Looks like the park reservation system is here to stay.

[Jrb1979]

If you lived in the WDW neighborhood, would you do this sometimes?

No but it's mainly due to how I do parks. I go to parks to ride rides.

 

[nancipants]

I live 20-25 minutes away from the gates. There are some days we go to the parks and do nothing but walk around. Other times we stay for an entire day. We ALWAYS buy stuff while we are there, even on the days we just walk around, whether it's a snack or an entire meal. I realize there are many local passholders who don't do this, but this idea of local passholders who pack all their food and don't buy merchandise, etc. I think is way out of touch. Just look at the lines for exclusive merch for any event or festival. Look at Epcot on any festival weekend. Obviously we will never know for sure because they don't release the data. But every passholder I know buys merch, food, and beverages all the time. And several of them live out of state so they ARE paying for lodging. Even we go to the parks for short staycations every so often.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

--

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

I live 20-25 minutes away from the gates. There are some days we go to the parks and do nothing but walk around. Other times we stay for an entire day. We ALWAYS buy stuff while we are there, even on the days we just walk around, whether it's a snack or an entire meal. I realize there are many local passholders who don't do this, but this idea of local passholders who pack all their food and don't buy merchandise, etc. I think is way out of touch. Just look at the lines for exclusive merch for any event or festival. Look at Epcot on any festival weekend. Obviously we will never know for sure because they don't release the data. But every passholder I know buys merch, food, and beverages all the time. And several of them live out of state so they ARE paying for lodging. Even we go to the parks for short staycations every so often.

I am not saying you're incorrect, and there really isn't a way to quantify it currently, i think people are just extrapolating on what they see happening via Disneys actions. I don't think Disney has a linear problem with AP holders, it is more of a trunk and branch issue. For instance there are AP holders who go to the parks to "Rob" all the park exclusive merch to sell online for triple, (which is obviously counter intuitive to pass holders not spending) and my belief is that Disney has a problem with those people as well. Just look at the 50th. On Oct 1, lines were out the door and basically to the parking lot for merch, the next day things were back to normal, and that tells me that AP holders were just loading up to resell, which cheapens Disneys brand

 

[Jrb1979]

I am not saying you're incorrect, and there really isn't a way to quantify it currently, i think people are just extrapolating on what they see happening via Disneys actions. I don't think Disney has a linear problem with AP holders, it is more of a trunk and branch issue. For instance there are AP holders who go to the parks to "Rob" all the park exclusive merch to sell online for triple, (which is obviously counter intuitive to pass holders not spending) and my belief is that Disney has a problem with those people as well. Just look at the 50th. On Oct 1, lines were out the door and basically to the parking lot for merch, the next day things were back to normal, and that tells me that AP holders were just loading up to resell, which cheapens Disneys brand

Adding the Oct 1st thing, the ride wait times were low if I recall. Personally if I was Disney, I would ban anyone caught reselling Disney merch.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Sometimes the lines are just too long so we pass them by. I also think the concept people have that locals pack their sandwiches and don't spend any money is seriously misplaced. I have brought food into a park a few times, but only when I had to for a difficult medical condition. They didn't have anything I could eat -- at least I had not found it to be true. So, I asked the cast members at the gate if that was okay and they said it was fine. It was not done to deprive Disney of a profit. It was also a time when I needed the "Happiest Place on Earth." I could not do much but walk around, but I did not interfere with other guests either. Most of the time I sat on a bench under an umbrella, but was so glad to be there. I remember they even sent a private cart to help me get from my car to the gate so I did not have to walk the length of the parking row for a tram. He gave me his name and number and said to just call and he would come and pick me up. They were incredibly helpful. But, I think locals do spend money -- maybe more than they realize.

I don't think it's a question on if they spend money, it's more of do they spend in line with other guests who are not AP holders. Again there is no concrete data, but i would wager a not even close

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Adding the Oct 1st thing, the ride wait times were low if I recall. Personally if I was Disney, I would ban anyone caught reselling Disney merch.

You are correct, i remember reading the boards that day and the day after, and everyone was talking about how the rides were basically walk ons, but you couldn't go near a store or any kind. All Disney has done is "limit" purchases to 2 of any 1 item, and when i was there last no one adhered to that. At least on the cast member level.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Posted before I wrote a reply!
We keep hearing that -- a per guest per day spend rate of 40% higher than passholders. But, that appears to be faulty logic to me.

Chapek said the traveling guest who spent 5 - 7 days in the parks spent more on food, beverage and merchandise. (See that does not include lodging.) He said they spent 40% more. For convenience I will use $100 per day per passholder and $140 per day for ticketed guest.

Do the calculations. An off-site local or DVC member with a kitchenette in their room, who brings a sandwich, might not spend as much on food, beverages and merch that day. But say a ticketed traveler comes once in the year for 5 - 7 days (that's Chapek's example) and spends $140 each day for 7 days. That's $980 for the year. But, the passholder comes 3 times a year for 7 days each for 21 days. Passholders do come more often. Or say a local may come 21 days a year -- just to keep the calculation numbers the same at a 40% increase in the spend rate.
Keeping that 40% ratio going that Chapek mentioned, the passholder spends $100 per day for 21 days is $2,100 for the year.

So, in your example, a local passholder who comes twice a week at $100 a day (Chapek's number for the average passholder spending per day at the 40% ratio) attends 104 times a year for a total of $10,400 a year.

And, they only had to advertise for and sell one pass to the passholder customer. To get that occasional ticketed guest, their sales force had to sell to 3 different people to get 21 days of park attendance.

Chapek specific language was "merchandise, food and beverage." Those appear to be his categories of comparison. On the individual person level, that does not appear to hold true. John may be a traveler with a higher per guest spend rate. But, over the course of the year, James, the passholder with DVC or local passholder with shorter stays will spend much more.

Which tells me, Disney would rather have fewer guests who spend more, than more guests who spend less. It could also mean less congested parks, which leads to less cast members, happier guest, ect., I'm just saying that it boils down to more than just the upfront money.

Also if you swapped out AP holders for average guest you're still up 40%, so it makes sense for Disney to dump everything into the average guest, there is a much larger potential payout.

 

[New Mouse]

They won't come out and say it but IMO the pass holder they dislike the most are ones who pop every days just to take in the sites and sounds.

The every day passholder is akin to the long term stable wall street company. Wall Street doesn't care about long term these days hence neither do ceos.

 

[john7994]

Posted before I wrote a reply!
We keep hearing that -- a per guest per day spend rate of 40% higher than passholders. But, that appears to be faulty logic to me.

Chapek said the traveling guest who spent 5 - 7 days in the parks spent more on food, beverage and merchandise. (See that does not include lodging.) He said they spent 40% more. For convenience I will use $100 per day per passholder and $140 per day for ticketed guest.

Do the calculations. An off-site local or DVC member with a kitchenette in their room, who brings a sandwich, might not spend as much on food, beverages and merch that day. But say a ticketed traveler comes once in the year for 5 - 7 days (that's Chapek's example) and spends $140 each day for 7 days. That's $980 for the year. But, the passholder comes 3 times a year for 7 days each for 21 days. Passholders do come more often. Or say a local may come 21 days a year -- just to keep the calculation numbers the same at a 40% increase in the spend rate.
Keeping that 40% ratio going that Chapek mentioned, the passholder spends $100 per day for 21 days is $2,100 for the year.

So, in your example, a local passholder who comes twice a week at $100 a day (Chapek's number for the average passholder spending per day at the 40% ratio) attends 104 times a year for a total of $10,400 a year.

And, they only had to advertise for and sell one pass to the passholder customer. To get that occasional ticketed guest, their sales force had to sell to 3 different people to get 21 days of park attendance.

Chapek specific language was "merchandise, food and beverage." Those appear to be his categories of comparison. On the individual person level, that does not appear to hold true. John may be a traveler with a higher per guest spend rate. But, over the course of the year, James, the passholder with DVC or local passholder with shorter stays will spend much more.

Having trouble with this ...
Shouldn't we be looking at total daily attendance of Ticketed v. Pass Holders as a total aggregate spend per day. I presume - and I don't know, but I assume Ticketed Customers are at least equal to or higher than AP holders on any given day. So to keep numbers simple:
Ticketed 1,000 X @$140 is $140,000
AP Holders 1,000 X @$100 is $100,000

So to our conversation the other day, it would be to their advantage on a daily park reservation basis to keep AP attendance artificially lower to increase ticketed revenue per reservation. There are clearly a lot of sub cohorts in this daily mix including combinations of Occasional, Day Only and Stay Inclusive (Multi- Day non-local) AP Holders and probably similar mixes in types of stays on the ticketed side.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

--

 

[john7994]

Good question, John. Good point too. However, ...
Yes. I do understand about the total daily attendance and per guest spend rate. I'm sure that is what Chapek refers to when he makes those statements. But, Chapek is a known bean counter and apparently is missing the more important social emotional currency and long term financial stability currency of that kind of accounting (bean counting). When Chapek says in a published story that passholders, who are individual people, are not valued because they don't spend as much in the parks, that hits very, very wrong. The individual passholder will spend far more in a year than the occasional guest who travels and stays 5 to 7 days on a one-off or at least not very often. It is very short sighted to offend the higher spending individual person who is the bedrock of the fan base for the brand. That was my point.

We are absolutely in agreement on that score - I think that's very valid. I think that works in both AP and non-AP park goers.
I was talking to a guest outside the Riviera on my last trip in May. She was describing to me the 10 trips she had taken over recent years with her large family and lamenting at the recent Cash Cost of the Resorts. Her feeling was, the lack of loyalty as a frequent visitor to WDW, but treated like everyone else - no discounts - just another number on the ledger. She was so emotional and near tears on the relationship she built with Disney on her side, but with nothing in return. So to your point, the social emotional currency is real for people.

 

[mdoc]

I think there are different categories of AP holders, and I don't think the spending patterns of one group necessarily equate to another. For instance, we are FL resident AP holders. We live on the southwest coast, roughly 3 hours from WDW. We can't just pop in for the day. When we go, it's usually for 3-7 days and we always stay onsite. We eat all our meals on Disney property, whether it be at the resorts, the parks or Disney Springs. When we're at the parks we buy snacks, we buy Disney merchandise, we pay for experiences. It doesn't matter that we've been a few dozen times, we still somehow find ways to transfer our money to Disney. Putting aside the cost for tickets (which I'd hope would be less per visit for us with our APs), I'd put our spending up against most visitors to WDW. In fact, we spend as much at WDW with our APs as we did before we were FL residents, when we came from Illinois for weeklong trips.

The way we do Disney and use our APs is not the same way most true locals, or people who can make a day trip, would do it. It's probably not what an AP holder from out of state or overseas would do, either. I don't doubt that Disney has lots of data, and maybe they just compile all the data without regard to the different types of AP holders, but I'd bet good money that my AP-holding family drops more money PER TRIP at Disney than many or even most non-AP families. We probably spend way more per year. Without the APs, I doubt we'd go as often, so while we may spend more for tickets on a given trip without an AP, we definitely wouldn't spend as much at WDW over the course of a year. Taking into account that we don't need to (and don't) go at the crowded times (my current AP is a Pixie Dust pass), meaning the opportunity cost of admitting us to the park with APs is not high, I think it'd be a loss for Disney. But I guess Chapek can count his beans the way he wants to.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

--

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

CEOs who are extremely focused solely on numbers and trying to appease the shareholder audience at a Quarterly Earnings Report meeting appear to have forgotten that a lot of the stock trading is done by computers. When big investors like the CalPERS Pension Fund do trades, a lot of those trades are computer instigated or controlled. A speech trying to appeal, justify or defend earnings is not going to sway an emotionless, programmed computer. But, signaling that a CEO devalues and disrespects a big, multi-general fan base for the brand, that does have an emotional/social response and it is not a good one.

I am not going to pretend to know the algorithms built into these computers, but i will say that the market does Ebb and Flow based on some speeches. Just look at every time Jerome Powell opens his mouth, so i do believe what is being said does matter

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

--

 

[StageTek]

Which tells me, Disney would rather have fewer guests who spend more, than more guests who spend less. It could also mean less congested parks, which leads to less cast members, happier guest, ect., I'm just saying that it boils down to more than just the upfront money.

Chapeck has been vocal about this. He would like to see a family trip to WDW as a once-in-a-lifetime, very expensive experience. For the reasons you mention.

 

[Miffy]

Chapeck has been vocal about this. He would like to see a family trip to WDW as a once-in-a-lifetime, very expensive experience. For the reasons you mention.

The thing that I just can't get my head around is why he--or anyone at Disney--would want to irritate (or worse) their loyal customers. If nothing else, we're free advertising for them.

 

[nancipants]

The thing that I just can't get my head around is why he--or anyone at Disney--would want to irritate (or worse) their loyal customers. If nothing else, we're free advertising for them.

Right. Also, a family can go once in their lifetime and spend $$$$$, OR go many times with an AP and spend $ each time. Same amount of money overall. I'm not a businessperson, but I feel like you need all types of customers to be successful--right? Why else invest so much in DVC and urge families to make Disney their vacation destination for a lifetime?

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

The thing that I just can't get my head around is why he--or anyone at Disney--would want to irritate (or worse) their loyal customers. If nothing else, we're free advertising for them.

yeah, i would argue that they don't need us (loyal guests, although i would shrink that field down to AP Holders, I consider myself a loyal guest, and we only go once every other year, and spare no expense). I haven't met anyone who i had to convince to take their family to WDW, it seems to be a right of passage now a days. Again their non-loyal guests pay more, so that is who they are going to cater to. If the loyal guests outspend the average guest i'm sure Disney would be more then happy to cater to them