Shanghai DL already trashed....

[jtowntoflorida]

Disney has said time and time again that they have X "income qualified" potential Chinese guests within Y miles of the park. I can't remember what X and Y are right now, but X is a big number (I want to say 300 million?) and Y is a small number. They definitely had the local incomes in mind when they set the pricing. That being said, I think their biggest issue with this park is going to be the Chinese economy in general, and whether whatever data they're using to set prices is actually accurate and predictive of the future. That's what remains to be seen.

I don't know if you can equate big crowds to visit the outside of the park for free. It could be that those who aren't able to afford it are just willing to settle for a glimpse of the castle from the outside.

 

[Budshark]

Wow to the post, the thread, and the lack of understanding on so many levels.

Given the opportunity, I'd go. But I think I'm more of a Western guy (the language and dining choices are more comfortable) although Japan is of interest so Tokyo might be an option some day.

Every large company in the world has an active plan, a passive plan, and an exit strategy for growth markets. China and India are where the growth opportunities are. Some companies plans just play out in a more public way. Executing a non-ROI active plan in a growth market does not get a CEO fired. Not having an active plan for the growth markets, and then not knowing when to go deeper and when to scale back is what will get a CEO fired.

Shanghai opening and the cultural differences are not going to be considered a problem. What happens in 3-5 years will matter.

 

[rileyz]

My husband travels to China 1-2 times per year for work and he isn't surprised at all. He has seen people washing their clothes in the same water Oxen are standing in. It's not anywhere I would ever go but I hope it doesn't continue to be a money drain on the U.S. Properties.

 

[Disney Von Drake]

It doesn't really appear to be a problem.

 

[ChrisFL]

Wow to the post, the thread, and the lack of understanding on so many levels.

Given the opportunity, I'd go. But I think I'm more of a Western guy (the language and dining choices are more comfortable) although Japan is of interest so Tokyo might be an option some day.

Every large company in the world has an active plan, a passive plan, and an exit strategy for growth markets. China and India are where the growth opportunities are. Some companies plans just play out in a more public way. Executing a non-ROI active plan in a growth market does not get a CEO fired. Not having an active plan for the growth markets, and then not knowing when to go deeper and when to scale back is what will get a CEO fired.

Shanghai opening and the cultural differences are not going to be considered a problem. What happens in 3-5 years will matter.

Go to Tokyo, you won't regret it

 

[manning]

Go to Tokyo, you won't regret it

Better yet send Disney management over there. With luck they may learn something. What's that snow ball in hell saying?

 

[DDLand]

I wrote this in February, but I think it's still pertinent...

"On the Shanghai issue...

It's easy to say you want all the divisions to have their own pot of money. Those that generate more would then get more to invest back in. Now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why should movie making Walt Disney Productions help pay for a theme park that likely won't succeed?

2) Why should Disneyland subsidize the Florida Project?

3) Why should the existing Magic Kingdom and Disneyland subsidize Epcot?

4)Why should Disneyland and Walt Disney World subsidize the Disney Cruise Line's startup?

5)Why should Walt Disney World subsidize fixing Disney California Adventure?

6)Why should Domestic Disney Parks subsidize Shanghai's startup?

Sometimes it just makes sense."

http://www.disboards.com/threads/budget-cuts-at-walt-disney-world.3484299/page-11#post-55253742

 

[Budshark]

I wrote this in February, but I think it's still pertinent...

"On the Shanghai issue...

It's easy to say you want all the divisions to have their own pot of money. Those that generate more would then get more to invest back in. Now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why should movie making Walt Disney Productions help pay for a theme park that likely won't succeed?

2) Why should Disneyland subsidize the Florida Project?

3) Why should the existing Magic Kingdom and Disneyland subsidize Epcot?

4)Why should Disneyland and Walt Disney World subsidize the Disney Cruise Line's startup?

5)Why should Walt Disney World subsidize fixing Disney California Adventure?

6)Why should Domestic Disney Parks subsidize Shanghai's startup?

Sometimes it just makes sense."

http://www.disboards.com/threads/budget-cuts-at-walt-disney-world.3484299/page-11#post-55253742

As you pointed out under the all for themselves philosophy the inverse is also true. Money losing movie division would've been sold off years ago and then money losing theme park division would've been sold off and well we'd now be talking about losing the "last" of the old Disney company as ESPN/abc are now going south and would likely be sold off.

The whole is better than the parts and that needs to be remembered even when your "part" is helping the others. If it weren't for profit from one division(movies) the parks would've never existed. There's actually a future where profits from Shanghai pay for expansion in the US. Of course though - we can't let that happen so keep the money in Shanghai and expand that park!

 

[PuppyJonathan]

I wrote this in February, but I think it's still pertinent...

"On the Shanghai issue...

It's easy to say you want all the divisions to have their own pot of money. Those that generate more would then get more to invest back in. Now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why should movie making Walt Disney Productions help pay for a theme park that likely won't succeed?

2) Why should Disneyland subsidize the Florida Project?

3) Why should the existing Magic Kingdom and Disneyland subsidize Epcot?

4)Why should Disneyland and Walt Disney World subsidize the Disney Cruise Line's startup?

5)Why should Walt Disney World subsidize fixing Disney California Adventure?

6)Why should Domestic Disney Parks subsidize Shanghai's startup?

Sometimes it just makes sense."

http://www.disboards.com/threads/budget-cuts-at-walt-disney-world.3484299/page-11#post-55253742

I agree with this wholeheartedly. Looking at the early Shanghai videos makes me think it was money well worth spent. I like that the money went into creating something great like this and that's why whenever the "budget cuts" came, I didn't complain

 

[lubob]

WDW is 45 years old. Shanghai isn't even open yet. You can't start out with $105+ tickets in Shanghai. You have to look at the people they are marketing too. The middle class in Shanghai can't afford to pay our kind of prices right now and Disney really wants those people to come to this park.

Our middle class and lower class can't afford disney now either in the states.

 

[Budshark]

Our middle class and lower class can't afford disney now either in the states.

Nice editorial, but also untrue. As a factor of disposable income middle class families are more capable of visiting Disney. They may not be participating in the extras or staying at Contemporary, but by and large by any definition of middle class, disposable income, and cost of a day at Disney more % of Americans can afford it today than when each of the parks opened.

 

[lubob]

Nice editorial, but also untrue. As a factor of disposable income middle class families are more capable of visiting Disney. They may not be participating in the extras or staying at Contemporary, but by and large by any definition of middle class, disposable income, and cost of a day at Disney more % of Americans can afford it today than when each of the parks opened.

The ticket prices kill you not the stay at a resort and how about the lower class . They deserve a vacation as well. We stay at a value resort cause the others are to pricey.

 

[Aurora0427]

My wife almost literally ran across someone's defecation in a Wal-Mart once... Interestingly, it was in the toilet paper aisle. I guess they just couldn't make it the 30 yards to the store bathroom...

Some people aren't too far removed from our evolutionary ancestors. Unbelievable. Gross.

 

[Budshark]

The ticket prices kill you not the stay at a resort and how about the lower class . They deserve a vacation as well. We stay at a value resort cause the others are to pricey.

You are right - they do. But call it what it is - Disney was never about providing a vacation to the lower class. It's always been a middle and upper class destination.

 

[ChipnDale79]

I wrote this in February, but I think it's still pertinent...

"On the Shanghai issue...

It's easy to say you want all the divisions to have their own pot of money. Those that generate more would then get more to invest back in. Now ask yourself these questions:

1) Why should movie making Walt Disney Productions help pay for a theme park that likely won't succeed?

2) Why should Disneyland subsidize the Florida Project?

3) Why should the existing Magic Kingdom and Disneyland subsidize Epcot?

4)Why should Disneyland and Walt Disney World subsidize the Disney Cruise Line's startup?

5)Why should Walt Disney World subsidize fixing Disney California Adventure?

6)Why should Domestic Disney Parks subsidize Shanghai's startup?

Sometimes it just makes sense."

http://www.disboards.com/threads/budget-cuts-at-walt-disney-world.3484299/page-11#post-55253742

I don't know the answer to this, but i'll ask the question.

Were costs cut while prices jacked up for the other divisions to subsidize the new ones? Or let me put it like this, did paying customers pay more for less to subsidize new projects?

I think the answer is probably going to be no, they were making vast profits and in turn taking those profits and putting them back into the company.

I think people are upset because Disney is making record profits, and instead of taking those profits and using them, they are cutting our experiences and jacking up our price. I think there is some justification for people being upset.

 

[rteetz]

Our middle class and lower class can't afford disney now either in the states.

Disney is a business (I am not a fan of using that phrase) so they don't have to cater to the lower or middle class. In the US Disney has found that they can continue to get record profits by charging more every year. People still pay for it too. So as long as people are still paying for it why would any business keep prices low when they can raise them and not lose any money.

 

[ChipnDale79]

Disney is a business (I am not a fan of using that phrase) so they don't have to cater to the lower or middle class. In the US Disney has found that they can continue to get record profits by charging more every year. People still pay for it too. So as long as people are still paying for it why would any business keep prices low when they can raise them and not lose any money.

Yes Disney is a business, but they aren't anywhere close to losing money. I think Disney's current problem is they are looking at things in a short term view point, and in turn, that typically hurts their long term goals and business.

They are making a lot of money right now, and people are paying a ton of money to go to their parks. But with that, you also have to be careful about jacking the prices up too much, you can set a reputation for your company that you may not be able to overcome in the long term.

Just because you can now, doesnt mean you should.

Disney isn't bullet proof, attendance has dropped in the past because of economic issues, gas prices, and a lot of other reasons. History has a way of repeating itself.

They will reach a tipping point on pricing at some point, and we may be getting close to it.

 

[rteetz]

Yes Disney is a business, but they aren't anywhere close to losing money. I think Disney's current problem is they are looking at things in a short term view point, and in turn, that typically hurts their long term goals and business.

They are making a lot of money right now, and people are paying a ton of money to go to their parks. But with that, you also have to be careful about jacking the prices up too much, you can set a reputation for your company that you may not be able to overcome in the long term.

Just because you can now, doesnt mean you should.

Disney isn't bullet proof, attendance has dropped in the past because of economic issues, gas prices, and a lot of other reasons. History has a way of repeating itself.

They will reach a tipping point on pricing at some point, and we may be getting close to it.

I don't disagree. I don't think they should necessarily make everything so expensive but if they can why wouldn't they.

I think I would also agree they are looking short term as they want that stock price to stay high right now.

I don't think anything will change until another economic crisis.

 

[ChipnDale79]

I don't disagree. I don't think they should necessarily make everything so expensive but if they can why wouldn't they.

I think I would also agree they are looking short term as they want that stock price to stay high right now.

I don't think anything will change until another economic crisis.

to me its easy on your "why wouldn't they" question.

Long term future of the company, that's what they are putting at "risk".

 

[rteetz]

to me its easy on your "why wouldn't they" question.

Long term future of the company, that's what they are putting at "risk".

Unfortunately they don't seem to see it that way.