2002 precisely for that purpose, but they haven't since.

Very few governments made ANY contribution to the pavilions in the world showcase. Most were paid for by corporate investment. I want to say that Morocco was the only other one to ever have direct government sponsorship.

 

[Eoghann]

The purpose of the World Showcase wasn't merely to promote tourism - it was meant to be a more permanent form (or a mimic) of the World's Fairs, where countries would showcase not just themselves but their industries, etc. - especially based on the 1964-1965 New York World's Fair, which was already a part of Disney history.

Tourism just happens to be heavily promoted at some of the pavilions, depending on who helped fund them (and if they still do). Norway's was the most notable, as the Norwegian government directly contributed money from 1992-2002 precisely for that purpose, but they haven't since.

Very few governments made ANY contribution to the pavilions in the world showcase. Most were paid for by corporate investment. I want to say that Morocco was the only other one to ever have direct government sponsorship.

The more I think about it the more I think that the original concept for Epcot (both front and back) is simply outdated in the age of the internet. There's a reason that nobody pays any attention to Worlds Fairs any more (yes they still go on). Let's be honest people aren't visiting Epcot to learn about countries. They're going there to drink and eat.

I think any efforts to just update Epcot as more of what it used to be are doomed to failure.

 

[doconeill]

The more I think about it the more I think that the original concept for Epcot (both front and back) is simply outdated in the age of the internet. There's a reason that nobody pays any attention to Worlds Fairs any more (yes they still go on).

The 2010 expo in Shanghai had more people attend that the 1964-1965 New York World's Fair (which, by the way, wasn't an "official" sanctioned World's Fair)

However, they don't generally have the spectacle that people attributed to some of the most prominent ones - like Expo '67 in Montreal, or Expo '70 in Osaka. Many are narrow-focused, often on agriculture. Plus the advent of fixed mega-parks tend to attract the tourists, so you aren't likely to get things like "it's a small world" and "Carousel of Progress" built for temporary locations.

Regardless of why people go to Epcot, I think they want to distinguish themselves as something more than a giant food court.