Spending at Disney increasing

[minnie-apple-mouse]

Well, we can play "what if" in lots of different ways that will paint either side into fictitiously unflattering positions.

But, the fact is: We have what we have.

Disney doesn't do that. Hasn't shown any signs of doing it. And isn't rumored to be doing it any time soon.

If they do, we can re-evaluate at that point.

Oh I get what your saying. But which one is right, WDW or US?

I'm just saying a few keystrokes and WDW can do the same thing.

But since the thread is about WDW spending increasing, this is a great example where they could bump spending even further like US does ( and further justify the MM+ investment ROI), but have chosen not to...for now anyway.

 

[pilferk]

Oh I get what your saying. But which one is right, WDW or US?

I'm just saying a few keystrokes and WDW can do the same thing.

But since the thread is about WDW spending increasing, this is a great example where they could bump spending even further like US does ( and further justify the MM+ investment ROI), but have chosen not to...for now anyway.

They are both right, for their resort, capacity, and implementation. From a guest pov....unis, as a resort guest, is obviously better....because it offers an unlimited amount of uses on 90% of the attractions. As a day guest, i'd give the nod to Disney, but its close, largely because the advantage that resort guest get in prebooking is considerable enough to reduce the value of the system ALOT.

Uni could do the same and grant ep to cabana guests...or reduce the price for day guests (or make it unlimited at its base version) or have it be effective for hp rides, or....there are enhancement opporunities available to them, too, in a blue sky way.

But they don't, largely for the reasons i suspect Disney doesnt have a version of ep...because doing that reduces the value of it, because you increase the use, and ride capacity gets overwhelmed.

There were rumors, and some guest surveys, at wdw a few years back concerning giving those at higher tier resorts mor fps, or charging for fp. I think wdw realized that would be a pr issue and guest satisfaction loser, that would outweigh the revenue increases. We will see if they reevaluate. So far.....no sign of that.

 

[mort1331]

They are both right, for their resort, capacity, and implementation. From a guest pov....unis, as a resort guest, is obviously better....because it offers an unlimited amount of uses on 90% of the attractions. As a day guest, i'd give the nod to Disney, but its close, largely because the advantage that resort guest get in prebooking is considerable enough to reduce the value of the system ALOT.

Uni could do the same and grant ep to cabana guests...or reduce the price for day guests (or make it unlimited at its base version) or have it be effective for hp rides, or....there are enhancement opporunities available to them, too, in a blue sky way.

But they don't, largely for the reasons i suspect Disney doesnt have a version of ep...because doing that reduces the value of it, because you increase the use, and ride capacity gets overwhelmed.

There were rumors, and some guest surveys, at wdw a few years back concerning giving those at higher tier resorts mor fps, or charging for fp. I think wdw realized that would be a pr issue and guest satisfaction loser, that would outweigh the revenue increases. We will see if they reevaluate. So far.....no sign of that.

They have a form of this for those who want to pay. There are different tours you can do and for the elite there is a very very expensive personal tour that you get FP for anything, meals booked ahead of time. It is cost prohibitive, but there are still some that do it, like the bungalows.

 

[rteetz]

I just looked at rooms for Value resorts in October this year. $92 a nite. Mods are $139 and up.

Animation hits the high end of Value. Probably due to demand. It's all about demand. If it's there, the price goes up.

Which is good I see the most value in the values and moderates it's where the deluxes get insane in pricing.

 

[Planogirl]

Oh I get what your saying. But which one is right, WDW or US?

I'm just saying a few keystrokes and WDW can do the same thing.

But since the thread is about WDW spending increasing, this is a great example where they could bump spending even further like US does ( and further justify the MM+ investment ROI), but have chosen not to...for now anyway.

They might both be right. What they do might fit for them.

As for shifts, no one is saying that any shift WDW makes is necessarily a bad thing for them. We really just don't know yet.

 

[Planogirl]

They are both right, for their resort, capacity, and implementation. From a guest pov....unis, as a resort guest, is obviously better....because it offers an unlimited amount of uses on 90% of the attractions. As a day guest, i'd give the nod to Disney, but its close, largely because the advantage that resort guest get in prebooking is considerable enough to reduce the value of the system ALOT.

Uni could do the same and grant ep to cabana guests...or reduce the price for day guests (or make it unlimited at its base version) or have it be effective for hp rides, or....there are enhancement opporunities available to them, too, in a blue sky way.

But they don't, largely for the reasons i suspect Disney doesnt have a version of ep...because doing that reduces the value of it, because you increase the use, and ride capacity gets overwhelmed.

There were rumors, and some guest surveys, at wdw a few years back concerning giving those at higher tier resorts mor fps, or charging for fp. I think wdw realized that would be a pr issue and guest satisfaction loser, that would outweigh the revenue increases. We will see if they reevaluate. So far.....no sign of that.

I worried about that before our last trip but we managed to get everything we wanted 30 days ahead of time. We didn't want A&E in fairness but we did get the elusive Dwarfs Mine train.

 

[pilferk]

They have a form of this for those who want to pay. There are different tours you can do and for the elite there is a very very expensive personal tour that you get FP for anything, meals booked ahead of time. It is cost prohibitive, but there are still some that do it, like the bungalows.

To add to that, Disney's "capacity" for those VIP tours is relatively low, too. Thats why I didn't mention it. It, like the bungalows, has a 1% or less capacity. While there's a mechanism for some to use, and it probably bears noting, it's not really an apt comparison in the EP vs FP discussion.

 

[pilferk]

I worried about that before our last trip but we managed to get everything we wanted 30 days ahead of time. We didn't want A&E in fairness but we did get the elusive Dwarfs Mine train.

I'm glad you got everything you wanted. Our turn in about 3 weeks!

But, here's the rub: Did you get them all for the TIMES you wanted? Were you able to "frontload" most days, so all your FP+s were in the AM, so you could then avail yourself of "extra" FPs in the afternoon?

I can also tell you, I've read LOTS of posts, on these boards, about day guests NOT being able to get what they want...or when they want it...esp A&E and TSMM. I actually don't see much fervor over 7DMT. I think the capacity on that ride really smoothes things out. In more recent FP+ analysis, some on these boards, I've even seen it suggested that you're better off using FP+ for other attractions (A&E, Pan, and...something else that I can't remember..Splash, maybe?) when considering wait times and touring efficiency.

That 60+10 advantage DOES devalue the day guests FP+. We can discuss how much, but I don't think you can deny that it does. That REALLY narrows the gap with Uni's pay version of EP, even with FP being free. It varies a bit, by time of year (because Uni's cost can jump, a LOT, around high demand times). Disney still has the advantage, but I don't think it's as wide as it was under the old system.

Which also might go toward increased guest spending...because there is a theoretical (if we go down the rabbit hole) thread to follow, there. The day guests are now having to spread out their FPs through the day, extending their stay in the park, and causing them to potentially spend more money on site, and not head off site quite as early (especially at the 3 "lesser" parks). And the resort guests are able to front load their FPs, and maybe head to downtown disney, or do some mini-golfing (or regular golfing), or hit up the hotel gift shop, or squeeze in some time for an extra TS somewhere. That's one of the lines the execs are pushing when they mention FP+ being correlated to spending.

 

[pilferk]

They might both be right. What they do might fit for them.

As for shifts, no one is saying that any shift WDW makes is necessarily a bad thing for them. We really just don't know yet.

EXACTLY.

There seems to be a level of being "offended" by the suggestion this might be a set Disney strategy, or that it might be happening.

 

[mcjaco]

Which is good I see the most value in the values and moderates it's where the deluxes get insane in pricing.

And really, I don't pay more that $120 a night for anything. It's a room I sleep in, and shower. Especially at Disney.

 

[rteetz]

And really, I don't pay more that $120 a night for anything. It's a room I sleep in, and shower. Especially at Disney.

I agree. For us POR has been our place usually because we're a family of five and it's the cheapest option for us when we go in the summer. This next trip in January my grandma is paying so we are splurging to see what deluxe is like.

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

Which is good I see the most value in the values and moderates it's where the deluxes get insane in pricing.

1) your group is still supporting/justifying/contributing to the "insanity" then.

2) Even if insane (or apparently defined as what people are willing to pay) a lot of discussion has been WDW becoming unaffordable. The deluxe end is expensive, the others not that bad IMO-at least during certain times of the year.

3) I think its awesome you are trying it out. you may love it enough to try it again one day, or decide its for sure a rip off-(or rent DVC points and stay at BCV for under $200 a night), or do a split stay with a Value in the future-but at least you will know.

4) But at least other guests (and now you) are willing to keep the deluxe options in business for you to indeed even try them out. Think how many guests might fall into a similar situation as yours and want to try them out.

 

[rteetz]

1) your group is still supporting/justifying/contributing to the "insanity" then.

2) Even if insane (or apparently defined as what people are willing to pay) a lot of discussion has been WDW becoming unaffordable. The deluxe end is expensive, the others not that bad IMO-at least during certain times of the year.

3) I think its awesome you are trying it out. you may love it enough to try it again one day, or decide its for sure a rip off-(or rent DVC points and stay at BCV for under $200 a night), or do a split stay with a Value in the future-but at least you will know.

4) But at least other guests (and now you) are willing to keep the deluxe options in business for you to indeed even try them out. Think how many guests might fall into a similar situation as yours and want to try them out.

I agree for the most part. I'll say this again tho, I think this topic of discussion is actually more about what people get in terms of value for their vacation dollars vs. how affordable it is. Disney is still very affordable in many ways but a lot of people are starting to question the value.

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

I agree for the most part. I'll say this again tho, I think this topic of discussion is actually more about what people get in terms of value for their vacation dollars vs. how affordable it is. Disney is still very affordable in many ways but a lot of people are starting to question the value.

Absolutely, but I can guarantee you many (probably the vast majority of Americans and abroad) questioned value (of all 3 categories) in 1989, 1999 and 2005 as well.

And I'll say this again tho, apparently more guests than ever have decided it is more valuable than ever-otherwise attendance would be declining.

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

EXACTLY.

There seems to be a level of being "offended" by the suggestion this might be a set Disney strategy, or that it might be happening.

I will double that EXACTLY 100%.

I for one am not one bit offended by a possible shift that brings in more money and ultimately the additional options/selections/choices that come with it, even if it's on the far end of the scale.

 

[peg110]

And I'll say this again tho, apparently more guests than ever have decided it is more valuable than ever-otherwise attendance would be declining.

But that "Value" could be that they are afraid it will NOT be affordable (for them at least) in the near future and as such they are making a sacrifice now before they can no longer afford it.

I have always said that this discussion (and the other similar one about Disney being screwed) is mostly about value, but the problem is, is Value is so subject as evidenced by the wide variety of responses in this thread. Whether Disney expands or not, whether they raise prices or not, whether they add or remove amenities/perks or not, it all boils down to value for the individual. That being said, while we LOVE Disney, it's getting to the point that we need to consider our spending a bit more carefully, because a the dollar at Disney (or anywhere for that matter) doesn't buy what it used to. (not that a Dollar will buy you ANYTHING at WDW...lol).

Of course despite what any of us want or perceive, there is no denying that Disney must be doing something right. As you point out, they are more people at the parks then ever and it doesn't seem to be declining. The only thing I see declining is the money in our wallets.

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

But that "Value" could be that they are afraid it will NOT be affordable (for them at least) in the near future and as such they are making a sacrifice now before they can no longer afford it.

I have always said that this discussion (and the other similar one about Disney being screwed) is mostly about value, but the problem is, is Value is so subject as evidenced by the wide variety of responses in this thread. Whether Disney expands or not, whether they raise prices or not, whether they add or remove amenities/perks or not, it all boils down to value for the individual. That being said, while we LOVE Disney, it's getting to the point that we need to consider our spending a bit more carefully, because a the dollar at Disney (or anywhere for that matter) doesn't buy what it used to. (not that a Dollar will buy you ANYTHING at WDW...lol).

Of course despite what any of us want or perceive, there is no denying that Disney must be doing something right. As you point out, they are more people at the parks then ever and it doesn't seem to be declining. The only thing I see declining is the money in our wallets.

Well said.

Sadly for folks on the bubble, WDW appears to be on a spending spree of sorts. The current decade might add up to what, close to $10 Billion? Pricing will continue to rise IMO. Then again there will be more value-just how much more is up to the individual like you say.

 

[Andrew015]

Absolutely, but I can guarantee you many (probably the vast majority of Americans and abroad) questioned value (of all 3 categories) in 1989, 1999 and 2005 as well.

And I'll say this again tho, apparently more guests than ever have decided it is more valuable than ever-otherwise attendance would be declining.

There's more to it than strictly attendance that determines the general public's perception of WDW "value". The total % of the population that finds "value" in a Disney vacation could very easily be down 10-20% since 1999 - early 2000's despite attendance being on the rise. My argument is that absolutely is the case. Basic microeconomics tells me that it has to be the case.

No argument can be made against WDW being significantly more expensive in inflationary dollars today as it was in the 1990's - 2000's. Price elasticity of demand automatically erases a certain % of the population that would no longer find value at today's higher prices as a result (how much is impossible to determine, but it's there by definition). For your argument to be true, consumers would have to have found significant value in terms of new experiences to justify the increase in price. You think it's there. I don't believe for a second that the magical shuttle bus, pre-planning to the Nth degree and the Dwarf's kiddie coaster has offered anywhere near enough "value" to offset the price increases. This is the only piece of the discussion that is even debatable.

So what explains the rise in attendance? Again, Disney's success in targeting and capturing consumers in the more affluent classes. Disclaimer: The following are not factual charts. Rather, this is an illustration of my theory. Hypothetically speaking, the first chart illustrates the % of the population that found value in a WDW vacation in the 1990's:

The next chart would illustrate the trend as a result of the higher, inflationary prices without much additional substance (in a nutshell, the definition of price elasticity of demand):

Again, the exact numbers / percentages are hypothetical swags, but I believe the trend to be true. My contentions are that Disney has minimized the % of the population that can make the value proposition for their offering, but at the same time, has been more successful than ever at targeting and retaining the remaining portion of the population (the blue shaded piece of the bell curve, or the more affluent demographics). It's great business for Disney (until the next recession hits), it's great if you're lucky enough to still be in the "blue", but not so great for the growing piece of the population that can no longer afford it.

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that Disney is successfully targeting and retaining more affluent customers today as compared to the previous decade, while simultaneously shying away from the middleclass ranks. Look no further than the ever-increasing cost of DVC, which sold out VGF @ $165/point like clockwork. Rumor has it that the Poly is selling out at an even faster pace, and more "high-end" DVC cabins are already in the works for Wilderness Lodge, all of which is 100% targeted to the upper-echelon. On the other hand, there's no evidence to suggest that the average middle class family making a combined ~$60K per year, in the face of higher taxes and stagnant wages, is flocking to "the World". In fact, with more and more restrictions being placed on "free dining" - the single, largest promotional tool geared specifically to the lower-middle classes (i.e. value & moderate resort audience), this becomes all the more evident. As previously mentioned, IF "free dining" eventually goes by the wayside as current rumors suggest may happen, the argument is virtually solidified.

If Disney were successfully retaining it's entire bases of middle-class customers AND bringing on the new, higher-end clientele, attendance would be significantly higher than it is today. Rather, attendance has been virtually stagnant in 3 of 4 parks, with attendance only climbing ~1% annually per park since 2008 (MK excluded). If the investments being made over the past decade were significant enough to continue justifying the value proposition for the middle class, attendance numbers would be off the chart. Fact of the matter is, they're not.

Your mileage may vary...

 

[Andrew015]

And I'll say this again tho, apparently more guests than ever have decided it is more valuable than ever-otherwise attendance would be declining.

Apparently, ~92% of the DISBoards doesn't agree with you. It's still early in the poll, but I suspect this trend will do nothing but continue, as I feel the evidence is overwhelming...

 

[minnie-apple-mouse]

There's more to it than strictly attendance that determines the general public's perception of WDW "value". The total % of the population that finds "value" in a Disney vacation could very easily be down 10-20% since 1999 - early 2000's despite attendance being on the rise. My argument is that absolutely is the case. Basic microeconomics tells me that it has to be the case.

No argument can be made against WDW being significantly more expensive in inflationary dollars today as it was in the 1990's - 2000's. Price elasticity of demand automatically erases a certain % of the population that would no longer find value at today's higher prices as a result (how much is impossible to determine, but it's there by definition). For your argument to be true, consumers would have to have found significant value in terms of new experiences to justify the increase in price. You think it's there. I don't believe for a second that the magical shuttle bus, pre-planning to the Nth degree and the Dwarf's kiddie coaster has offered anywhere near enough "value" to offset the price increases. This is the only piece of the discussion that is even debatable.

So what explains the rise in attendance? Again, Disney's success in targeting and capturing consumers in the more affluent classes. Disclaimer: The following are not factual charts. Rather, this is an illustration of my theory. Hypothetically speaking, the first chart illustrates the % of the population that found value in a WDW vacation in the 1990's:

The next chart would illustrate the trend as a result of the higher, inflationary prices without much additional substance (in a nutshell, the definition of price elasticity of demand):

Again, the exact numbers / percentages are hypothetical swags, but I believe the trend to be true. My contentions are that Disney has minimized the % of the population that can make the value proposition for their offering, but at the same time, has been more successful than ever at targeting and retaining the remaining portion of the population (the blue shaded piece of the bell curve, or the more affluent demographics). It's great business for Disney (until the next recession hits), it's great if you're lucky enough to still be in the "blue", but not so great for the growing piece of the population that can no longer afford it.

There's plenty of evidence to suggest that Disney is successfully targeting and retaining more affluent customers today as compared to the previous decade, while simultaneously shying away from the middleclass ranks. Look no further than the ever-increasing cost of DVC, which sold out VGF @ $165/point like clockwork. Rumor has it that the Poly is selling out at an even faster pace, and more "high-end" DVC cabins are already in the works for Wilderness Lodge, all of which is 100% targeted to the upper-echelon. On the other hand, there's no evidence to suggest that the average middle class family making a combined ~$60K per year, in the face of higher taxes and stagnant wages, is flocking to "the World". In fact, with more and more restrictions being placed on "free dining" - the single, largest promotional tool geared specifically to the lower-middle classes (i.e. value & moderate resort audience), this becomes all the more evident. As previously mentioned, IF "free dining" eventually goes by the wayside as current rumors suggest may happen, the argument is virtually solidified.

If Disney were successfully retaining it's entire bases of middle-class customers AND bringing on the new, higher-end clientele, attendance would be significantly higher than it is today. Rather, attendance has been virtually stagnant in 3 of 4 parks, with attendance only climbing ~1% annually per park since 2008 (MK excluded). If the investments being made over the past decade were significant enough to continue justifying the value proposition for the middle class, attendance numbers would be off the chart. Fact of the matter is, they're not.

Your mileage may vary...

Put it this way, more guests have decided the value of a WDW trip is worth taking. Even if it's one guest or family more.