So just why is Disney raising ticket prices so early

[Metro West]

I'm guessing them buying the Marvel franchise had something to do with WWOHP coming (at the time). Once the contract Universal has with Disney runs out, I expect to see some major Marvel attractions coming to WDW. That is going to hurt Universal. WWOHP is great but it's not like everyone is into HP (I know myself and my wife aren't and I know of many others who are). However, everyone seems to dig the mouse. And with an extra incentive to bring people there (i.e. Marvel stuff), I see good things on the horizon. I just hope they don't make it so darn expensive many people can't (or won't) pay the prices...

Universal doesn't have a contract with Disney...they have a contract with Marvel. I know Disney owns Marvel but that doesn't change who the original contract is with...Marvel. Universal won't get rid of anything in Marvel Super Hero Island until they are ready to do so or unless Disney writes them a huge check for the theme park rights. I don't see either happening in the near future.

From what I remember when the announcement was made, Disney purchased Marvel mainly for movie rights and distribution vehicles...not the theme parks. I doubt they would have sunk billions of dollars into buying a company just because Universal was adding a new area. That wouldn't make any sense. If Disney was really concerned about Universal having the Marvel characters and WWoHP, they would have had to have bought Universal out and that didn't happen.

 

[mom2rtk]

It's not just about if you were to buy the dining plan anyway. IMHO, most people who buy the dining plan are losing money. The only way to make the dining plan a value is to use it to its best advantage--where the vacation becomes about dining. And that's OK, but would you order that food normally? An appetizer for every person? No dessert ever? No adult beverages ever? Never a signature restaurant? ALL quick service (since that is the free plan for values)? People don't normally eat the way the dining plan is designed. Many waste credits--or splurge at the end of the trip on snack credits because it isn't something they ate.

Start talking about free dining and you're talking about paying rack rate on rooms. And premium prices on tickets. And taking away choice that might lower the overall quality of your vacation.

It's all for Disney's favor. Nothing wrong with it. But Disney knows that makes you pay rack rate for room, premium price on dining, a WDW capitive that will spend all souvenir money there, and won't cost them a ton on dining because the average guest (not DIS guest) won't use the dining plan to their best advantage.

For us it's a great deal.

1) We know where every credit goes and use them all.

2) I consider character dining an enjoyable piece of our Disney experience.

3) We never order appetizers

4) We don't order adult beverages.

5) We seldom do signature dining. When we do CRT, we pay OOP and use our dining credits to double up another day, maybe Epcot.

6) Remember, I'm talking about free dining in conjunction with a value resort only. Rack rate isn't that high in comparison to begin with. And any room discount you might get is pretty neglibible. The best room discount you will get is around $30 to $35 a day. With only 2 people in a room, you get around $60 in dining plan benefit, even more with 3 or 4 people in the room. Yes, you have to pay to upgrade. But if you were going to have the dining plan to begin with, it's still the best deal you will find.

Honestly, if people are not using their dining plan to its full advantage, then that's their loss. Who the heck cares?

 

[rt2dz]

For us it's a great deal.

1) We know where every credit goes and use them all.

2) I consider character dining an enjoyable piece of our Disney experience.

3) We never order appetizers

4) We don't order adult beverages.

5) We seldom do signature dining. When we do CRT, we pay OOP and use our dining credits to double up another day, maybe Epcot.

6) Remember, I'm talking about free dining in conjunction with a value resort only. Rack rate isn't that high in comparison to begin with. And any room discount you might get is pretty neglibible. The best room discount you will get is around $30 to $35 a day. With only 2 people in a room, you get around $60 in dining plan benefit, even more with 3 or 4 people in the room. Yes, you have to pay to upgrade. But if you were going to have the dining plan to begin with, it's still the best deal you will find.

Honestly, if people are not using their dining plan to its full advantage, then that's their loss. Who the heck cares?

But I'm talking about the average WDW guest (not DIS board members), and then only the majority (there are always an exception). And most of them, do NOT use their dining plans to the best advantage. Yes, that's their problem--I totally agree with that. BUT, the point is: overall DISNEY makes a pretty penny off the dining plans, even when free.

You're also not just talking about the extra room costs either. But the costs to upgrade plans (if you do so). The extra you pay for those oop meals. The extra you pay on admission tickets. You have to compare bottom line to bottom line. And part of that, is what would you pay if planned your dining around what you wanted and not your credits. I recommend THIS article all the time on helping people figure out how to look objectively at the dining plans.

I don't think they are bad. I just think most people don't really save on them. Or, at least not anywhere near as much as they think.

 

[mom2rtk]

But I'm talking about the average WDW guest (not DIS board members), and then only the majority (there are always an exception). And most of them, do NOT use their dining plans to the best advantage. Yes, that's their problem--I totally agree with that. BUT, the point is: overall DISNEY makes a pretty penny off the dining plans, even when free.

You're also not just talking about the extra room costs either. But the costs to upgrade plans (if you do so). The extra you pay for those oop meals. The extra you pay on admission tickets. You have to compare bottom line to bottom line. And part of that, is what would you pay if planned your dining around what you wanted and not your credits. I recommend THIS article all the time on helping people figure out how to look objectively at the dining plans.

I don't think they are bad. I just think most people don't really save on them. Or, at least not anywhere near as much as they think.

Honestly, if someone adds the dining plan, then leaves credits "on the table" or doesn't use it to its fullest extent...... then they deserve what they get. It's THEIR job to be a smart consumer.

If Disney devises a promotion that GETS people to book, but people don't take full advantage of said promotion, then it really just sounds like a smart marketing plan for Disney. Sort of like stores that offer mail-in rebates knowing full well a certain percentage of buyers will never follow through and mail it in.

And WHAT extra on the tickets are you talking about? We're not AP holders, and even if we were, the tickets you have to buy could be saved and used toward your renewal next year. I guess we could buy from Undercover Tourist and save a tiny bit, but I don't consider that enough to matter.

And I already explained that even WITH the cost of upgrade, it's still a solid deal for those staying at a value resort. What's the alternative for a better deal at a value?

 

[rt2dz]

Honestly, if someone adds the dining plan, then leaves credits "on the table" or doesn't use it to its fullest extent...... then they deserve what they get. It's THEIR job to be a smart consumer.

If Disney devises a promotion that GETS people to book, but people don't take full advantage of said promotion, then it really just sounds like a smart marketing plan for Disney. Sort of like stores that offer mail-in rebates knowing full well a certain percentage of buyers will never follow through and mail it in.

I don't deny any of that, and have actually said the exact same thing. So we agree here.

And WHAT extra on the tickets are you talking about? We're not AP holders, and even if we were, the tickets you have to buy could be saved and used toward your renewal next year. I guess we could buy from Undercover Tourist and save a tiny bit, but I don't consider that enough to matter

Disney charges the highest price for tickets. UT, as with any discount ticket broker, helps you cut down those costs. How you define "a little bit" depends on how many tickets you have to purchase. Someone (like myself) buying many tickets, not just two, has that little bit add up to not be such "a little bit." Also, there are other discounts for tickets out there. Most notably, many companies offer BIG discounts on Disney tickets. We used to get a 20% discount, so automatically we'd be paying 20% higher.

And I already explained that even WITH the cost of upgrade, it's still a solid deal for those staying at a value resort. What's the alternative for a better deal at a value?

Now, Let me stress a couple of things; I know I've said it before, but it hasn't registered.

I'm not talking about YOU specifically, but the AVERAGE guest. For the most part, most people on the DIS are not average guests, even first time visitors. We are people who look at more angles than "the company line."

I'm not talking about QS at a value resort, but the program in general. It is you who is talking about that. I keep saying it is individual for every person, but in general...

Not every guest stays at a value resort, or in just one room at a value resort. Not everyone is a party of 2, or even 4. Not every guest takes the QS plan. Not every guest uses the credits to their best advantage, so whether their fault or not, it's not always a good deal in general that people should jump on automatically.

What I am saying is that every guest needs to fully evaluate THEIR situation.

Just because you don't order appetizers doesn't mean the couple next to you wouldn't want to. Just because you don't order adult beverages doesn't mean the couple down the hall from you doesn't. Just because you eat all those snacks, doesn't mean the solo traveler on the floor above/below you does. Or that he/she drinks soda/coffee/tea making use of those mugs. Or the people who have food allergies are interested in any counter service. Or the people with the autistic kid can take the time to deal with the waits/noise/smell of a TS restaurant. Just because you don't get a good discount on tickets, doesn't mean the people in the building over don't get a grand discount on tickets. Just because you don't eat signature dining meals, doesn't mean someone else can't go without eating at one or two or three of them.

What I saying is that each person needs to add up the bottom line costs and compare them to find out which is the best deal for them. They need to sit down and plan their meals of where they want to eat without paying attention to if it is a signature meal, TS, or CS. They then should look at the menus and decide what they might want to eat without paying attention to if it is included on the dining plan (appetizer/dessert/alcoholic beverage/kids that prefer to not eat junk fast food the entire time/etc). They should then add up all those costs. They should see which dining plan they would have to order/upgrade to. Add the OOP dining costs to the discount room to the discount tickets and compare it to the package price and see which is cheaper. If it's free dining, FANTASTIC! That's what you should go for. If it isn't, then you shouldn't.

It's all about what you said in the beginning.

It's THEIR job to be a smart consumer.

That's the only thing I'm advocating. I'm not fighting against you. Or even telling you, you are wrong. I think you are very right for you. I don't think you can make a blanket statement for everyone. I have a good friend, who 2 years ago, booked with free dining for their family of 4: 2 adults, 1 junior (adult ticket & dining) and 1 child. Stayed at a value. Cheaper to take a room only discount, ticket discount, and pay out of pocket. Didn't do it because her DH would complain about restaurant prices (fair enough), but it WAS cheaper.

 

[Planogirl]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. For a family of six, when the tickets alone cost close to $3K, without all the kids paying adult prices at the ripe old age of 10, something has to give. At least eventually.

There are lots of options. We'll probably do a combination of the two below:

• Attending less frequently. Instead of 10 days annually. I'm thinking 2 years in a row go (to max out the AP) and then go elsewhere the next two years.
• Staying offsite, which will lead to eating offsite.

In the long run, Disney will catch less of our dollars. Our resort dollars will go to some vacation home owner. The restaurants around Disney will gain quite a bit of dining dollars. The grocery stores will earn our breakfast dollars, and some snack dollars. If we're not captive to Disney pricing, it would be foolish to not visit Universal, who will gain ticket dollars and souvenir money.

We were talking about buying DVC, and had been on the fence about it. I think this secures the "nope" of buying. Money Disney lost. I'm just afraid of how high the price point will eventually get. We're not talking 1-2 people. Or even 4. But 6. I think that can make a big difference (the number of people one is purchasing for) on how you see the price increase. But I will admit, it's more of the cost of rooms that has me

I won't be spending less, I just won't spend more. And in order to navigate around their price increases, I just need to make adjustments where possible. I just find it hard to believe I am the only one.

No, you aren't the only one. We're already there. But then maybe we're it.

 

[TisBit]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. For a family of six, when the tickets alone cost close to $3K, without all the kids paying adult prices at the ripe old age of 10, something has to give. At least eventually.

There are lots of options. We'll probably do a combination of the two below:

• Attending less frequently. Instead of 10 days annually. I'm thinking 2 years in a row go (to max out the AP) and then go elsewhere the next two years.
• Staying offsite, which will lead to eating offsite.

In the long run, Disney will catch less of our dollars. Our resort dollars will go to some vacation home owner. The restaurants around Disney will gain quite a bit of dining dollars. The grocery stores will earn our breakfast dollars, and some snack dollars. If we're not captive to Disney pricing, it would be foolish to not visit Universal, who will gain ticket dollars and souvenir money.

We were talking about buying DVC, and had been on the fence about it. I think this secures the "nope" of buying. Money Disney lost. I'm just afraid of how high the price point will eventually get. We're not talking 1-2 people. Or even 4. But 6. I think that can make a big difference (the number of people one is purchasing for) on how you see the price increase. But I will admit, it's more of the cost of rooms that has me

I won't be spending less, I just won't spend more. And in order to navigate around their price increases, I just need to make adjustments where possible. I just find it hard to believe I am the only one.

But I don't get the full reasoning here. You are upset about Disney ticket costs, so you will decrease by one or two days your Disney tickets and then pay Universal ticket costs. It is significantly more expensive to buy days at Universal compared to adding an adidtional day to your Disney tickets. If you aren't saving money, what was the purpose (unless you just wanted to go, in which case the Disney ticket cost was not the factor).

If the price of the rooms are the factor, then DVC might be a better option (depending on what you normally book, etc) as the room costs stays somewhat more stable and doesnt' depend on pin codes, free dining, etc to create a savings.

But honestly, Disney isn't even losing you. You will still be there and buying tickets and souveniers. You might cut back a bit and contribute more to the local economy (which does indirectly benefit Disney, without the local infrastructure Disney would struggle...even Universal benefits Disney and vice versa).

And that's OK, but would you order that food normally? An appetizer for every person? No dessert ever? No adult beverages ever? Never a signature restaurant? ALL quick service (since that is the free plan for values)? People don't normally eat the way the dining plan is designed. Many waste credits--or splurge at the end of the trip on snack credits because it isn't something they ate.

Actually, you make a valid point here. Most people do not order what they would normally order if they were not on the dining plan. The biggest draw of the dining plan...its a fixed price. When that first time visitor is going to WDW and doesn't know what food will cost them, can feel at ease because the food is budgeted at a fixed price. Many will not pay attention to if the food they order adds up to what the plan costs. Heck, they might go stock up on snacks to use their credits, but it still wasted money if you weren't going to buy those snacks anyways.

If I take a menu to my wife and ask what she would like to order off it, rarely is it the most expensive item...and usually with the DP, if you don't order the most expensive items you are lucky to break even and could actually lose money on the deal.

 

[Planogirl]

Disney's 3 day hopper is listed as $293.95 at Undercover Tourist. Universal's Park to Park pass for 3 days is $146.95. You could argue that you get 4 parks compared to 2 but the point is that the prices aren't the same at all. Adding days to a Disney pass is inexpensive but if you don't plan to stay at WDW for long it really doesn't add up. It sounded like the other DISer was saying that they would stay and dine offsite due to higher prices and less value and would therefore be more inclined to explore other attractions. That will save money, no question.

For example, I'm working on a short trip for this Fall. I don't have the time (or in fairness the desire) to add low cost days to standard passes. I can only purchase the standard passes to begin with.

 

[DebbieB]

Yes, free dining is less of a "deal" than it used to be. But honestly, when you're looking to stay onsite, the value resort with free dining, even with the price of the upgrade, is the best deal going (assuming you planned to add the dining plan anyway, which we would). The best room discount at a value is what..... 30 to 35%? That's $30 to $35 a night in discount. If you have even 2 people staying in the room, it's still a far better deal than any alternative.

If you typically stay at a deluxe, then it's a whole different ballgame. But for the best onsite value, free dining is still it.

My point was that they gradually picked away at it so that it wasn't as noticable. If you had free dining 5 years ago and didn't go since then and they told you that the value room was now $40 more, no appetizer, you had to pay the tips, you had to pay another $16 per adult per night to get the full dining plan vs quick service, what would you think? If they had done that all in one year people would have been outraged. But by doing it a little at a time, people were not upset. Same thing with the ticket price increase and doing it 6 weeks earlier.

 

[mom2rtk]

My point was that they gradually picked away at it so that it wasn't as noticable. If you had free dining 5 years ago and didn't go since then and they told you that the value room was now $40 more, no appetizer, you had to pay the tips, you had to pay another $16 per adult per night to get the full dining plan vs quick service, what would you think? If they had done that all in one year people would have been outraged. But by doing it a little at a time, people were not upset. Same thing with the ticket price increase and doing it 6 weeks earlier.

I understand the history of the deal. My point is that regardless of what it was before, the value resort + free dining is still the cheapest way to stay onsite with the dining plan.

I actually would like to go back to Disneyland for one of our trips. But with no value resorts and no dining plan, it just costs a lot more to have a similar stay. I know we can stay offsite at one of the good neighbor hotels, but I do enjoy staying fully immersed in the Disney experience.

 

[TisBit]

Disney's 3 day hopper is listed as $293.95 at Undercover Tourist. Universal's Park to Park pass for 3 days is $146.95. You could argue that you get 4 parks compared to 2 but the point is that the prices aren't the same at all. Adding days to a Disney pass is inexpensive but if you don't plan to stay at WDW for long it really doesn't add up. It sounded like the other DISer was saying that they would stay and dine offsite due to higher prices and less value and would therefore be more inclined to explore other attractions. That will save money, no question.

For example, I'm working on a short trip for this Fall. I don't have the time (or in fairness the desire) to add low cost days to standard passes. I can only purchase the standard passes to begin with.

Yes, if they plan on going ot Universal instead of Disney it will be less expensive....and if they only planned on doing 3 days. He stated they usually do 10 days annually, I don't see Universal (both parks) being more than three days, so it implied to me that he would do both...

It is true that you can save money on a Disney vacation. Even staying on site you can still do breakfast in the room, less money on meals, etc. There are tons of options that people have...but unless it really affects the bottom line at WDW, they will not change their pricing.

 

[rt2dz]

But I don't get the full reasoning here.

I’m not happy about the price increase on Disney tickets, but I’m not stark raving mad about it either. I was expecting it. BUT, there is a limit to my vacation dollars. I can’t stretch them without skipping a vacation, and I’m not willing to do that.

I’m not actually downgrading my tickets. We get APs and will continue to do so. The fact is, it is the cheapest way to go for us. We currently go for 10 days annually. That is our vacation time—10 days. I’m not taking a shorter vacation. And, if we go two years in a row, it’s much less expensive to buy an AP than not to buy one.

I will be spending less time in Disney's parks, and that is where they get hit--because I have to make up the costs somewhere, and that’s with staying offsite and eating offsite. I mean, since we are staying offsite, it just makes sense to eat meals offsite too. Not all of them. But right now we eat 0% offsite. It’s a loss for Disney. And, if I’m offsite anyhow, we might as well hit Universal; the kids would love it. Especially Harry Potter; we're fans from the books, not the movies (although we like those too). I’m saving more by staying offsite than the increase in ticket price is costing me (the big increases that are hurting me are the increase in room costs), so I do have that extra room to purchase Universal tickets. And it’s not like I’m going there for 3 or 4 days—just one or two, most likely two. And I see deals for 2 day hoppers for Universal all the time for as low as $100. We might also hit the beach one day. Go on an airboat ride, check out Gatorland, etc.

Again, my dollars are limited. So, my souvenir money will go to places other than Disney. Especially when Disney has made all their things so generic. Over the years, we’ve cut down on what we’ll buy. I’m sorry, but if I’m at Disney WORLD, I will not buy something that says DisneyLAND. And I will not purchase something I can get at Wal-Mart. Disney is saving money in manufacturing, but losing money in sales. Does that hurt them, help them, or make no difference? I don’t know. I just know they are losing MY money.

We looked at DVC. It really doesn’t make that much sense economically to buy into it. It’s a big outlay of cash that is better of invested; I'd make more off the investment than I'll save in rising resort prices. I believe in making my money work for me. And then I still have to pay dues, which can go up. Then also what happens when the kids grow up and aren’t coming with us? That’s a lot of extra points to have. And, what if we just tire of Disney every single year? DH has an MBA in finance—a big financial guy—and when he ran the numbers, it just didn’t make a lot of sense; he said it might be a wash and it might lose us money. No saving us money. Renting points will certainly save us money compared to just staying onsite, but not as much as renting a 5-7 bedroom house around the corner will. And, then we still also have flexibility. Besides, Disney still won’t gain resort dollars if we rent points though, they’ve already received that money from the DVC owner.

And, you’re right, Disney isn’t losing me--fully. They are losing some of my dollars. Actually, a sizeable chunk of my dollars. And, the local economy will bank a bit more and that will inadvertently benefit Disney. But, I’m not trying to hurt Disney. There is no “revenge” happening here. I’m simply looking out for me. They made changes which causes a reaction from me. Can’t help that. However, Disney isn’t gaining as much benefit as if I were spending my money onsite with them.

ETA: We will be skipping Disney years now too, most likely. It's just getting to expensive to do everything we want to do, and are used to doing. All prices are going up. So, after that AP expires, we'll probably take 1-2 years off Disney before purchasing new APs. We'll pretty much be on a 2 year on, 1-2 year off cycle.

 

[GadgetRick]

Universal doesn't have a contract with Disney...they have a contract with Marvel. I know Disney owns Marvel but that doesn't change who the original contract is with...Marvel. Universal won't get rid of anything in Marvel Super Hero Island until they are ready to do so or unless Disney writes them a huge check for the theme park rights. I don't see either happening in the near future.

From what I remember when the announcement was made, Disney purchased Marvel mainly for movie rights and distribution vehicles...not the theme parks. I doubt they would have sunk billions of dollars into buying a company just because Universal was adding a new area. That wouldn't make any sense. If Disney was really concerned about Universal having the Marvel characters and WWoHP, they would have had to have bought Universal out and that didn't happen.

I never said (nor implied) Disney has a contract with Universal. I know it's with Marvel.

For now, maybe they won't start bringing some Marvel stuff to Disney but what about in the future. I don't think it's out of the question. Think about it, one of Disney's larger competitors in FL is Universal. If Disney were to bring a Marvel universe to WDW in some way, it would really put a hurting on Universal and they'd make more money (in the long run) off the Marvel name.

I agree they bought it more for the movie rights and not the theme park rights. But it doesn't mean they won't (some day) take advantage of the theme park side of the business. Once they determine it makes sense (financially) to bring that kind of thing home (so to say), that's when we'd see it (is my guess).

 

[GadgetRick]

I’m not happy about the price increase on Disney tickets, but I’m not stark raving mad about it either. I was expecting it. BUT, there is a limit to my vacation dollars. I can’t stretch them without skipping a vacation, and I’m not willing to do that.

I’m not actually downgrading my tickets. We get APs and will continue to do. The fact is it is the cheapest way to go for us. We go for 10 days annually. That is our vacation time—10 days. I’m not taking a shorter vacation. And, if we go two years in a row, it’s much less expensive to buy an AP than not to.

I will be spending less time in their parks, and that is where they get hit because I have to make up the costs somewhere, and that’s with staying offsite and eating offsite. I mean, since we are staying offsite, it just makes sense to eat meals offsite too. Not all of them. But right now we eat 0% offsite. It’s a loss for Disney. And, if I’m offsite anyhow, we might as well hit Universal; the kids would love it. Especially Harry Potter. I’m saving more by staying offsite than the increase in ticket price is costing me (the big increases that are hurting me are the increase in room costs), so I do have that extra room to purchase Universal tickets. And it’s not like I’m going there for 3 or 4 days—just one or two, most likely two. And I see deals for 2 day hoppers for Universal all the time for as low as $100.

Again, my dollars are limited. So, my souvenir money will go to places other than Disney. Especially when Disney has made all their things so generic. Over the years, we’ve cut down on what we’ll buy. I’m sorry, but if I’m at Disney WORLD, I will not buy something that says DisneyLAND. And I will not purchase something I can get at Wal-Mart. Disney is saving money in manufacturing, but losing money in sales. Does that hurt them, help them, or make no difference? I don’t know. I just know they are losing MY money.

We looked at DVC. It really doesn’t make that much sense economically to buy into it. It’s a big outlay of cash that is better of invested. I believe in making my money work for me. And then I still have to pay dues, which can go up. Then also what happens when the kids grow up and aren’t coming with us? That’s a lot of extra points to have. And, what if we just tire of Disney every single year? DH has an MBS in finance—a big financial guy—and when he ran the numbers, it just didn’t make a lot of sense; he said it might be a wash and it might lose us money. Renting points will certainly save us money, but not as much as renting a 5-7 bedroom house around the corner will. And, then we still also have flexibility. Disney still won’t gain resort dollars if we rent points though, they’ve already received that money from the DVC owner.

And, you’re right, Disney isn’t losing me--fully. They are losing some of my dollars. Actually, a sizeable chunk of my dollars. And, the local economy will bank a bit more that will inadvertently benefit Disney. But, I’m not trying to hurt Disney. There is no “revenge” happening here. I’m simply looking out for me. They made changes which causes a reaction from me. Can’t help that. However, Disney isn’t gaining as much benefit as if I were spending my money onsite with them.

ETA: We will be skipping Disney years now too, most likely. It's just getting to expensive to do everything we want to do, and are used to doing. All prices are going up. So, after that AP expires, we'll probably take 1-2 years off Disney.

Overall very well-said.

Some of us aren't happy about the price increases but we're not so unhappy as to just be done with Disney. The problem is, we're either not going as much or not spending as much. If EVERY guest who attended WDW in 2010 were to spend just $10 less they would have lost $169.7 million (based on 16.97 million visitors reported in 2010). That's a hefty number. I know I'm spending much less than $10 when I'm there so that number can increase dramatically.

Now, this must not be happening (enough people spending less to show a decline in revenue $$) or Disney might not be increasing prices/taking away things. However, it will happen eventually. It probably won't be over night were everyone says, "I'm done with Disney!" It'll be gradual until one day they'll realize they went too far. Then they'll do something else to bring the revenue back.

I'm more bummed about the price increases (every year) because it affects how often we go (even living in FL now). I'm not angry with Disney. But it doesn't mean I have to like it either. I totally understand it's a business.

 

[Metro West]

I never said (nor implied) Disney has a contract with Universal. I know it's with Marvel. Ummmm...yes you did. See below:

I'm guessing them buying the Marvel franchise had something to do with WWOHP coming (at the time). Once the contract Universal has with Disney runs out, I expect to see some major Marvel attractions coming to WDW. That is going to hurt Universal. WWOHP is great but it's not like everyone is into HP (I know myself and my wife aren't and I know of many others who are). However, everyone seems to dig the mouse. And with an extra incentive to bring people there (i.e. Marvel stuff), I see good things on the horizon. I just hope they don't make it so darn expensive many people can't (or won't) pay the prices...

For now, maybe they won't start bringing some Marvel stuff to Disney but what about in the future. I don't think it's out of the question. Think about it, one of Disney's larger competitors in FL is Universal. If Disney were to bring a Marvel universe to WDW in some way, it would really put a hurting on Universal and they'd make more money (in the long run) off the Marvel name.

I agree they bought it more for the movie rights and not the theme park rights. But it doesn't mean they won't (some day) take advantage of the theme park side of the business. Once they determine it makes sense (financially) to bring that kind of thing home (so to say), that's when we'd see it (is my guess).

The only way Disney can bring Marvel attractions into WDW is by using characters Universal doesn't currently have rights to. All the biggies are already taken but Marvel has hundreds of lesser know characters Disney can use.

Disney bringing Marvel merchandise into their parks is free advertising for IOA. Although Disney gets a portion of the merchandising, Universal still keeps the lion's share of the money.

I can see Disney bringing in some Marvel stuff but its not going to be anytime soon. Again...it would have to be something Universal does not have theme rights to.

 

[GadgetRick]

The only way Disney can bring Marvel attractions into WDW is by using characters Universal doesn't currently have rights to. All the biggies are already taken but Marvel has hundreds of lesser know characters Disney can use.

Disney bringing Marvel merchandise into their parks is free advertising for IOA. Although Disney gets a portion of the merchandising, Universal still keeps the lion's share of the money.

I can see Disney bringing in some Marvel stuff but its not going to be anytime soon. Again...it would have to be something Universal does not have theme rights to.

That was certainly a mistake on my part. I've always been well-aware Disney doesn't have a contract with Universal.

I don't know the ins and outs of what Disney has (or doesn't) have rights to. My understanding is, they bought Marvel...ALL of Marvel. I could be wrong. If I'm right, then, Universal only has rights to the theme park stuff only as long as Marvel--or its owner--allows it. Someone else here mentioned this is (essentially) the case but, personally, I really don't know the details.

I'm sure you wouldn't be seeing Marvel stuff tomorrow. First of all, they'd have to figure a way to integrate Marvel and Disney. Two totally different worlds. Second of all, it wouldn't be cheap to build attractions and other things and I'm sure Disney has plans for the next x number of years of what they're doing on this front and I'm guessing none of those plans had anything to do with Marvel so these plans would have to be re-worked.

Will it happen? I have no idea. Can it happen? From what I know of the details of everything, absolutely. But it would certainly take a while before we'd realize anything like that in WDW.

 

[phamton]

I don't know the ins and outs of what Disney has (or doesn't) have rights to. My understanding is, they bought Marvel...ALL of Marvel. I could be wrong. If I'm right, then, Universal only has rights to the theme park stuff only as long as Marvel--or its owner--allows it.

Universal has exclusive rights for the characters and rides they already have. This right is exclusive for any theme park east of the Mississippi for as long as they continue to use them. That could be forever or tomorrow. But they can't be used at Disneyworld until or unless Universal relinquishes those rights. Now Disneyland would be another story though.

But honestly I don't see a conflict of interest. Disney uses some of Universal's music in both their commercials and in the park itself. They pay the rights to use the music. There's nothing weird about that.

 

[Planogirl]

The only way Disney can bring Marvel attractions into WDW is by using characters Universal doesn't currently have rights to. All the biggies are already taken but Marvel has hundreds of lesser know characters Disney can use.

Disney bringing Marvel merchandise into their parks is free advertising for IOA. Although Disney gets a portion of the merchandising, Universal still keeps the lion's share of the money.

I can see Disney bringing in some Marvel stuff but its not going to be anytime soon. Again...it would have to be something Universal does not have theme rights to.

Does that include the characters that are only meet and greet characters such as Wolverine? I've never been clear on that.

 

[MikeandReneePlus5]

Hmm, a little bit insulting there...

Anyway, I do know a thing or two about profits and business. And I know quite a bit about Disney's history. Disney has this aura around them that they care, they really care about their customers. I'm not saying they don't care, I'm saying they don't care about us any more than any other company out there.

You're taking me totally literally. Obviously, customer satisfaction is important (at least on some level) or they wouldn't have people employed to read our letters/emails and to take our calls. However, at the end of the day, if doing something is going to make them less profitable, they aren't going to do it (generally). Sure, there will be some examples of where they might be doing things in spite of profits--many companies do this--however, at the end of the day, they must answer to the shareholders. The shareholders expect value in their Disney stock. If there are no profits (or lower profits), that value is reduced. You might want to read up on public companies and how they answer to shareholders not the customers...

apologies if the tone was off I was typing quickly and didn't bother to read it for tone etc...my bad

But I do think that even shareholders know that the first - very first and most important thing - is the customer.

It is all about the customer...everything else follows. Yes, as you say, the s/h's want value....without customers (happy ones) there won't be any.

Here is Disney's statement off it's IR website, notice the order of the overall objective, and the following financial goal:

"The Walt Disney Company's objective is to be one of the world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information, using its portfolio of brands to differentiate its content, services and consumer products. The company's primary financial goals are to maximize earnings and cash flow, and to allocate capital toward growth initiatives that will drive long-term shareholder value."

Here is the CEO in the shareholder letter from the 2010 annual report...3 priorities mentioned:

"In my five years as CEO of this great Company, we’ve sought to build on Disney’s legacy by focusing on three
core strategic priorities: creating great entertainment that people want to experience; using new technology to
maximize the quality and reach of that entertainment; and growing our businesses in promising international markets
to extend the impact of that entertainment.
These priorities again served us well in 2010."

He then goes on to discuss how those priorities led to profits etc.

Anyway - I am probably beating a dead horse...seems like lots of other interesting discussions are going on - I haven't had time to read it all.

I was responding to people who say they don't give a crap about customers happiness. I thought you were among them. It just isn't true.

And again...my bad on the tone of my earlier post...

 

[flicx]

I think this is the misconception that I have mentioned before. Extracting the most money as possible has always been the direction that Disney has moved in...from the beginning.

I disagree that this was always disney's motive.They used to do it the old fashioned way.By being on the cutting edge,keeping things kept up,looked after the little things such as park cleanliness,and friendly cast members etc.They offered a exceptional expierience at a fair price.Now lets look at their current system,put in a high end housing development on park property,let attractions set empty,and jack up prices much faster than before.In the earlier years the business made a profit because it was managed better.Now I think people can see it is not as well run and the constant drive for higher prices seems to never end.Slice it the way you want it but this is how I see it.