Marvel coming to WDW???!!!!

[DDLand]

Ok...but attendance is rising and they are increasing prices dramatically for a solid 10 years...

Isn't that how to maximize profits? Why spend capex when the market/ customer base isn't forcing it?

Good question, and this is where it can get interesting. There is arguably a point where there are theme parks that are such a drag on the company that they have to invest. They're forced. I just don't think that's the only time they'll be compelled to invest either. 2% increases in attendance are great, but when compared with 20% attendance growth is it as favorable? Nope. It gets to a point where not building something costs them more in lost revenue than just building the thing in the first place. Especially because the attendance increase can spill into multiple business segments of the Resort. While I agree that getting too trigger happy with expansion can lead to issues (late 1990s anyone?) if done in an appropriate targeted approach can grow the business.

This really gets to a point on whether Disney should invest in WDW at all. I'm one that tends to think they haven't fully maximized the property yet. There's upward area to grow. Is it critical for survival like HKDLs expansion? Nope. Is it potentially millions of high margin guests making additional visits? Yes. Just because it's not life or death doesn't mean that profits can outweigh CapEx.

 

[DDLand]

I agree... We're just not seeing it.

Not yet. I just don't see them going up against Universal and into their 50th with nothing. I know that Disney hardly moved when the orignal HP came out, and anniversaries aren't as big a deal in Orlando but let's get real. They need something to get the public excited for. Avatar supplanted NF, and I think DHS supplants Avatar on the horizon. Keep people excited for something all the time long term. Not having anything is not likely at all.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I like this one...by the way...

But back to the joust -
You talk alot about growth and maximizing the property.

Consider that wdw is running close to "max" than you think.

A place like universal even 5 year ago was completley underdeveloped/underutilized...

But wdw... Sure they have tons of room and they are not at max capacity by their schematics...

But they currently get around 50,000,000 annual visitors. Their numbers probably can "support" close to 100...

But those are hypothetical figures.

They can't support a jump like that... They can't even support a 20% jump in a relatively short time as you suggest.

First, central Florida can't support it...it will become a tourist bog/traffic jam and they lose as many people in the fallout. The airport can't... Though they finally got the grant money to vastly improve that.

Second...it would have to be an "even" bump distributed over the calendar...and that wouldn't happen either. Still ebb and flow...just with violent swings.

Third... And this is what is both a pro and a con to your stance on studios...

The 80s and 90s management overbuilt the property to handle a large increase in traffic.
Well... This one hasnt...which means they used up the lead they have. They have actually retracted the amount of guest areas at this point...12 years of slide. While they are generating more profits and lowering per capita overhead costs...they also wasted their third quarter lead and let the team back in the game.

Say they build a huge new studios and attendance in Jedi fueled zeal jumpd 8 mil over the first 18 months...
That's great, right?

On one hand... Yes. Full occupancy and higher prices.

On the other... You can only imagine what a quagmire it will create.

A mess. You limit your options when you sit on your laurels.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Not yet. I just don't see them going up against Universal and into their 50th with nothing. I know that Disney hardly moved when the orignal HP came out, and anniversaries aren't as big a deal in Orlando but let's get real. They need something to get the public excited for. Avatar supplanted NF, and I think DHS supplants Avatar on the horizon. Keep people excited for something all the time long term. Not having anything is not likely at all.

Ok... Gonna have to disagree point by point on this one.

First - they aren't "going toe to toe" with universal. They get $0.70 of every dollar in town and universal is almost out of space.

The blessing of size.

Second - you're starting to sound like our young steward...
The 50th isnt gonna do much for the stock price. At Disneyland - that energizes the crowd. But at wdw the management has all but abandoned the eisnerian "anniversary" philosophy. People come with no "celebrations" - notice there hasn't been one since the housing bubble glutt.

It will have a new logo, some signage, and a whole lot of shanghai issue merch. But honesty don't think it's much more important than that.

Third... Wheres the buzz for avatar? I know - old argument - but in order to quote it, it has to exist and it simply doesn't outside of dizgeek circles. And is highly contentious there.

And as far as "keep people excited"...that's commonsense, right?

Or is it? We are in a global, low consequence, consumer spending society. You know why attendance is still rising? New fantasyland? Heck no.
Because travel is now the kind of quick pleasure, low thought enterprise that shopping at the mall is...and they are drawn to the brightest star in the sky like bugs to a light. That's the Disney brand and rep.

It honestly doesn't matter what they do. The 5 year magic kingdom project produced little if you're honest...while Comcast had rapidly transformed the whole operation in the same amount of time. They should be embarassed and losing significant business... That's what the "free market" would produce.
But no...they are getting more people and making money off the charts...because the Micro curve has broken down on their price model as well...price is affecting neither supply not demand...all three are moving independently of each other.

Simply put... The deck is stacked. The truth will only be revealed when a recession hits... If even then.

 

[Josh Hendy]

I'll ask another question, which is the flipside of the Marvel-in-WDW question.

Never mind Disney for a moment ... why doesn't Universal have enough to appeal for girls? Pixie dust is mostly just dewy-eyed princesses and fairies ... Disney doesn't own a copyright on fairy tales or Hans Christian Anderson stories.

I thought of this because although I've brought my DDs twice to Universal and they really liked it they still told me, we prefer Disney.

I think it's something to do with the princesses and fairies, and something to do with the sweet tameness of many of the rides. Practically everything in Universal is boy-centric, when you think about it. A little bit rough and loud.

Although IP isn't the be-and-end-all, Universal would probably be wise to start with a cartoon princess of some kind. Even a tough action princess like Mulan would be good. Dreamworks has been struggling? They should get on it right away. There is absolutely nothing mysterious about how a great princess cartoon is put together ... just look for great stories and great songwriters and grab some disaffected Disney animators, which haven't been in short supply since Ub Iwerks was wearing short pants.

 

[rteetz]

I'll ask another question, which is the flipside of the Marvel-in-WDW question.

Never mind Disney for a moment ... why doesn't Universal have enough to appeal for girls? Pixie dust is mostly just dewy-eyed princesses and fairies ... Disney doesn't own a copyright on fairy tales or Hans Christian Anderson stories.

I thought of this because although I've brought my DDs twice to Universal and they really liked it they still told me, we prefer Disney.

I think it's something to do with the princesses and fairies, and something to do with the sweet tameness of many of the rides. Practically everything in Universal is boy-centric, when you think about it. A little bit rough and loud.

Although IP isn't the be-and-end-all, Universal would probably be wise to start with a cartoon princess of some kind. Even a tough action princess like Mulan would be good. Dreamworks has been struggling? They should get on it right away. There is absolutely nothing mysterious about how a great princess cartoon is put together ... just look for great stories and great songwriters and grab some disaffected Disney animators, which haven't been in short supply since Ub Iwerks was wearing short pants.

Princess peach is Nintendo....

 

[ChrisFL]

Princess Fiona is in Universal...it's something

 

[eXo]

Keep in mind that the Harry Potter franchise has LOTS of female fans. The genius of that property is it really appeals to both genders and a wide variety of ages. I have seen each movie once or twice and thought they were ok, but the actual themepark version was amazing. The execution of Diagon Alley (and Hogsmeade for that matter) is truly something impressive.

That said, with all the rumors of a third HP expansion (I believe the most prominent are Ministry of Magic over the current location of the fear factor stage) begins to run the risk of too much harry potter in the parks. For as great as Diagon Alley looks, after a while the merch begins to feel very "samey" between both expansions. Considering each HP area is currently 1 ride (excluding the two rebranded rides at IOA) and like 10 shops... well, that's already a lot a shops selling HP merch and maybe too many if they keep the same ratio up for a third expansion?

I would also argue that the Despicable Me ride is cross gender. My daughter loves that movie and when she saw the fluffy unicorn it became her must have souvenir for the trip. Simpsons is pretty universal as well. I think it makes a lot of sense to go with IP's like that that speak towards the whole family rather than rolling out something that is targeted specifically at little boys or little girls.

But beyond that.... why would Universal want to compete with Disney on the princess level? Disney has got that stuff down to a science. They have decades of characters and movies to build on and a park with a princess castle smack dab in the middle that is globally recognizable. If there is one thing Disney does almost perfect, it's monetize princesses. So why try to compete with that? If anything, it would make any attempt Instead, it makes a lot more sense to address the areas that Disney lacks. Super Heroes, thrill rides, magic... they are much more likely to get people in the gates with this stuff over a second rate princess ride\area that has almost no hope of competing with Disney's offerings.

You don't beat McDonald's by trying to make cheap burgers just like they do.

While it is currently just rumor, and I'm likely to get dragged through the mud or even bringing it up - there has been heavy speculation (and a leaked slide from a presentation) that suggested Universal was looking at a third gate. This could have be as simple as calling the new waterpark, Volcano Bay, a third gate, however several folks swear it's not the same thing. A third gate could be really interesting as far as what Universal brings to the table. Especially if all the rides are on the same level as the stuff they have been building lately. The blueprints on the new Skull Island ride suggest a very unique spin on the old tram ride formula. If Avatar's rides really boil down to nothing more than an enhanced soarin' and a dark ride, then a new park full of technically superior rides would go a long way in making Disney feel a bit like your father's theme park.

 

[Planogirl]

Universal purchased quite a bit of land across the highway of course. I've heard that WetnWild's days might be numbered too even though that seems odd to me. Doesn't that waterpark do pretty good numbers? If they built another park on that land, it should be interesting to see what they do about transportation.

That aside, any of this being true might make them even more eager to keep Marvel.

 

[rteetz]

Universal purchased quite a bit of land across the highway of course. I've heard that WetnWild's days might be numbered too even though that seems odd to me. Doesn't that waterpark do pretty good numbers? If they built another park on that land, it should be interesting to see what they do about transportation.

That aside, any of this being true might make them even more eager to keep Marvel.

Well the rumor is if they get this new water park up and running they would shut down wet n wild and build a third gate on that site.

 

[WillJenDisney]

Ok... Gonna have to disagree point by point on this one.

First - they aren't "going toe to toe" with universal. They get $0.70 of every dollar in town and universal is almost out of space.

The blessing of size.

Second - you're starting to sound like our young steward...
The 50th isnt gonna do much for the stock price. At Disneyland - that energizes the crowd. But at wdw the management has all but abandoned the eisnerian "anniversary" philosophy. People come with no "celebrations" - notice there hasn't been one since the housing bubble glutt.

It will have a new logo, some signage, and a whole lot of shanghai issue merch. But honesty don't think it's much more important than that.

Third... Wheres the buzz for avatar? I know - old argument - but in order to quote it, it has to exist and it simply doesn't outside of dizgeek circles. And is highly contentious there.

And as far as "keep people excited"...that's commonsense, right?

Or is it? We are in a global, low consequence, consumer spending society. You know why attendance is still rising? New fantasyland? Heck no.
Because travel is now the kind of quick pleasure, low thought enterprise that shopping at the mall is...and they are drawn to the brightest star in the sky like bugs to a light. That's the Disney brand and rep.

It honestly doesn't matter what they do. The 5 year magic kingdom project produced little if you're honest...while Comcast had rapidly transformed the whole operation in the same amount of time. They should be embarassed and losing significant business... That's what the "free market" would produce.
But no...they are getting more people and making money off the charts...because the Micro curve has broken down on their price model as well...price is affecting neither supply not demand...all three are moving independently of each other.

Simply put... The deck is stacked. The truth will only be revealed when a recession hits... If even then.

WDW isn't losing significant business because it's simply a great vacation spot without making any improvements. While NFL wasn't as much as some expected, it added a quickly beloved sit-down restaurant/experience, a small rollercoaster and a short dark ride, while dramatically improving the look and feel of fantasyland. Maybe that wasn't huge, but it didn't have to be, because it's already an amazing park.

People go to the beach every year. Nobody goes to the beach and says, "dang, this is the same sand and water as last year, I'm not coming here again." I think to some extent that applies to WDW as well (unlike any other theme park). It's great as-is, so people will keep coming back even if they change nothing. If WDW were some mediocre destination, then failing to make significant improvements/changes would show up in attendance figures. But since it's already great, huge changes just aren't necessary. "Smaller", incremental improvements work just fine (NFL, Avatar, Disney Springs, hopefully DHS soon).

 

[rteetz]

WDW isn't losing significant business because it's simply a great vacation spot without making any improvements. While NFL wasn't as much as some expected, it added a quickly beloved sit-down restaurant/experience, a small rollercoaster and a short dark ride, while dramatically improving the look and feel of fantasyland. Maybe that wasn't huge, but it didn't have to be, because it's already an amazing park.

People go to the beach every year. Nobody goes to the beach and says, "dang, this is the same sand and water as last year, I'm not coming here again." I think to some extent that applies to WDW as well (unlike any other theme park). It's great as-is, so people will keep coming back even if they change nothing. If WDW were some mediocre destination, then failing to make significant improvements/changes would show up in attendance figures. But since it's already great, huge changes just aren't necessary. "Smaller", incremental improvements work just fine (NFL, Avatar, Disney Springs, hopefully DHS soon).

I agree to an extent. I think if WDW didn't do anything new for 20 years they wouldn't keep increasing attendance. Even 10 years. Small additions should be rather frequent maybe every 3-5 years while larger additions less frequent. DHS hasn't seen anything new since 2008. Epcot hasn't seen anything new since 2005. AK nothing since EE in 2006.

 

[OldsDr]

What if on that beach people have been traveling to annually they are charging double what they were 12 years ago for that same water and same sand. Then they put up private cabanas that block the view of half the beach and charge people a premium for a view that used to be included. Then for even more beach going pleasure you can book your favorite spot on the beach 60 days out, which if you don’t do you will be stuck behind one of the cabanas. If a beach tried doing this, people might just find a new beach.
I am waiting for Universal to adopt the Avis slogan from years ago “We may be number two, but we try harder” WDW has the girth and customer loyalty to withstand a lot from Universal, but then again didn’t GM have a similar girth when Toyota started making headway in the US car market. Granted GM as a whole relied more on selling cars than Disney as a whole relies on WDW, but I think it is a fair analogy, which is why this is not the first time I have made it.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Wow, Olds... That was deep.

You went to the bottom of the ocean on this one

 

[George4]

Several business journals (Forbes, Wall Street Journal, Busniessweek) have been reporting anticipated visits to WDW growing to 80 million this year, and 120 million by 2025 (in 10 years). That type of continued growth is impressive, but they don't have the capacity on site to support that type of growth. One of the challenges Disney is facing is how to build and expand to prepare for the growth while also bracing for the next recession. If, in 10 years, we are going to see nearly 50% increase in park attendance, where are they going to go? MK surely doesn't have the space or capacity to handle 50% more people. The other parks have room to grow, but not if they don't start planning and expanding now. You can't see the parks get uncomfortable for guests due to waits and poor service, because you didn't see it coming. You have to see it now, and start planning and building, and that is what we aren't seeing from Disney at this point. It could be a scary future for those of us that like to repeatedly visit the parks.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

There's no space for that many people...

I'm not talking the Disney property...I'm talking Orlando. The infrastructure will not support double the people under any circumstances...

This do this all the time when money is flowing...

Come up with these grandiose estimates about Orlando growth...and then a recession hits, everything grinds to a halt, half the people in town lose their houses...and they are brutally reminded of just how dependent they are on frivolous cash that dries up in down times.

Grain of salt for anything written about Orlando "growth"

 

[Josh Hendy]

People go to the beach every year. Nobody goes to the beach and says, "dang, this is the same sand and water as last year, I'm not coming here again." I think to some extent that applies to WDW as well (unlike any other theme park). It's great as-is, so people will keep coming back even if they change nothing. If WDW were some mediocre destination, then failing to make significant improvements/changes would show up in attendance figures. But since it's already great, huge changes just aren't necessary. "Smaller", incremental improvements work just fine (NFL, Avatar, Disney Springs, hopefully DHS soon).

Theme parks are partly about atmosphere, which is static, but also about thrills and stimulation and these feelings are increased by novelty. So an un-novel, un-innovative theme park is almost a contradiction in terms. You might as well just sit on the couch in a really nice hotel lobby and listen to the piped-in music and have as much fun as you would at a theme park whose rides are mostly old and unchanging.

It's not like WDW theme parks are lousy or too old and stale to visit any more ... not even the worst critics on these boards would say that. But there is a disturbing trend in place that's hard to ignore. There's no way that a "theme park" with only 3 or 4 rides worth going on is worthy of the name. What you have at WDW is one park with a dozen good rides that costs over $100 per day, and 3 parks with only 1/3 the number of rides which cost about $75 each. That doesn't look like a good deal to some of us. And the supposed big push to fix that situation looks like it's too little and too slow.

 

[George4]

Grain of salt for anything written about Orlando "growth"

I disagree, but only because even with the most recent recession, WDW continued to expand. With this years estimates hitting 88 million visitors to WDW, it is even more shocking to put that in perspective that in 2005, park attendance was approximately 44 million for all of WDW. That shows an almost doubling of park visits in 10 years, during which 4-5 were a major recession for the US and much of the rest of the world.

I think Disney is in for a rude awakening with regards to being prepared for this continued growth DESPITE any recession that may hit. They may be making big money right now, but I have been saying, and will continue to say, if the vacation experience isn't enjoyable, people will stop coming. Once that landslide starts, it will be hard to stop it, even with a flurry of construction that will likely be too little, too late.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Orlando writers are always more positive, superfluous about Orlando predictions than reality dictates...

Just compare what's written and what comes to pass... As I have for 20 years now.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

With this years estimates hitting 88 million visitors to WDW, it is even more shocking to put that in perspective that in 2005, park attendance was approximately 44 million for all of WDW.

The 2013 attendance numbers was a total of 49 million...

I can't find a firm number for 2014... But I remember hearing 52...

Those are the "trackable" numbers...

I think your apples and oranges with that 88 number. That sounds like the total for all 3 complexes in town.

Wdw would collapse under its own weight before it gets to 88 gated entries as it currently sits...defections due to crowd uncomfort would set in well before that.