New survey .. proposal .. Tiered Ticket Prices

[SmithSmith]

I agree with some parts of the TP article... but I also find some parts of it suspicious.

First, we know there are multiple pricing charts because they've been featured in this thread. So how come Len is only citing the one that has the highest jump in prices? He hasn't even mentioned the existence of the other pricing chart, the one that shows a relative minor jump in prices. Curious...

Second, in the article, he wrote:

After presenting the price calendar and table, Disney asked whether you would have:

• Visited on the same dates with the same ticket
• Changed the dates you visited or the number of days you bought
• Bought an annual pass

Why did he leave off the last question Disney asked in the survey? Which was:

Would not have visited the Walt Disney World theme park at all.

Third, with this comment:

However, there are a bunch of exceptions where Disney rates a day much higher than actual crowds. This is one way for Disney to raise prices – by saying a day is more crowded that it really is.

For example, there are 21 days in the past year that Disney has labeled “Gold” where the crowd level was 6 or below for the resort or the Magic Kingdom (July 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 19, 20, 26, and 27, 2014 are examples). And there are 39 days that Disney has labeled “Silver” where the crowd level was 4 or lower for the entire resort or the Magic Kingdom (Examples: November 1, 7, 8, 15, 16, 22, 30, 2014).

He's essentially accusing Disney of "moving the goal post". The issue I have with this commentary, is he's relying on his own TP crowd calendar to prove his point. However, his conclusion can be quickly refuted if you use the dates he cited and compare them to the easyWDW crowd calendar.

 

[cakebaker]

I don't recall seeing any claims in Testa's article or anywhere else that this was a final structure.

I agree- it's all just guessing. My problem with his is that he chose the chart that would show the highest possible price increase and never mentioned there were others where the increases were much more reasonable. It was, imo, written for shock value. He wrote it as though- this is THE possibility rather than include other just as viable possibilities.

That's an interesting point about human nature! The "most reliable" isn't always the same source, it's whoever has the most negative/scary info! I suppose not an apples to apples comparison, as EasyWDW has not yet weighed in as far as I know, but TP was widely criticiazed here as less reliable.

And sources looking to get attention know that sensationalism sells- make it sound as bad as possible and you'll get lots of attention. Is it possible Disney will jack prices 85%? Sure. Is it likely? I don't think so. Will there be a price increase someday? That one is a sure bet ....almost. But that wouldn't be "news".

 

[cigar95]

He's essentially accusing Disney of "moving the goal post". The issue I have with this commentary, is he's relying on his own TP crowd calendar to prove his point. However, his conclusion can be quickly refuted if you use the dates he cited and compare them to the easyWDW crowd calendar.

While I think Len was a bit off-base in some of his inferences and conclusions, I have to note that he's using the TP crowd calendar data for *past* dates, which cites what actually happened on those dates. It isn't based on their advance predictions. So in that regard, the data make for a fair comparison. (I don't know that easywdw posts similar data, though I'm much less familiar with the site.)

 

[Mikie]

I agree with some parts of the TP article... but I also find some parts of it suspicious.

First, we know there are multiple pricing charts because they've been featured in this thread. So how come Len is only citing the one that has the highest jump in prices? He hasn't even mentioned the existence of the other pricing chart, the one that shows a relative minor jump in prices. Curious...

Second, in the article, he wrote:

After presenting the price calendar and table, Disney asked whether you would have:

• Visited on the same dates with the same ticket
• Changed the dates you visited or the number of days you bought
• Bought an annual pass

Why did he leave off the last question Disney asked in the survey? Which was:

Would not have visited the Walt Disney World theme park at all.

Third, with this comment:

However, there are a bunch of exceptions where Disney rates a day much higher than actual crowds. This is one way for Disney to raise prices – by saying a day is more crowded that it really is.

For example, there are 21 days in the past year that Disney has labeled “Gold” where the crowd level was 6 or below for the resort or the Magic Kingdom (July 5, 6, 11, 12, 13, 19, 20, 26, and 27, 2014 are examples). And there are 39 days that Disney has labeled “Silver” where the crowd level was 4 or lower for the entire resort or the Magic Kingdom (Examples: November 1, 7, 8, 15, 16, 22, 30, 2014).

He's essentially accusing Disney of "moving the goal post". The issue I have with this commentary, is he's relying on his own TP crowd calendar to prove his point. However, his conclusion can be quickly refuted if you use the dates he cited and compare them to the easyWDW crowd calendar.

Good observations. Regarding the bolded, though, does EasyWDW report actual crowd levels after the fact? I thought only TP did that, in which case there's no EasyWDW comparison to make. If it's based on Easy's *predicted* crowd levels, just as Disney created tiers based on their own *predicted* crowd levels, I'm not sure that's the right data to later assess whether the days panned out to be placed in the proper tier.

ETA: Must have been simul-posting with Cigar95

 

[cigar95]

Even if it did- I don't take an example posted in a survey as any indication that this is anything close to a final pricing structure. It's because I think Disney would be insane to make that kind of jump that I don't believe they'd ever do it - I don't think they're stupid.

You're noticing a key bit of information - Well-crafted survey questions are often worded to ask about something other than what one is actually planning on doing. Hence we have seen at least three different surveys asking similar-sounding but substantially different questions. One can then analyze the similarities and differences among the answers to the different questions to draw conclusions about what potential guests are actually sensitive to.
That isn't to say that significant price increases *aren't* coming - though personally I don't think it's likely - just that the survey questions alone don't tell us this.

 

[jtowntoflorida]

That's a nationwide average from 2012 I believe and obviously what percentage a household falls in will depend on the area of the country as well.

I don't think it means that they are the only ones they are interested in, just that they are the target right now for marketing. And it may just be saying that their target are the households most likely to be able to afford a trip. It may not be saying much at all.

ITA. The ideal Disney guest is one who stays onsite on a package that includes tickets and a meal plan and who have extra spending money to blow in the parks. Due to Disney's pricing, that's almost by definition going to exclude anyone who makes less than the top 10-20% of income earners. I think that the memo is much ado about nothing. Of course Disney is targeting people who can afford to visit Disney! Who else are they going to target?

 

[SmithSmith]

While I think Len was a bit off-base in some of his inferences and conclusions, I have to note that he's using the TP crowd calendar data for *past* dates, which cites what actually happened on those dates. It isn't based on their advance predictions. So in that regard, the data make for a fair comparison. (I don't know that easywdw posts similar data, though I'm much less familiar with the site.)

Good observations. Regarding the bolded, though, does EasyWDW report actual crowd levels after the fact? I thought only TP did that, in which case there's no EasyWDW comparison to make. If it's based on Easy's *predicted* crowd levels, just as Disney created tiers based on their own *predicted* crowd levels, I'm not sure that's the right data to later assess whether the days panned out to be placed in the proper tier.

ETA: Must have been simul-posting with Cigar95

You're both right. EasyWDW does not provide observed crowd level data like TP does, so there's no direct comparison. However, my point was... that I, and others, find TP crowd levels (whether observed or predicted) unreliable. But that's another discussion entirely.

 

[cakebaker]

That isn't to say that significant price increases *aren't* coming - though personally I don't think it's likely - just that the survey questions alone don't tell us this.

This is what I think as well which is what makes the TP article annoying- the way it's written makes it out to be a forgone conclusion when it is far from it and gets people all up in arms over nothing.

ITA. The ideal Disney guest is one who stays onsite on a package that includes tickets and a meal plan and who have extra spending money to blow in the parks. Due to Disney's pricing, that's almost by definition going to exclude anyone who makes less than the top 10-20% of income earners. I think that the memo is much ado about nothing. Of course Disney is targeting people who can afford to visit Disney! Who else are they going to target?

I agree- it really isn't news that Disney wants people who can afford to come and spend money. But that's another problem I have with the piece that was written- makes it sound like Disney is after only those who are wealthy. They didn't build all those value resorts to attract the "rich" ....or the poor.

 

[SmithSmith]

I agree- it's all just guessing. My problem with his is that he chose the chart that would show the highest possible price increase and never mentioned there were others where the increases were much more reasonable. It was, imo, written for shock value. He wrote it as though- this is THE possibility rather than include other just as viable possibilities.



And sources looking to get attention know that sensationalism sells- make it sound as bad as possible and you'll get lots of attention. Is it possible Disney will jack prices 85%? Sure. Is it likely? I don't think so. Will there be a price increase someday? That one is a sure bet ....almost. But that wouldn't be "news".

Exactly.

I've come to the conclusion that the pricing structure Len cited will never come to fruition. I believe it's a red herring. I think those obscene prices were created to make the other tiered pricing chart (the one with modest price increases) seem more palatable.

 

[Jennytoon]

You're noticing a key bit of information - Well-crafted survey questions are often worded to ask about something other than what one is actually planning on doing. Hence we have seen at least three different surveys asking similar-sounding but substantially different questions. One can then analyze the similarities and differences among the answers to the different questions to draw conclusions about what potential guests are actually sensitive to.
That isn't to say that significant price increases *aren't* coming - though personally I don't think it's likely - just that the survey questions alone don't tell us this.

I actually have a theory (which I posted in the comments on the TP article as well). I think the most likely outcome is that we will see the tiered pricing, but we will only see it applied to 1 and 2-day tickets. If this happens:

• Everyone who has been up in arms about the complexity of calculating what days they need to be there and locking in their park days in advance to get the proper tier will heave a big sigh of relief about the simplicity of the solution.
  
  
• The camp that has been saying this is what happens in many other venues (sports tickets, other theme parks, off-season water park tickets, etc.) and therefore it's not outrageous that Disney does it will gain a lot of followers who were unwilling to provide agreement when the surge cost was applied to the entire multi-day ticket for a lengthy stay.
  
  
• Disney will get to look like it is responsive to its customers.

One reason I think this is that not only are there different pricing models, there are two different displays of the chart that I have seen. One has all the prices calculated out, the other blanks out everything after the 1-day ticket and just applies a flat percent. And in the flat % chart, it is not still divided up by category, it is swept across the entire line. The subliminal effect of that, at first glance and before reading the details, is to imply that if you are buying a multi-day ticket then the changes between the tiers are minimized. So I think they're looking to confirm that people are giving a weaker negative response when the chart is presented that way, which would indicate that surge pricing on a short-length ticket would not meet too much opposition.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I agree- it's all just guessing. My problem with his is that he chose the chart that would show the highest possible price increase and never mentioned there were others where the increases were much more reasonable. It was, imo, written for shock value. He wrote it as though- this is THE possibility rather than include other just as viable possibilities.

I can see how it could be seen that way. That is very different than what I originally responded to, which seemed to be saying the numbers were something Testa created himself, not something from Disney.

 

[nugov2]

One thing that I wonder about (if these new increases take effect based on a target demographic of highest 10% of earners) is level of service. Yes, these are the types of consumers who have no issue with paying thousands of dollars on a vacation. However, they're also the type of consumer for whom this isn't a "once in a lifetime" expenditure, or even a rare expenditure. They expect a certain level of service which, frankly, Disney doesn't provide. Disney provides good service. It does not, though, provide the kind of service which can compete with a true "luxury vacation" and which higher-end consumers expect for that kind of money.

Examples:
long wait times to speak with a CSR
issues with Disney website
waiting 10-20-30 minutes to be seated at an ADR
luxury resorts on par with a Holiday Inn
quality of food
flexibility of service
Disney transportation times
etc.

That is the problem I think Disney isn't looking at realistically. We are middle class by no means the 10% but everyone I know that goes to Disney is like us middle class. I have a relative who is definitely in the 10% and they have taken their entire family kids and grand kids to places like the Mediterranean and Europe. No way would they think that the Polynesian or even the Grand Floridian is true deluxe accommodations. They would expect way better food and service than places like Narcoose's offers.The wife is a clean ocd (goes through housekeepers quickly because her standards are so high) and would not be impressed by the cleanliness standards of today's parks, don't even get me started on the monorail that is the transportation at their highest deluxes. Disney parks were built and made their bread and butter on the middle class. Even back in the 80s to 90s my family took around 4 trips to WDW and most of the families we knew who went like us were solid middle class. I just think this pricing model will not work as even my relative expects to see a value for their money as they didn't get to be rich by throwing it away.

Good points by both in those posts. I have only read bits and pieces of this thread, but did read the other one about this. If those increases are accurate Disney has lost their mind. I assume my family would be in the targeted group who can afford the prices, but like is mentioned WDW doesn't even come close to the amenities and high quality we would get anywhere else we vacation. CL at Disney is a joke compared to anywhere else. It is one of the reasons we have moved off site. With our family of 5 we need a minimum of 2bdrms and 2 bdrms club level is laughable at WDW for what you get. Eventually I planned to take the kids back onsite for the views when they were older, but if the second chart posted is accurate WDW will become just one or two days of our Orlando vacation. My dh already thinks WDW is a sham and we should be skipping it to be in Hawaii or over seas, I can only imagine when all my kids are technically adults and we have to pay $2300 plus tax for 5 days. I am almost to the point where I don't think EP, AK and HS are worth it at today's prices they are definitely not worth the predicted ones. MK is the only one I would have any interest in visiting in the future if this is the case. The think I think is funny is the large majority of people in my circle think WDW is a one and done vacation spot and most who also are in this new target find the accommodations appalling. I think they are targeting the wrong people. If they really think that just because people can spend that they will, they are idiots. I have no problem spending a lot of money on a memorable vacation, but WDW is becoming stale and expensive for what you get already(I have big childhood memories that bring me back, dh does not and loathes it). I think this may be the critical error that causes their success to derail.

 

[Angel Ariel]

This is what I think as well which is what makes the TP article annoying- the way it's written makes it out to be a forgone conclusion when it is far from it and gets people all up in arms over nothing.

All of this goes to show how important individual perception is. I didn't get the forgone conclusion from that post in my quick read of it. I just read it as analysis of survey questions...not that it was definitely happening.

I am not worried about this happening imminently, but I find the discussions interesting and appreciate what people like Mr. Testa and Josh think based on the amount of information they have that I don't. I don't take it as gospel, but I enjoy their contributions to the discussions.

 

[Ambear]

I think I'm going to do what twinprincessmermaids has done and move to orlando and get an AP. Takes all the guess work out of it lol.

 

[Praying Colonel]

I think I'm going to do what twinprincessmermaids has done and move to orlando and get an AP. Takes all the guess work out of it lol.

...until WDW adds a "Gold Day AP Surcharge" if you want to use your AP on a Gold day.

 

[cigar95]

I can see how it could be seen that way. That is very different than what I originally responded to, which seemed to be saying the numbers were something Testa created himself, not something from Disney.

I found it interesting that the Disney survey simply presented percentage discounts, so that one could look at the chart and see "wow, a 40% discount, that sounds good". So Len called the bluff and actually did the calculation. Suddenly those discount numbers didn't look quite so appealing. (Though again, I don't believe they were seriously considered to start with, for reasons I have cited throughout the thread.)

 

[cakebaker]

I can see how it could be seen that way. That is very different than what I originally responded to, which seemed to be saying the numbers were something Testa created himself, not something from Disney.

No, I never meant that he created the numbers.

 

[mummabear]

As I said at the beginning of this thread, this concept doesn't bother me at all and doesn't come as a surprise because different pricing for different dates and different times is so common in the entertainment industry (note Universal's pricing for Express Passes). What I do care about is how the pricing translates into actual dollars and how any increases compare to the usual increases that Disney has implemented for decades.

We can quibble about things like complication and fairness, but when you factor in things like special promotions, seasonal pricing for resorts, package pricing, etc., when has planning for a Disney vacation (or travel to any popular destination for that matter) ever been that simple. When we travel to Disney, we look at dates, resort (usually DVC availability), airfares and so on, and then decide on park tickets based on how long we are staying and whether we are likely to be making other trips in the near future (to decide if annual passes make sense). Based on the dates of our trip, it wouldn't be any more difficult to make these decisions because we will know what tier we are in. Unless the differences in prices are dramatic, we aren't likely to fudge our dates just to save something on park tickets. With schoolteachers in the family, we can't usually be that flexible.

The biggest thing that jumps out at me from the Touring Plans article is that the sample price chart he uses is very dramatically different than the one shown earlier in this thread. In that chart from WDW Magic, the bronze price seemed to be about like current prices, silver was a little higher, and gold was a little higher than that. But all of the examples continued the current structure of extra days costing $10 after the first 4 days. In that chart, a 10 day gold ticket was $405. In the chart in the Touring Plans article, that same 10 day ticket is listed at $732.

It would appear that different people are seeing different proposed price charts. I don't know exactly where the point would be that price increases would significantly affect how often we would visit WDW. The chart from WDW Magic wouldn't really faze me, but the one from TP definitely would. There is a big difference between what I can afford and what I am willing to pay.

I personally agree with the idea of tiered pricing but I think overall it could be more complicated than it is worth going on a day by day set up.
What has me worried is the price increase shown in the article up to $732 for a gold 10 days, it seems like they were trying to discourage people coming for a longer stay.

 

[mummabear]

I pay little attention to stats of this kind so I'm really surprised that the top 10% includes the 15Ok per year level.

If that's true - I'm
not surprised if that's their target- they have said they want to encourage longer stays, onsite. Honestly I'm not sure how people making a great deal less than that can afford a long, onsite WDW trip or how they ever did.

That said, their target market doesn't mean they want to get rid of anyone who isn't in that group- it means that group is who they're working hardest to attract.


I simply don't believe the price increases predicted by Testa. He's working on not much more information than anyone else and it's guessing- which if fine, but I'm giving it the weight I think it deserves- and that's not much.

Then why are they increasing the 10 day tickets by the largest percent?

 

[cakebaker]

Then why are they increasing the 10 day tickets by the largest percent?

First off, they aren't. Not that we know of. It was an opinion article, not a factual one.

I haven't looked at the chart in depth, but that would be yet another reason why I don't put much stock in the chances that the TP article is worth much as far as what might really happen.

Penalizing longer stays goes against everything they've been doing for quite some time now and against what they have publicly said they want to do.

I'm not sure why the TP article didn't include the information that the chart they used was just one and that there were others that had been used. Nor do I understand why they didn't disclose that they used the worst case scenario available- but those 2 things make me question their article and honestly, pretty much discount it. I don't like sensationalism and not being open in the article bothers me a great deal.