Noooo...the end of EMH?

[eyehartdisney]

Not when the price of extending their ticket is about $9 per day. Disney does better when they leave and get replaced by new guests. The "spare" family may, or may not have come anyway. It all depends on space availability. Perhaps they need the first family to check out of Marriott World and head to Daytona in order to free up space at the hotel. It isn't true that there is simply an infinite number of families who can go to WDW on any given day. The crowd numbers simply don't support that. If that were the case, then the parks would reach capacity all the time.

Disney wants the new guests and the nine dollars a day family. They might not be spending the money on the tickets, but they generally will buy something during their stay during that day.

 

[wdw4rfam]

I know I'm in the minority when I say this but with many stays onsite I've only taken advantage of EMH once. It was fun but not something we see the need to use often and definitely not a selling point for us to stay on property. For us there are so many other things that keeps us coming back to staying on property. We've stayed off property at some wonderful homes w/pools and such for great prices but nothing beats staying in our Disney bubble.

same here. actually, we avoid whatever park has EMH that day. We stay on property because we have got free dining the last 8 trips, so that ends up saving us a fortune when my family of 5 eats for free. The buses, early fp booking, 180+10, and being surrounded by disney is what sells me. i dont care about EMH at all.

 

[JimmyV]

I think they might. If, for example, we were going to stay 5 nights at WDW, we would probably do 5 days at Disney. If we stayed 5 nights in a condo off-site, we might only do 3 days at Disney and 2 days somewhere else.

But the example compares two families who each bought 5 day passes. So the odds of buying 5 day passes and then only using 3 of those days is slim. If one wants to construct a comparison of a family who spends 9 days at WDW to a family who spends 3 days at WDW, then sure, one can jiggle the numbers any way they want. It is only useful to compare a 5 day vacation to a 5 day vacation.

While it might seem logical that Disney makes more money the longer a family stays, it doesn't actually work that way. A family who stays for 7 days doesn't buy more Mickey Ears than a family who stays for 5. They don't buy more stuffed, plush Olafs. They don't buy more T-Shirts. What they do buy more of is park pass days which have a diminishing return, and they buy more hotel nights and more meals. But those hotel nights and meals are going to be bought by someone else even if the family in question leaves. I think that some here are looking at this as if Disney has a vacancy and an unbought meal if a family leaves after 5 days instead of 7. That might be true in most places. But Disney will fill that hotel room and serve that meal. If you look at the expenses of a family who stays for 5 days as compared to a family who stays for 8, you will find that 90% of their spending is accounted for in the first 5 days. (That is not to say that they actually buy the T-Shirt in the first 5 days. They might buy it on the "last day of the trip". But that could just as easily be day 5 as day 8. It all depends on what the last day is.) The extra days means hotel expenses and meals. And those are two things that Disney is going to sell anyway. The extra park ticket revenue is modest, and the extra "other" spending is as well.

 

[JimmyV]

Disney wants the new guests and the nine dollars a day family.

Well of course they do. They would love to close the parks due to full capacity every day. But it doesn't work that way in the real world. They know that on a given day in September, "X" number of offsite guests are going to come through the turnstiles. They can probably predict this to within 1k-2k. Given that, do they want those people to all be on their 6th day of their trip, or would they prefer that they all be on their first day? (Neither scenario is likely, or possible, of course. But just saying...) They would prefer that more guests be starting their vacations than ending them. More MIckey Ears to sell. More coffee mugs. More of everything.

 

[eyehartdisney]

But the example compares two families who each bought 5 day passes. So the odds of buying 5 day passes and then only using 3 of those days is slim. If one wants to construct a comparison of a family who spends 9 days at WDW to a family who spends 3 days at WDW, then sure, one can jiggle the numbers any way they want. It is only useful to compare a 5 day vacation to a 5 day vacation.

While it might seem logical that Disney makes more money the longer a family stays, it doesn't actually work that way. A family who stays for 7 days doesn't buy more Mickey Ears than a family who stays for 5. They don't buy more stuffed, plush Olafs. They don't buy more T-Shirts. What they do buy more of is park pass days which have a diminishing return, and they buy more hotel nights and more meals. But those hotel nights and meals are going to be bought by someone else even if the family in question leaves. I think that some here are looking at this as if Disney has a vacancy and an unbought meal if a family leaves after 5 days instead of 7. That might be true in most places. But Disney will fill that hotel room and serve that meal. If you look at the expenses of a family who stays for 5 days as compared to a family who stays for 8, you will find that 90% of their spending is accounted for in the first 5 days. (That is not to say that they actually buy the T-Shirt in the first 5 days. They might buy it on the "last day of the trip". But that could just as easily be day 5 as day 8. It all depends on what the last day is.) The extra days means hotel expenses and meals. And those are two things that Disney is going to sell anyway. The extra park ticket revenue is modest, and the extra "other" spending is as well.

If that were the case, they would not discount the tickets the longer you are there. The point of diminishing returns for disney is two weeks. How do we know this? That's when their ticket prices run out.

 

[JimmyV]

If that were the case, they would not discount the tickets the longer you are there.

I have no doubt that Disney is looking at this. They already stopped selling passes at DLR longer than 5 days. Despite the fact that Disney sells 14 day tickets in Florida, it is absolutely the case that spending decreases over time. "Spending fatigue" is a real thing.

 

[eyehartdisney]

Well of course they do. They would love to close the parks due to full capacity every day. But it doesn't work that way in the real world. They know that on a given day in September, "X" number of offsite guests are going to come through the turnstiles. They can probably predict this to within 1k-2k. Given that, do they want those people to all be on their 6th day of their trip, or would they prefer that they all be on their first day? (Neither scenario is likely, or possible, of course. But just saying...) They would prefer that more guests be starting their vacations than ending them. More MIckey Ears to sell. More coffee mugs. More of everything.

You keep insisting that it's an if/then statement. It isn't. They are making a grab for both the first days and the sixth days. Why do you insist on such narrow parameters for your arbitrary comparison? Of course in your hypothetical situation it works that way, but that's not what the numbers show in the real world. If you stay on site you are more likely to go exclusively to disney. If you stay offsite, then you are more likely to visit their competitors. "But that doesn't matter!" You keep saying, which is at best, an opinion, not reality based. 1) keeping money out of their competitor's pockets is important. 2) even if it's only 9 dollars they are gaining, that's still 9 dollars they didn't have before. 3) there is not a finite call for disposable souvineers such as mickey bars and soda. The profit margin on those items is far greater than mickey ears etc, and will be purchased on the 9th day as well as the first.

 

[hopemax]

Yes. And I am doing an "apples to apples" comparison as to their 5 days. What happens on days 6-10 is irrelevant. The offsite family can go wherever they want at the end of their 5 days. As long as some other family fills their space. It only makes a difference if the offsite family is not replaced by another family and Disney loses attendance.

The problem with apples to apples, is that it misses the part where I believe off-site are more profitable for Disney than people think. Daily admission revenues. I guess a good chuck are "short stay, just passing through" varieties. They are buying 1-4 day admission tickets, which have a higher margin than 5-10 day passes. All the advertising "the longer you stay the cheaper it gets..." not really true, for these off-site short trippers. And as you say, those offsite people are being replaced regularly.

So take a 3 day off-siter. They are spending $97.63 per day on admission. Family of 4 (ignoring child price, to do the math faster) = $390.50. And they have to buy daily parking, so add $17 so we're up to $407.50.

Next. Family staying 5 days onsite. Their daily admission price is $67.10 x family of 4 = $268.38. They don't pay parking, so no addition.

So just to get to, and through the gate, the off-siter has outspent the on-siter by $139.12. Certainly comparable to a night at a value resort. On-siters have more value if their in-park spending is greater than the off-siter, or if they are staying in a more expensive room. But any value guests, that come and stay for 10 days that think they are "more important" than that off-site guest... probably not.

 

[THEDISNEYTHREE]

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.

I second that. It is absolutely Magical!

 

[mummabear]

I would argue that a family staying off-site is more likely to spend a day or two at another or a couple of other Theme Parks making the numbers much different.

Not sure if i'm the minority but we always we do the other parks whether staying on site or off site, also we eat breakfasts in our rooms (unless we do a character breakfast) either way as well

 

[mummabear]

A somewhat random thought but even if you gave each family the same amount of money to visit Disney(excluding transport to Orlando) each one would spend it differently.
Some would splurge on staying deluxe, some would splurge on dining, some would splurge on experiences like tours and BBB etc. Others would spend more on merchandise.
How much someone spends does not equate evenly to how much profit Disney makes and only those in the know are aware which parts make them the most coin.
I certainly disagree with any notion that people staying offsite spend any less on other parts of their trip in fact they may spend more buy spending the money they saved by staying offsite.
Its like the limit I can charge back to me room being less at a value than a deluxe-the hotel room I book doesn't link to how much I can spend but how much I want to and the value I see in it, someone at the Poly may be cash strapped but saved hard to get the hotel experience they desire and others like us choose to stay value since we are only in our room to sleep. I hated having to go to reception every night to pay off our room bill so we could continue charging the next day, and the fact that I only had to do that because we were at a value was frustrating and a little offensive.

 

[ElsasFan]

For what it's worth, I went to the Disney World website and did the live chat and asked whether the rumor is true. Here is the response that I received.

Hi, Elsasfan! So far the update we have they will offer Extra Magic Hours on January 2016.

Hope that is correct. We had thought about going in January, counting on EMH because the park days are shorter. We ultimately decided to wait until spring. I would be pretty worried right now, if I had booked for January.

 

[mummabear]

But the example compares two families who each bought 5 day passes. So the odds of buying 5 day passes and then only using 3 of those days is slim. If one wants to construct a comparison of a family who spends 9 days at WDW to a family who spends 3 days at WDW, then sure, one can jiggle the numbers any way they want. It is only useful to compare a 5 day vacation to a 5 day vacation.

While it might seem logical that Disney makes more money the longer a family stays, it doesn't actually work that way. A family who stays for 7 days doesn't buy more Mickey Ears than a family who stays for 5. They don't buy more stuffed, plush Olafs. They don't buy more T-Shirts. What they do buy more of is park pass days which have a diminishing return, and they buy more hotel nights and more meals. But those hotel nights and meals are going to be bought by someone else even if the family in question leaves. I think that some here are looking at this as if Disney has a vacancy and an unbought meal if a family leaves after 5 days instead of 7. That might be true in most places. But Disney will fill that hotel room and serve that meal. If you look at the expenses of a family who stays for 5 days as compared to a family who stays for 8, you will find that 90% of their spending is accounted for in the first 5 days. (That is not to say that they actually buy the T-Shirt in the first 5 days. They might buy it on the "last day of the trip". But that could just as easily be day 5 as day 8. It all depends on what the last day is.) The extra days means hotel expenses and meals. And those are two things that Disney is going to sell anyway. The extra park ticket revenue is modest, and the extra "other" spending is as well.

I hear what you are saying but for us we are less likely to do add ons in a short stay for us 5 days in minimum park time but if we have 10 days then I am happy using park time for BBB, PL tours etc. Then there is the days we stay onsite but don't enter the parks, we still spend money on other things like Pirates and Pals or Kids pirates adventures etc

 

[Planogirl]

When we stay at a Disney resort we still do things offsite. That never changes. The only difference might be a few more offsite meals when we stay offsite since we might be passing some locations anyway. DS can get his Chick-fil-a fix and we can get some decent pizza.

It's hard to judge this. We eat many onsite meals and buy stuff we don't need whether we stay offsite or onsite. If they take away FP+, that goes away. Are we unusual?

 

[Luckybee]

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.

Dh and I need to travel with you

 

[StarGirl11]

Personally think it's more likely a scheduling miss then them removing it. Considering the fact that we'll both water parks are currently listed as being open for January. Which would be a first from since usually one is down for a refurb at that time of the year.

And then there's the weird listed timings for the shows. Or the fact Epcots closing later then MK the first full week in January when I clearly remember MK closing around 9 or 10 most of that week when I was there last year. It just seems odd. Wouldn't put a lot of stock in it at this point.

 

[WEDWDW]

Wouldn't put a lot of stock in it at this point.

I wouldn't either if they hadn't already shortened PM EMH and now the Hilton news.

It really looks like smoke to me.

 

[larryz]

That's really interesting that the Hilton has posted that EMH is a benefit of staying there only until December 31 2015.

They pay WDW for the privilege... perhaps they've decided it's not worth the premium any more...

 

[larryz]

You know, something that Disney could do that would both increase the incentive to stay onsite and would also help them redistribute the crowds would be to offer more fastpasses to certain resort guests at certain parks on certain days. Let me explain.

Group one: Contemporary, Polynesian, Port Orleans Riverside & FQ, Pop Century
Group two: Grand Floridian, Wilderness Lodge, Coronado Springs, Art of Animation
Group three: Boardwalk, AKL, All Star Movies, All Star Music
Group four: Yacht and Beach, Caribbean Beach, All Star Sports

On Monday, Group one would have more fast passes at MK, Group 2 at Epcot, Group 3 at DHS, and Group 4 at AK. On Tuesday, Group 1 would have more fast passes at Epcot, Group 2 at DHS, Group 3 at Ak, and Group 4 at MK. So on and so fourth. People like having more than 3 fast passes so the incentive would be high. It would also disperse their onsite guests more evenly (you would need to put them in groups evenly and I don't have the numbers to do that) and give Disney a very good idea of who would be in which parks on what days. You can do this by allowing them to book extra FP+ or, my recommendation would be, give them a card or something - possibly load it on the magic band - that has, say 5 fast passes, that are eligible at any of the attractions. A person wants to use all 5 on Space Mountain, they can. They want to use them all first thing in the morning, more power to them. If they want to split it up and use one every 2 hours, they can. I think the guests would be more content because they would have more fast passes and not be scheduling as much of their day unless they really wanted to and Disney would be happy because they would have the guests more or less locked into a park the same way they are locked in with FP+ now. EMHs are no longer needed so they aren't staffing those hours and guests still have a major incentive to stay on property.

This sounds like therapy for compulsive Disney planners.

 

[Major Tom]

In light of record occupancy levels for on-site resorts with not much headroom left for improvement, it seems perfectly "business like" for WDW to start reducing the most expensive perks associated with the resorts as they may no longer be necessary to spur demand.

Keeping entire parks open and functioning for on-site resort guests has to be near the top of the list of the most expensive perks to provide, with 60-day FP reservation window being at the bottom of that list with virtually no associated cost.