Walt Disney World Parking Fee now $9 dollars

[YoHo]

No. But if the company really only cared about making a pofit they wouldn't invest the amount of money they do in new attractions.

Why? because AK is makjing money hand over fist the way it is? Please make sense. Animal Kingdom is a drag on the bottom line. E:E is an attempt to fix it just like Dinoland was. We saw how going cheap worked.

 

[YoHo]

That's the equivalent of predicting the Earth will be round and YoHo and All Aboard will drink rum.

I like my rum wiht extra rum in it.

 

[DancingBear]

I specifically said "successful" movie. Why would you then use the Haunted Mansion and King Arthur as examples.

A failed movie can lose a lot more money than an attraction ever will. You can't compare only rewards and not factor in risk.

 

[peter11435]

Oh my.

What is the reason you believe they invest what they do in new attractions?

Because the company still understands the need for Disney to be Disney.

 

[peter11435]

Why? because AK is makjing money hand over fist the way it is? Please make sense. Animal Kingdom is a drag on the bottom line. E:E is an attempt to fix it just like Dinoland was. We saw how going cheap worked.

Animal Kingdom doesn't have nearly the problems some try to paint. The park as a whole is doing just fine.

 

[YoHo]

Animal Kingdom doesn't have nearly the problems some try to paint. The park as a whole is doing just fine.

uh huh, sure. And you know this because......

 

[raidermatt]

A failed movie can lose a lot more money than an attraction ever will. You can't compare only rewards and not factor in risk.

Hmmm, I was about to say "good point", but now I'm not sure that's true. If an attraction costs $150 million and nobody comes to the park because of it, you wasted $150 million. If a movie costs $150 million and nobody comes to see it, you wated $150 million.

I think its the same.

The difference, I think, is only in the accounting. A loss for a movie is easily accounted for. If it happens with an attraction, its just folded into the overall operation of the park (at least publically).

 

[Aintdisablast]

I like my rum wiht extra rum in it.

Ahhhhh..... 21 year old rum.....................been tooooo long.

Your post is going to cost me a few dollars.

 

[YoHo]

I got a bottle of the VX in Montego bay for about half what it costs at BevMo!

I am pleased.

 

[peter11435]

uh huh, sure. And you know this because......

I could say the same thing about you. How do you know that Animal Kingdom has the problems you speek of....

 

[All Aboard]

Damnit YoHo, now I'm thinking about changing weekend plans. I might need to swim to the Bahamas.

 

[raidermatt]

Because the company still understands the need for Disney to be Disney.

Animal Kingdom doesn't have nearly the problems some try to paint. The park as a whole is doing just fine.

But don't you see how contradictory these statements are? I'm fine with accepting that AK is making money, and doing just fine, as far as that goes.

But if Disney is "being Disney", wouldn't they consider AK to be a collossal failure? Really, if they were "being Disney", they never would have considered even opening the park with the limited scope it had (let's forget for now the "quality" issues). Same with MGM and DCA. "Disney", especially when it was doing something major, was about topping what they did before, not trying to add a day to somebody's stay.

Beyond that, if you read the annual reports, listen to the quarterly conference calls, read the press releases and really take a hard look at their decisions, you'd see they aren't doing things, especially of this magnitude, just to be Disney.

 

[Another Voice]

Because the company still understands the need for Disney to be Disney.

That's had me laughing out loud.

Let's start with cancelling 'The Wonderful World of Disney' on Sunday night (a family tradition for almost fifty years) and replacing it with 'Americas Funniest Home Videos'.

Yup - "the reason we shut down Feature Animation is because its important for us to be Disney!"

Pass the rum!

 

[YoHo]

I could say the same thing about you. How do you know that Animal Kingdom has the problems you speek of....

I know some people

 

[airlarry!]

How do you measure success with DAK?

Was it not built to increase length of stay and to generate guests in the park for in-park revenues, also?

According to industry reports, the park has done neither.

Perhaps you have copies of internal memos lying around that show that DAK is exceeding all expectations in terms of net revenue for the company?

I'd love to see 'em.

Because you are the first person on the DIS (and I've been here since at least '98) that I can recall that argued that DAK is a success. There have been many to say its a great park, it is/isn't half-day park, it is/isn't in the Disney tradition blah blah blah, but you are the first to say DAK is "doing just fine" and "doesn't have the problems" we think it has.

 

[DancingBear]

Hmmm, I was about to say "good point", but now I'm not sure that's true. If an attraction costs $150 million and nobody comes to the park because of it, you wasted $150 million. If a movie costs $150 million and nobody comes to see it, you wated $150 million.

I think its the same.

The difference, I think, is only in the accounting. A loss for a movie is easily accounted for. If it happens with an attraction, its just folded into the overall operation of the park (at least publically).

But as long as the attraction is successful enough to remain open, it's still going to occupy a number of bodies, even if it's not making the turnstiles spin wildly. It seems unlikely that there is any $150 million attraction that will just stop having utility in the same time frame that a $150 million failed movie will stop selling tickets and DVDs.

The accounting problem works both ways, as A-V has pointed out repeatedly. In the abstract, everyone understands that you can't maintain attendance, let alone increase it, without making improvements to the parks. But it's hard to isolate any one potential attraction or improvement and say it's going to make the difference in the park.

Somebody needs to keep an eye on the forest and not just the individual trees.

 

[Aintdisablast]

Don't get discouraged or feel like you're being ganged up on. It may feel like it, but really, you're not.

If you KNOW you are right, stick to your guns, don't back down, and prove your point.

If you THINK you're right, keep an open mind because maybe, just maybe, you're not.

And if you realize you are wrong, accept it and quit beating a dead horse.

Take heart in knowing that the people you are battling here are passionate, true Disney fans. Learn from their experience.

Don't let their cynical, sometime sarcastic nature get under your skin. They spent many years honing those skills from the early days here and old habits die hard.

Just remember, Dumbo is just a spinner.

 

[raidermatt]

It seems unlikely that there is any $150 million attraction that will just stop having utility in the same time frame that a $150 million failed movie will stop selling tickets and DVDs.

I see that point. But when you get down to how much revenue it actually generates, or saves, I don't think a real stinker does that, does it? Yes, people ride it, but they aren't paying anything to do it. In this hypothetical case (Triceratops Spin), nobody buys a ticket to that park (AK) who wouldn't have otherwise, and nobody buys merchandise who wouldn't have otherwise.

Yes, it still provides utility, but in some ways, if its a truly "bad" attraction (Superstar Limo), that can be worse. Its harder to sweep under the carpet.

 

[YoHo]

Don't get discouraged or feel like you're being ganged up on. It may feel like it, but really, you're not.

If you KNOW you are right, stick to your guns, don't back down, and prove your point.

If you THINK you're right, keep an open mind because maybe, just maybe, you're not.

And if you realize you are wrong, accept it and quit beating a dead horse.

Take heart in knowing that the people you are battling here are passionate, true Disney fans. Learn from their experience.

Don't let their cynical, sometime sarcastic nature get under your skin. They spent many years honing those skills from the early days here and old habits die hard.

Just remember, Dumbo is just a spinner.

Well now isn't that an interesting post from a person that joined just this december. Hmmmm.

 

[raidermatt]

Alright, Aintdisablast, everybody wants to say it, and I'm dumb enough to bite.

Be a man, or woman as the case maybe, and 'fess up.