Noooo...the end of EMH?

[JimmyV]

According to Disney's 2014 Annual Report, per room guest spending (which includes hotel cost + food and merchandise purchased at the hotels only) is $280 at the domestic resorts. So, on average, a 5 night stay gives Disney $1400 in revenue per room...somewhere in the middle of your guesses. From the way Disney reports its results, it's hard to see the standalone profitability of either the "parks" or the "resorts" in the Parks & Resorts operating segment, so I'm assuming both of you are guessing on that.

Yes. Much of this is guesses built on guesses. AVerages can only get one so far. In truth, Disney makes most of its money from people who plop down $475+ per night for a hotel room. As the numbers set out above by me, Mr. I and you can attest, a person staying at a Value renting out for $115 per night is almost the same as if that person stayed offsite. (If the resort doesn't have a TS restaurant and the only food added to the hotel bill is QS, there simply isn't much profit to be had there. And the operating cost of the hotel itself eats up almost the entire nightly room rate.)

 

[Angel Ariel]

I would easily see it. And think it would be a much better perk than EMH.
Costs a LOT less than trying to staff extra hours. It uses the technology they have put tons of money into.

I mean they could offer a 4th, 5th or even 6th to resort guests and it would essentially the same as EMH with MORE flexibility (basically if you are staying onsite you can get on more rides with less waits than off-site guests (which EMH does for you today) without the need of getting there early or staying late. I am sure a TON of families with young kids would prefer this over EMH. (I know I would).

I think that would draw more guests to resort stays than EMH does. I have never considered EMH when deciding whether to stay onsite or not .

For myself, I have serious questions about whether they have the capacity to give resort guests 4th/5th/6th FP+. If any of this pans out at all (and I am in no way panicking), and the extra FP+ is the route they choose to go, I would definitely be waiting to see how well that pans out before booking *any* trip, much less an onsite trip.

(the only caveat to that being my brother and SIL decide to go during that time...I won't staunchly hold out on an opportunity to go with my nephews to WDW because of it)

 

[PEC]

Not a deal breaker but staying on site I will miss EMH. My last trip I did 6 attractions in that hour. Each one of them easily go to 20-40 minute waits later in the day. I wish Disney would say something because it could/would affect what park I went to on each day.

 

[WEDWDW]

Yeah it seems like the Hilton really doesn't want to deal with angry customers if it's not available.

Yes,looks like they are giving potential Guests plenty of notice that the EMH Perk is going away.

 

[mom2rtk]

For myself, I have serious questions about whether they have the capacity to give resort guests 4th/5th/6th FP+. If any of this pans out at all (and I am in no way panicking), and the extra FP+ is the route they choose to go, I would definitely be waiting to see how well that pans out before booking *any* trip, much less an onsite trip.

(the only caveat to that being my brother and SIL decide to go during that time...I won't staunchly hold out on an opportunity to go with my nephews to WDW because of it)

And there's no substantial increase in capacity on its way.

I fail to see how they can increase their FP offerings any time soon. But that won't necessarily stop them from trying.

 

[itchin2go]

Yep the biggest perk is a combination of location and bubble. It's "just being there". It's also a hard sell to someone who doesn't know. It's coming home from the MK to your hotel via an uncrowded boat, and then hanging out on the beach. Waking up in the morning to Mickey Waffles and right off to the parks. Monorail, boats, whatever. It's all part of the experience. At no point do you have to hop in your car and drive anywhere from 10 to 30 min to get to your hotel. It's just different. For anyone wanting to experience a vacation in Disney World, I recommend onsite. Note I tend to recommend either an Epcot or MK area resort. I don't think the Values add very much, with some long walks to the bus and long waits. They do need to make sure to keep those differentiated. Not sure how to do this while keeping the cost in the $120-range.

I'll note...

60+10... yes, agree, this is not a game-changer
Extended hours... not really. We have stayed late at Epcot, and didn't find it to be all that. Stayed late at MK, same. Guess we differ here.
Transportation... yes, huge, especially for anyone not driving in.
ADRs... I value this one quite high. Already for December, pretty much everything good is booked up. It was a big benefit for us to get in early.

To this, I will say, the only perk I miss about staying onsite was location - most notably, when we stayed at BC. That location cannot be beat. And now that we stay offsite, the only thing that EVER gets me thinking about springing for onsite again, is that BC/YC/BW location. But that would cost us 4x as much for less space. That's a hard pill to swallow.

I'm actually surprised that so many are up in arms about EMH. Every bit of advice I ever got was to avoid the parks with EMH, whether you used them or not - unless you had hoppers (which we typically don't). Not saying you can't get a lot done during EMH, but we employed a different strategy that didn't involve stretching our hours outside our comfort zone. I understand others have different schedules, hoppers, etc. But for us, we didn't use EMH when we DID stay onsite.

Academically, I'm wondering what the loss of EMH will do to crowd calendars/best & worst parks ...

 

[Angel Ariel]

Of course. There is no comparison in terms of value to Disney World in general. (keep in mind, I've been both an onsite and offsite guest many times) The onsite guest might pay $300/nt to stay, $200/day to feed their family of 5, and $50 in misc expenses like drinks or nick nacks. Plus their $200 or whatever it works out to for that day of their tickets. Compare to the offsite family which is paying the same price for the tickets ($200?). But spending the other $550 elsewhere. I'd guess a single onsite guest is over 10x more profitable to WDW than an offsite guest.

Why the assumption that the offsite family is spending their food and misc spending dollars offsite? We have done offsite at WDW as well as DLR..and are doing offsite again at DLR this year. We still eat meals inside the park (and DLR is a heck of a lot more accessible to offsite than WDW, and we still eat in the parks). We still snack inside the park. The only meal we don't eat in a park is breakfast (unless doing a character meal) - we eat that in our hotel room before leaving for the day (we have cereal/milk etc in the room, no matter where we stay). Where we are sleeping at night plays no part in where we spend those monies.

At WDW, especially, if I were staying somewhere off property, I wouldn't be leaving the parks for lunch and dinner. Too much travel time doing that.

I don't disagree with the premise that the offsite guest is spending less at Disney than the onsite guest, I'm sure that's true. I just don't think it is as extreme as onsite guests get all of their lodging, tickets, food, snacks, etc onsite, and offsite guests are only spending money on tickets onsite.

 

[PugsNotDrugs]

EMH is when I can ride things over and over and not get off, so yeah if they get rid of EMH I'll be pissed! Not even gonna sugar coat it. When people leave after the fireworks I'm just like "yes! now it's party time!". I get a nice parade spot with very little, if any waiting. I can actually walk around without having to stop or change directions constantly. EMH is when my family goes wild and we just get straight up crazy until the wee hours of the morning.

Nope. This can't be true. I know Disney wouldn't break my heart like this.

 

[Angel Ariel]

To this, I will say, the only perk I miss about staying onsite was location - most notably, when we stayed at BC. That location cannot be beat. And now that we stay offsite, the only thing that EVER gets me thinking about springing for onsite again, is that BC/YC/BW location. But that would cost us 4x as much for less space. That's a hard pill to swallow.

I'm actually surprised that so many are up in arms about EMH. Every bit of advice I ever got was to avoid the parks with EMH, whether you used them or not - unless you had hoppers (which we typically don't). Not saying you can't get a lot done during EMH, but we employed a different strategy that didn't involve stretching our hours outside our comfort zone. I understand others have different schedules, hoppers, etc. But for us, we didn't use EMH when we DID stay onsite.

Academically, I'm wondering what the loss of EMH will do to crowd calendars/best & worst parks ...

Evening EMH are DH and I's favorite time in the parks, especially in MK. a little harder to manage with a toddler, but when we had family with us the grandparents were generally OK with "watching" a sleeping DD so we could go enjoy evening EMH.

There is nothing like being on a completely empty Main Street USA at 2am. Or just sitting in the HUB enjoying the quiet and the castle view.

 

[JimmyV]

I'm actually surprised that so many are up in arms about EMH. Every bit of advice I ever got was to avoid the parks with EMH, whether you used them or not - unless you had hoppers (which we typically don't).

This advice typically applies to morning EMHs, and sometimes to evening EMHs at DHS. But evening EMHs at MK and Epcot can be wonderful things. I, too, typically avoid the a.m. EMH. In part because of the advice to do so, and in part because I would need a divorce lawyer if I tried to get my wife up and at it on vacation just so that I could queue up at 7:00 to ride Space Mountain. To her way of thinking, this is sufficient objective proof necessary to apply for involuntary commitment to a State Hospital. But at night? She takes her leave of us when she is good and ready and my daughter and I close the park(s) down. Our only rule...In bed by 2:00 means no RD the next day. It has to be a day off or a day at World Showcase beginning at 11:00.

 

[HopperFan]

You have to visualize the tabs. But it's around 3.5X. Only cuz this offsite guest you described bought lots of food and misc. In a scenario in which an offsite guest attempts to eat most of their meals offsite as well, it's a different story. To the original point, I think we agree that Disney has every incentive to get a guest onsite. What is more likely to do so... EMH or extra FP+'s? I think I'd still take the extra FP+'s.

Do realize that many offsite are saving money on their hotels so they can spend their money on Disney restaurants, Disney goods to take home and Disney extras. We spend more money at Disney when we stay offsite. I don't run back offsite to eat meals and I hate eating all QS dining so we mostly do a meal each day TS. I may eat a late dinner on the way out from a early closing park and it is not unusual at all for me when staying onsite to get in my car and drive off for some Chickfila or good pizza. It's really hard to lump all offsite into the same spending pattern. While we do know that onsite guests without cars are eating onsite.

The numbers that JimmyV posted are actually very low for us as offsite guests.

 

[JimmyV]

The numbers that JimmyV posted are actually very low for us as offsite guests.

For the record...me too. We are usually Swan/Dolphin people which means that we are quasi-offsite. Disney tolerates us, but would greatly prefer that we stay next door at the Boardwalk...at 3x the price. As for our meals, we usually spend more on a bottle of wine than the amount I quoted for the whole meal. But that is just our idiosyncrasy.

 

[goherdibg]

Here you go, rerunning with your numbers, but switching from a Value to a Deluxe. I put 50% margin on everything, but you could change that to whatever.
Onsite Profit Offsite Profit
Hotel 1600 800 0 0
Passes 1250 0 1250 0
Breakfasts 250 125 0 0
Lunches 350 175 350 175
Dinners 700 350 420 210
Miscellaneous 200 100 125 62.5
1550 447.5
You have to visualize the tabs. But it's around 3.5X. Only cuz this offsite guest you described bought lots of food and misc. In a scenario in which an offsite guest attempts to eat most of their meals offsite as well, it's a different story. To the original point, I think we agree that Disney has every incentive to get a guest onsite. What is more likely to do so... EMH or extra FP+'s? I think I'd still take the extra FP+'s.

If you really want to get into the minutia, the onsite guests are required to put down a deposit and pay in full 45 days in advance for a package. Think they put that money where is doesn't earn them more? I would also venture a bet that they get a cut of my airline costs when I book flights through them.

Just looking at the PIF 45 day window.....someone above said there were 30,000 rooms. If 85% of them are occupied at any given time, that is 25,000 rooms. I will remove 5,000 for DVC/Villas where a payment to Disney may not be made. So, 20,000 packages of some type (room only, magic your way (old name), dining, etc). If the average stay is 5 days, that is 4,000 packages booked/paid for per 45 day window (I think). If the average cost for a stay is $3,000 (no clue), Disney gets to use $12,000,000 for 45 days to make more money. Even if they only get 3% for that 45 days, that is an additional $45,000. While they may only make a little more than $10 per room in interest (assuming simple interest model) over the 45 day window, scaling that out against 4,000 packages can't hurt the bottom line. If I am thinking about this correctly, the $45,000 would be multiplied by 365 days since a new 45 window pops up each day for another 4,000 rooms/packages. That would be over $16,000,000 earned from other people's money.

Add in the $200 per person deposit sometimes paid 400+ days in advance.......it goes on and on.

 

[Babe the Blue Ox]

We find that the park that has morning EMH is much less crowded late at night. There's nothing better than hopping to MK about 8 pm or so and finding bumper to bumper traffic leaving the park. We can do more in the remaining 4 hours than most can fit into a full day.

 

[HopperFan]

For the record...me too. We are usually Swan/Dolphin people which means that we are quasi-offsite. Disney tolerates us, but would greatly prefer that we stay next door at the Boardwalk...at 3x the price. As for our meals, we usually spend more on a bottle of wine than the amount I quoted for the whole meal. But that is just our idiosyncrasy.

It's a conscious choice for us. If I pay less for the room I sleep in - then I can do lots more things like Africa Trek, Dining with Imagineer, Wishes Party, Star Wars Party, Biergarten with lots of beer, no packing lunch, lots of snacks, shopping and more shopping, drinks at Epcot (with a DD) and more. When I stay onsite I tend to pack my lunch so I can have my TS dinner because I paid too much for my bedroom. Focus on park time only. These trips are usually just DS#1 and I and during winter months when hours are shorter anyway. I love being in the bubble but now with big kids, no naps, less pool time we want to do ALL that other stuff ..... and I want to keep traveling down for 5-6 weeks a year. I need to spread that money the best I can.
Disney is making it so hard for me to maintain my magical lifestyle.

 

[MrInfinity]

Do realize that many offsite are saving money on their hotels so they can spend their money on Disney restaurants, Disney goods to take home and Disney extras. We spend more money at Disney when we stay offsite. I don't run back offsite to eat meals and I hate all QS dining. I may eat a late dinner on the way out from a early closing park and it is not unusual at all for me when staying onsite to get in my car and drive off for some Chickfila or good pizza. It's really hard to lump all offsite into the same spending pattern. While we do know that onsite guests without cars are eating onsite.

The numbers that JimmyV posted are actually very low for us as offsite guests.

Of course, I've stayed offsite lots of times. I thought his numbers were pretty fair, for a family of 5 for 5 nights. That's why I ran w them. I thought they may have been a little high on the food for a typical guest, but on both sides so it was a wash to me. I don't think it's the average experience to eat 3 meals a day, with at least one being a $140 TS and the others being a $70 lunch and $50 breakfast, every day. But since he was balanced on proposing a similar experience for both types of stay, I was ok w it.

As a rule of thumb I use the dining plan as a good estimator, so I'd guesstimate for a family of 5 (2/3) a $62-$62-$20-$20-$20 daily food budget, or $154. Of course folks may spend more than this if they do more expensive things, or you could easily spend much less too.

 

[HopperFan]

If you really want to get into the minutia, the onsite guests are required to put down a deposit and pay in full 45 days in advance for a package. Think they put that money where is doesn't earn them more? I would also venture a bet that they get a cut of my airline costs when I book flights through them.

Just looking at the PIF 45 day window.....someone above said there were 30,000 rooms. If 85% of them are occupied at any given time, that is 25,000 rooms. I will remove 5,000 for DVC/Villas where a payment to Disney may not be made. So, 20,000 packages of some type (room only, magic your way (old name), dining, etc). If the average stay is 5 days, that is 4,000 packages booked/paid for per 45 day window (I think). If the average cost for a stay is $3,000 (no clue), Disney gets to use $12,000,000 for 45 days to make more money. Even if they only get 3% for that 45 days, that is an additional $45,000. While they may only make a little more than $10 per room in interest (assuming simple interest model) over the 45 day window, scaling that out against 4,000 packages can't hurt the bottom line. If I am thinking about this correctly, the $45,000 would be multiplied by 365 days since a new 45 window pops up each day for another 4,000 rooms/packages. That would be over $16,000,000 earned from other people's money.

Add in the $200 per person deposit sometimes paid 400+ days in advance.......it goes on and on.

Very valid point. I heard this spring the occupancy was in the mid 90%. That is crazy but given what the parks looked like, not surprised. The minimal Free Dining rooms offered tells me they are maintaining a high rate.

 

[TwinPrincessMermaids]

My only experience with EMH is that every park emptied into one and the crowds were insane. These reride people, what??? I think it got worse after EMH. I agree with the early morning, that was the only success we had. But not enough to miss it.

 

[JanaDee]

I think until Disney makes official announcement don't get stressed out about this issue.When or if they do I think will be the time to discuss this issue.

It won't be announced. They just won't include them in the park schedule (like is showing now).

 

[ArwenMarie]

If you really want to get into the minutia, the onsite guests are required to put down a deposit and pay in full 45 days in advance for a package. Think they put that money where is doesn't earn them more? I would also venture a bet that they get a cut of my airline costs when I book flights through them.

Just looking at the PIF 45 day window.....someone above said there were 30,000 rooms. If 85% of them are occupied at any given time, that is 25,000 rooms. I will remove 5,000 for DVC/Villas where a payment to Disney may not be made. So, 20,000 packages of some type (room only, magic your way (old name), dining, etc). If the average stay is 5 days, that is 4,000 packages booked/paid for per 45 day window (I think). If the average cost for a stay is $3,000 (no clue), Disney gets to use $12,000,000 for 45 days to make more money. Even if they only get 3% for that 45 days, that is an additional $45,000. While they may only make a little more than $10 per room in interest (assuming simple interest model) over the 45 day window, scaling that out against 4,000 packages can't hurt the bottom line. If I am thinking about this correctly, the $45,000 would be multiplied by 365 days since a new 45 window pops up each day for another 4,000 rooms/packages. That would be over $16,000,000 earned from other people's money.

Add in the $200 per person deposit sometimes paid 400+ days in advance.......it goes on and on.

Yep. Not to confuse threads, but part of what I think they are going to do if they do that new tiered pricing is use to push people towards onsite packages via discounts and penalize people who come from offsite. Packages also lock people in way more than even room-onlys, which we know is one of their main goals with so many of the changes.