Price Increase Coming.....

[NVDISFamily]

What if you are already 72 and have no heirs/family.

I can only wish I’m fortunate enough to still have enough time on the clock and motivation to be thinking about the bucket of DVC points in my 70s. If so that would mean that either I have been more successful than I could ever dream or modern medicine is doing wonders and I have firm plans to live another 30 years at that time

I’m giving myself a 10 year cutoff to invest into this program and then it will be up to my kids to work hard and decide if they want to take the lead on it for their family as the years go buy. At least that’s what I feel right now…. Who knows it could change.

 

[fumanchu2488]

When we first bought in, we paid an inflation-adjusted $71 per point.

No matter how you slice it, $71 per point is a lot more affordable to a lot more people than today's $207 per point.

The issue is you are comparing Disney inflation to US inflation. You have to compare the value relative to the cost of a normal Disney vacation.

For example, I think the latest marketing material comparing cash reservations to DVC cost shows 'save up to 50%'. I think the math on a cash stay Disney vacation is probably comparable to when it was $60 or $70/point to buy. Meaning you need to compare Disney inflation to Disney inflation (DVC vs. Cash).

As long as the cash side increases greater than inflation then DVC will increase at the same rate. Look at 2023 availability, even at the deluxe resorts. People are paying crazy prices for rooms. I remember when I was looking at cash rates about 12 years ago and you could get rooms at the value resorts less than $90/night. Now the absolute cheapest rack rate at Art of Animation is around $200.

So, in 2010, DVC was selling for around $120/point. In that time, Disney Rack rates have about doubled and the DVC rates have about doubled. I would say they are staying par for the course.

 

[Brian Noble]

There is so much sentiment these days from old timers about how the magic is gone, especially under Chapek.

I don't think this is new, so much as it has been exacerbated the way everything is right now because \waves-at-all-of-this. For as long as I've been a Disneyphile, every price increase, lapse in "show quality", discontinued offering, new attraction that is more miss than hit, price increase, etc. etc. etc. has been met with the same refrain: "This time they've gone too far!"

It hasn't happened yet. TWDC does not have a perfect track record in the business end of the business, but overall that track record is very very good. They usually know what they are doing, and they know it much better than the various armchair CEOs that populate blogs, vlogs, and message boards. That's not to say that these changes are to the benefit of the customer. Of course many of them are not! And I suppose it is possible that one of these changes will eventually be the straw that breaks the Mouse's back. But, if I'm playing the odds, this is an easy bet: put all your money on the red, black, and yellow.

The other thing that happens with "old timers" is that the mechanics of the Disney Parks market keeps making more of them. There is a never-ending supply of new families with pre-school/school-aged children, and while a Disney Parks visit is seen as a right of passage, many of them will keep visiting. Some of them will be bitten by the pixie-dust bug, and want to come back for many years. After all, Disney is a company that makes money by selling happiness, and they are good at it. The problem is, it is easy to confuse that with "Disney wants me, personally, to be happy." And, eventually Disney does something that will make that person feel distinctly unhappy. The longer it takes for that to happen, the more it feels like a betrayal. But, Disney does not care if I am happy, because there is another family lined up to take my place if I decide to stop coming.

 

[DonMacGregor]

The other thing that happens with "old timers" is that the mechanics of the Disney Parks market keeps making more of them. There is a never-ending supply of new families with pre-school/school-aged children, and while a Disney Parks visit is seen as a right of passage, many of them will keep visiting. Some of them will be bitten by the pixie-dust bug, and want to come back for many years. After all, Disney is a company that makes money by selling happiness, and they are good at it. The problem is, it is easy to confuse that with "Disney wants me, personally, to be happy." And, eventually Disney does something that will make that person feel distinctly unhappy. The longer it takes for that to happen, the more it feels like a betrayal. But, Disney does not care if I am happy, because there is another family lined up to take my place if I decide to stop coming.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

because there is another family lined up to take my place if I decide to stop coming.

You touch on something here what I've always known to be true. I believe most of the anger toward Chapek is misguided. I definitely understand some of the sentiments but I think what "old timers" are REALLY angry about are other people taking up more space and limited resources at the parks. What used to be a more exclusive experience is now open to the masses and tons more people are becoming DVC members as well as becoming repeat visitors to Disney. The growth of the fan base likely outpaces the people threatening to leave for Universal. What used to be "affordable" is no more and and they can no longer come multiple times a year like they're used to. I empathize. It must be hard to accept these changes while still being passionate about what was. But we all haveto make sacrifices in this time of high inflation. I go out to eat less and cook more. I use the AC in my house less in lieu of fans. I do more staycations. Just this year, I made the difficult decision to not renew our Magic Keys at DLR. It was so hard letting them expire but the numbers made zero sense to renew. By not renewing, I saved about $7000 by forgoing an extra trip to Anaheim next year. I have made a conscious decision to go to Disney less but enjoy it more while I'm there while filling the other times by doing more staycations at Aulani.

 

[Nabas]

“Old timers” are upset that WDW has not built a theme park since 1996 yet the U.S. population has grown from 270 million in 1996 to 332 million in 2022, an increase of 23%. Yet Disney hasn’t added a theme park since 1996.

In addition, nearly 20% of WDW attendance is now international while it was only a fraction of that in the 1990s. (Disney started to heavily advertise in Europe and South America in the 2000s.)

Universal is building a theme park to keep up with demand, Disney is not.

That’s what “old timers” are unhappy about.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

“Old timers” are upset that WDW has not built a theme park since 1996 yet the U.S. population has grown from 270 million in 1996 to 332 million in 2022, an increase of 23%. Yet Disney hasn’t added a theme park since 1996.

In addition, nearly 20% of WDW attendance is now international while it was only a fraction of that in the 1990s. (Disney started to heavily advertise in Europe and South America in the 2000s.)

Universal is building a theme park to keep up with demand, Disney is not.

That’s what “old timers” are unhappy about.

Fair point and I can agree about Disney not having increased park capacity commensurate to the increased demand. I'm just not sure how feasible it would be to build a 5th gate and staff it in this economy. Disney can barely staff the parks and resorts as it is. Since Disney hasn't built a new park since 1996, shouldn't "old timers" blame Iger and Eisner rather than just Chapek for the over-crowded parks? As for the comparison to Universal's new park, while I think it will be very nice, I don't think it's going to blow away Disney like people are anticipating or hoping for. Sure it will attract a lot of Disney fans that way. But I think that will be good for both Disney and Universal in terms of crowds. And I also think significant price increases will be coming to Universal very soon to recoup all that investment they're making.

 

[Jwaire]

“Old timers” are upset that WDW has not built a theme park since 1996 yet the U.S. population has grown from 270 million in 1996 to 332 million in 2022, an increase of 23%. Yet Disney hasn’t added a theme park since 1996.

The last thing they need is another park. They have two 1/2 built parks as it is in Animal Kingdom and Hollywood Studios. Animal Kingdom has multiple expansion pads just waiting to be used. Expand Animal Kingdom, reimagine the area that used to be Pixar Place at Hollywood Studios, dump the meet and greets and build actual attractions.

As for EPCOT, it's full of expansion possibility also.

WDW's biggest problem is the fact their flagship park doesn't have enough crowd absorbing attractions. As long as Magic Kingdom has Cinderella Castle, it will remain the flagship park. They need to put in the cash and expand it. It's going to be expensive, but they can do it. There's room beyond Adventureland where Fire Mountain was supposed to get built, there's room behind Big Thunder as alluded to at D23, there's room to the right of Tron and then there's the elephant in the room, Tom Sawyer's Island.

The problem is investing in the theme parks doesn't excite Wallstreet.

 

[Brian Noble]

WDW has not built a theme park since 1996

Of course they haven't, and IMO they'd be foolish to do so. That's because the average length of a US vacation is well under a week and getting shorter (there are lots of sources for this; here is one). The only thing building a new gate would accomplish is to cannibalize the attendance of the existing parks. The only way that doesn't happen is to convince significantly more people to come to Orlando than are coming now. And, Disney clearly knows this, because the "default" length-of-stay when you go to book a resort is six nights, which itself is likely to be a subtle upsell for someone thinking of only staying four or five.

Universal doesn't have that problem yet; they had only two parks, so a third gate makes sense for that not-quite-a-week vacation length.

But, they have been expanding the existing parks' capacities to help cope with the increases in attendance. In the past ten years, they've opened:

• New Fantasyland in MK (new land, unless you want to go back to Submarine Voyage, and still a significant add)
• The Pandoraverse in AK (replacing a stub land, but retaining and moving that stub land's attractions)
• Toy Story Land in DS (new land, plus a third track on Toy Story Mania)
• A third Soarin' theater plus Rat and the France expansion in EP.
• Galaxy's Edge in DS (replacing Lights Motors Action and backlot, but significantly larger)

Each of those expanded the capacities of their respective parks, though admittedly some more than others. The Epcot spine redevelopment is hopefully replacing what was essentially a bunch of dead space with something that is at least a little more interesting and capable of holding guests' attention. Tron is an expansion of Tomorrowland, and Guardians repurposed an attraction that was largely ignored and replaced it with something people want to do.

The additions are not just in terms of attractions but also infrastructure. Just in MK, they have themed the "backstage" escape route from the Tomorrowland/Main Street border because they use it so often. The ferry boats now load and unload on two levels instead of one. The new flyover roadway helps separate MK traffic from that to/from the MK-area resorts. Studios road entrances were redone to expand capacity.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

Of course they haven't, and IMO they'd be foolish to do so. That's because the average length of a US vacation is well under a week and getting shorter (there are lots of sources for this; here is one). The only thing building a new gate would accomplish is to cannibalize the attendance of the existing parks. The only way that doesn't happen is to convince significantly more people to come to Orlando than are coming now. And, Disney clearly knows this, because the "default" length-of-stay when you go to book a resort is six nights, which itself is likely to be a subtle upsell for someone thinking of only staying four or five.

Universal doesn't have that problem yet; they had only two parks, so a third gate makes sense for that not-quite-a-week vacation length.

But, they have been expanding the existing parks' capacities to help cope with the increases in attendance. In the past ten years, they've opened:

• New Fantasyland in MK (new land, unless you want to go back to Submarine Voyage, and still a significant add)
• The Pandoraverse in AK (replacing a stub land, but retaining and moving that stub land's attractions)
• Toy Story Land in DS (new land, plus a third track on Toy Story Mania)
• A third Soarin' theater plus Rat and the France expansion in EP.
• Galaxy's Edge in DS (replacing Lights Motors Action and backlot, but significantly larger)

Each of those expanded the capacities of their respective parks, though admittedly some more than others. The Epcot spine redevelopment is hopefully replacing what was essentially a bunch of dead space with something that is at least a little more interesting and capable of holding guests' attention. Tron is an expansion of Tomorrowland, and Guardians repurposed an attraction that was largely ignored and replaced it with something people want to do.

The additions are not just in terms of attractions but also infrastructure. Just in MK, they have themed the "backstage" escape route from the Tomorrowland/Main Street border because they use it so often. The ferry boats now load and unload on two levels instead of one. The new flyover roadway helps separate MK traffic from that to/from the MK-area resorts. Studios road entrances were redone to expand capacity.

Great points! I wonder if most of the sentiments for a 5th gate are from locals. For me, since WDW is a every other year trip, we don't even visit AK since we don't have APs and find AK to be a complete waste of a day ticket. Outside of Pandora, the entire park is just sad and I'm not going to spend an entire day-ticket worth for a single ride (FoP) and wait in line for 2 hours. I'm not traveling 5k miles to see Dinoland USA. And if I want to see animals, I'll go to the Honolulu zoo, or even better, the San Diego zoo which is massive. We go for 2 weeks and buy the 10-day non-hopper tickets and feel that the other 3 parks give us more than we can handle. You're bullet points show that Disney has in fact made tremendous improvements to the parks over the years, which probably led to overcrowding problem since they are such a draw. Take a look at DCA in Anaheim. That park was pathetic at inception in the early 2000's. Look at it now with the addition of Cars Land, Avenger Campus, Pixar Pier and other improvements over the last 20 years. DCA afternoon crowds are ridiculous! As I said before, the problem with Disney is NOT that the magic is gone. It's that too many people want a finite resource and there isn't much Disney can do to control demand without significantly raising prices so that ALL of us will go less, but still go and and spend more money while we're there.

 

[Nabas]

Of course they haven't, and IMO they'd be foolish to do so. That's because the average length of a US vacation is well under a week and getting shorter (there are lots of sources for this; here is one). The only thing building a new gate would accomplish is to cannibalize the attendance of the existing parks. The only way that doesn't happen is to convince significantly more people to come to Orlando than are coming now. And, Disney clearly knows this, because the "default" length-of-stay when you go to book a resort is six nights, which itself is likely to be a subtle upsell for someone thinking of only staying four or five.

Universal doesn't have that problem yet; they had only two parks, so a third gate makes sense for that not-quite-a-week vacation length.

But, they have been expanding the existing parks' capacities to help cope with the increases in attendance. In the past ten years, they've opened:

• New Fantasyland in MK (new land, unless you want to go back to Submarine Voyage, and still a significant add)
• The Pandoraverse in AK (replacing a stub land, but retaining and moving that stub land's attractions)
• Toy Story Land in DS (new land, plus a third track on Toy Story Mania)
• A third Soarin' theater plus Rat and the France expansion in EP.
• Galaxy's Edge in DS (replacing Lights Motors Action and backlot, but significantly larger)

Each of those expanded the capacities of their respective parks, though admittedly some more than others. The Epcot spine redevelopment is hopefully replacing what was essentially a bunch of dead space with something that is at least a little more interesting and capable of holding guests' attention. Tron is an expansion of Tomorrowland, and Guardians repurposed an attraction that was largely ignored and replaced it with something people want to do.

The additions are not just in terms of attractions but also infrastructure. Just in MK, they have themed the "backstage" escape route from the Tomorrowland/Main Street border because they use it so often. The ferry boats now load and unload on two levels instead of one. The new flyover roadway helps separate MK traffic from that to/from the MK-area resorts. Studios road entrances were redone to expand capacity.

In 1996, the last year Walt Disney World added a theme park, total attendance at all 4 theme parks was 35 million.

In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, WDW attendance had exploded to over 58 million.

Adding a land here-or-there and adding a third theater to Soarin' is not going to fix the problem.

Universal understands this, which is why they are building an entirely new theme park.

WDW needs to do the same.

 

[WB1971]

Didn’t Animal Kingdom open in 98? Wasn’t 96. Point remains the same, but for the good of the order.

 

[floridavet]

In 1996, the last year Walt Disney World added a theme park, total attendance at all 4 theme parks was 35 million.

In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, WDW attendance had exploded to over 58 million.

Adding a land here-or-there and adding a third theater to Soarin' is not going to fix the problem.

Universal understands this, which is why they are building an entirely new theme park.

WDW needs to do the same.

Think about it purely from a business perspective....
If attendance has soared without them building a new park, and they are actively raising prices to temper park demand, why would they invest in a billion dollar new park?

 

[fumanchu2488]

In 1996, the last year Walt Disney World added a theme park, total attendance at all 4 theme parks was 35 million.

In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, WDW attendance had exploded to over 58 million.

Adding a land here-or-there and adding a third theater to Soarin' is not going to fix the problem.

Universal understands this, which is why they are building an entirely new theme park.

WDW needs to do the same.

What does a completely new park give them vs. expanding existing parks? I think that is the point others are making here. The logistics behind a new gate are far greater than adding or modifying existing parks. Just think of the parking lots, roads, utilities, infrastructure, etc... needed for a new gate.

Also, think about everything that HAS happened since '96 or '98. New Fantasy Land, Avatar, Toy Story Land, Star Wars, Disney Springs, Guardians, Remy, Mickey and Minnie and others.

Sure, I think they should be doing more, but I think it should be focused on expanding and finishing the existing parks and not adding a completely new park. But before they do that, they need to optimize the attendance and decide what they can reasonably expand with proper staffing, space and keep people happy.

As someone who was raised with Disney, the things that are bugging me are not the lack of park projects or expansion. It is the removal of benefits (not talking Genie+). I am talking things like Magical Express and Resort Airline Check-In. I am fine increasing prices but not removing benefits.

 

[Sandisw]

In 1996, the last year Walt Disney World added a theme park, total attendance at all 4 theme parks was 35 million.

In 2019, the last year before the pandemic, WDW attendance had exploded to over 58 million.

Adding a land here-or-there and adding a third theater to Soarin' is not going to fix the problem.

Universal understands this, which is why they are building an entirely new theme park.

WDW needs to do the same.

Universal only had a total of 20 million in 2019....so, maybe the reason to build a park is not to deal with overcrowding, but to increase more visitors to their location.

 

[Nabas]

What does a completely new park give them vs. expanding existing parks? I think that is the point others are making here. The logistics behind a new gate are far greater than adding or modifying existing parks. Just think of the parking lots, roads, utilities, infrastructure, etc... needed for a new gate.

Also, think about everything that HAS happened since '96 or '98. New Fantasy Land, Avatar, Toy Story Land, Star Wars, Disney Springs, Guardians, Remy, Mickey and Minnie and others.

Sure, I think they should be doing more, but I think it should be focused on expanding and finishing the existing parks and not adding a completely new park. But before they do that, they need to optimize the attendance and decide what they can reasonably expand with proper staffing, space and keep people happy.

As someone who was raised with Disney, the things that are bugging me are not the lack of park projects or expansion. It is the removal of benefits (not talking Genie+). I am talking things like Magical Express and Resort Airline Check-In. I am fine increasing prices but not removing benefits.

A 5th Gate gives Disney more areas to disperse people.

Prior to the pandemic, facilities such as walkways, bathrooms, restaurants, bus stops, etc. we’re becoming insufferably crowded. Chapek has acknowledged on earnings calls that park overcrowding is the top complaint they receive.

I understand Disney’s strategy - use Park Pass to limit low yield Guests (mostly annual pass holders) and increase prices across the board so that only those paying these much higher prices.

Disney’s solution to overcrowding is to charge more per Guest.

Universal’s solution to overcrowding is to build an entire theme park.

Don’t make excuses for Disney.

As a paying customer, what solution do you prefer?

 

[Brian Noble]

As a paying customer, what solution do you prefer?

Oh, that's easy. I want three new parks, I want them to be cheaper, I want the food to be better, and I want them to be less crowded.

I also want a pony.

But, I'm probably not going to get those things, and there are arguably good business reasons why that's so.

Less flippantly: I don't get to decide what Disney does or does not do in terms of capital expenditures. What I do get to decide is whether or not the value proposition, as it is, is something that I want to continue to partake in. If so, great! I keep visiting. If not, also great! I can do something else with my time and money. Disney has shown that their decisions seem to be working fairly well using the metric by which they are measured, which is profit. Naturally, their profit is not my goal. My goal is to have fun vacations. While our goals are aligned, we can do business. When they no longer are, I'll do something else. And, I do a lot of something elses. We take between three and five weeks of vacation a year. At most one of those weeks is with Disney. In 2023, I am planning: Nuevo Vallarta, coastal California, two weeks in Hawaii (the Big Island and Kauai), some hiking in Colorado, and a week at Universal Orlando (in a nearby Marriott). Oh, and there's also a long weekend at WDW for the runDisney Springtime Surprise races.

 

[heynowirv]

Exactly - promotions are only going to get a lot better in the coming months/years. Too many people are in denial for what's coming economically. The CPI data was still garbage this month and the fed is going to keep hiking rates until they break the consumers' will.
Inflation doesn't stop unless the buying demand stops - the only way you do that is making money unaffordable. Surging mortgage rates to slow down the buying pool, surging credit and loan rates to stop generalized spending, etc.
All the while Disney has been getting awful mainstream press the past few weeks about price surges. When the backlog of 2020/2021 cancelled trips from covid is finished as well as the 50th anniversary celebration, Disney revenue should fall off a cliff with the rest of the consumer market.
Financing a DVC will have 15-19% APR's by the time the fed is done hiking rates in 2023 while HELOC's will be at 30 year highs.

If you have to mortgage to buy a luxury item like DVC then it's not worth buying IMHO. We never have and never will.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

As to the possibility of a 5th gate, here is another perspective I have not seen mentioned.

If the dissolution of Reedy Creek Improvement District continues on track, as it is now, and the RCID is dissolved in favor of a successor district run by governmental agencies, then future development at WDW is going to be more costly and take longer for permits, approvals and terms and conditions of mitigation. (Disney is already cancelling projects that were in the pipeline.) Delays in construction are extremely costly!

Then in the long term future, it may make more sense for Disney to alleviate crowding and meet demand on both coasts by building a third Disney park in the United States -- other than in California or Florida.

Walt Disney started Walt Disney World because he was hemmed in by development around Disneyland. There were also issues with local government permitting and environmental requirements (which had just gotten started in California at that time.) So, a critical part of the decision to come to Florida was cheap, undeveloped land in almost all directions (with a nearby airport) and the right to have RCID so they could permit their own projects without having to go through the government process including some public hearings. Now, Disney World is hemmed in on every side by commercial and residential development (again) and it appears any future land use development and the permitting process will have the normal government processes. These are the two very things that caused Disney to set their sights on a new location back in the 1960s.

If a third park location is in the cards for Disney, it has to eventually impact DVC at WDW.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

Oh, that's easy. I want three new parks, I want them to be cheaper, I want the food to be better, and I want them to be less crowded.

I also want a pony.

But, I'm probably not going to get those things, and there are arguably good business reasons why that's so.

Less flippantly: I don't get to decide what Disney does or does not do in terms of capital expenditures. What I do get to decide is whether or not the value proposition, as it is, is something that I want to continue to partake in. If so, great! I keep visiting. If not, also great! I can do something else with my time and money. Disney has shown that their decisions seem to be working fairly well using the metric by which they are measured, which is profit. Naturally, their profit is not my goal. My goal is to have fun vacations. While our goals are aligned, we can do business. When they no longer are, I'll do something else. And, I do a lot of something elses. We take between three and five weeks of vacation a year. At most one of those weeks is with Disney. In 2023, I am planning: Nuevo Vallarta, coastal California, two weeks in Hawaii (the Big Island and Kauai), some hiking in Colorado, and a week at Universal Orlando (in a nearby Marriott). Oh, and there's also a long weekend at WDW for the runDisney Springtime Surprise races.

You want a pony? That’s so weird