WDiW to spend 15 million dollars on Disney Transportation

[raidermatt]

I read it and re-read it, which is something I find myself having to do when it comes to deciphering your points.

So sorry you're having trouble. Since I get disagreement from others, but not confusion, I hesitate to make any changes.

But since all communication is a 2-way street, I'll try to tone down the complexity for you.

Your point was, nothing is free.

No, it wasn't. My point was the WDW transportation system needs to be evaluated in totatility with the rest of the resort. As such, no guest really uses the system for free, from WDW's pov. So any cost analysis has to include what value the monorail (or any other component of the system) has on frequency of visists, ancillary spending, etc.

This was a direct response to your statement:

In many cases, an individual can use the Disney transportation system complimentary without having to pay one dime in park admission fees.

While techincally true, this ignores the fact that if the guest isn't paying park admission fees that day, they are paying for something else on property. Therefore this does not support the idea that Disney's funding challenges are equal to those of big cities. Which is what your statement was in support of.

I can't spell it out any more clearly.

However, in this case, being given the ability to ride around all day long on a monorail, a bus, a boat , and a tram without paying one dime out one's pocket meets the definition of complimentary.

True, but irrelevant to the discussion. To the guest, it appears complimentary. However that does not mean its not generating revenue for Disney, which is all that matters when evaluating the systems "cost efficiency".

I threw in the Dolphin/Swan example only to challenge your point that staying on-site ie giving your money to Disney one way or the other so to speak is not necessarily a pre-requisite for taking advantage of this system.

But this is a poor challenge, since those guests use the transportation to go to the theme parks, water parks, Downtown Disney, etc, and give money directly to Disney. Again, the system is providing revenue to WDW. Throw in the fee the S/D pays, whether fixed or variable, and it only makes the point stronger.

How convenient. Then try real hard to concentrate solely on the Wynn properties when comparing any Vegas stat to Disney and leave the rest of the city out of it.

Not convenient, logical.

No, Las Vegas, Hawaii, and the various other destinations that have been mentioned to WDW are not apples to apples discussions with respect to tourism numbers. But they're pretty close.

Certainly there's no reason to focus on any one resort within those locations. You could evaluate each separately, I suppose, but when your done, you've got the entire destination anyway.

The comparison of those destinations is a lot more valid than comparing the use and value of their mass transit systems. As already covered, the funding is completely different. In terms of purpose and benefit, again, major differences.

These are not conveniences, they are facts.

Once again, they do not "prove" that the monorail, or any other particular system is the best investment for WDW. They only demand more critical analysis than pointing to some city that uses and funds its mass transit in a completely different manner and trying to stop the conversation at that point.

Is that really so hard to comprehend?

 

[crusader]

No apology necessary.

According to you:

Nobody can ride the transport systems for free.

Because....................

This -

Your idea that some ride the system for free is completely off-base. Virtually everybody who rides the system is either staying at a Disney resort, attending a Disney theme/water park, shopping at Disney stores, eating at a Disney restaurant, etc, or some combination thereof. If you look at the resort as a single entity, as it should be for the purposes of this dicussion, the system is never being used in a complimentary manner.

Which is wrongfully being put forth as the same as saying this..................

This -

No, it wasn't. My point was the WDW transportation system needs to be evaluated in totatility with the rest of the resort. As such, no guest really uses the system for free, from WDW's pov. So any cost analysis has to include what value the monorail (or any other component of the system) has on frequency of visists, ancillary spending, etc.

somehow, corrects my position.

To which, I'll repeat -

Anybody can ride the system complimentary.

It doesn't matter if Wolfgang Puck picks up the tab or Disney writes it off as a direct or indirect overhead expense. As long as I can be dropped off downtown or wherever, and board the busses, boats, monorails, and trams and ride around all day long without spending a dime it's a free service.

 

[raidermatt]

And as I said, that's irrelevant to this discussion.

Whether or not the guest views it as complimentary does not matter. Disney knows it gets revenue from the system becauses its needed to get people to all of the places on its property where they can spend money on Disney services and products.

How it contributes to that revenue is all that matters. Calling it a "free service" as evidence of it having equal or greater funding challenges compared to the mass transit systems of other cities (which is the context in which it was raised) is inaccurate.

 

[DisneyKidds]

My point was, if I can board any public transit vehicle without being charged a fee it's complimentary.

While enforcement may be another discussion, your presumption is wrong here as it pertains to WDW.

You are entitled to use the WDW transportation system if you are staying at a WDW resort or have purchased admission to a WDW theme park. I bet if you dig deep enough into the accountanteers most obscure financial documents you will likely find transportation as a component of the development of both the resort and admission pricing.

So, it is not complimentary. Rather, the use fee you are paying is built into the resort and admission rates you are paying.

Yes, John Q Public who is neither staying at a WDW resort or going to a WDW theme park could board the transportation. Of course making such an argument would be foolish and irrelevant to the discussion. Beyond the fact that that is an enforcement issue, how many people take the time to drive to WDW just to travel the transportation system all day? Really. Even if you find a few, Matt's argument about supporting the overall revenue stream via whatever purchases they make while navigating the system (afterall, all that transportation leads somewhere) kicks in. If there is a freak or two out there who just rides the busses around all day with no destination in mind, well I suggest we just leave them alone because who knows what such an unstable person might do if you confront them .

 

[raidermatt]

If there is a freak or two out there who just rides the busses around all day with no destination in mind, well I suggest we just leave them alone because who knows what such an unstable person might do if you confront them.

Speaking of unstable, where's YoHo?

 

[crusader]

So, it is not complimentary.

It is complimentary. Disney relaxed its' policy a long time ago. This is not an enforcement issue - it's a sales initiative.

They provide transportation to anyone who wishes to explore the place.

 

[raidermatt]

I didn't realize they changed the policy. I knew they didn't enforce it.

Regardless, the point remains, every non-psycho who boards a bus or monorail is buying something from Disney, and the transportation system is facilitating that purchase. Hence the funding for the system from Disney's pov, and hence one of the big differences between it and most other mass transit systems.

The system, if efficient, also encourages future visits. If "Magical", as some view the Monorail, the system in effect becomes an attaction unto itself, and also encourages future visits (and all the spending that goes along with those visits). Which is another key difference between WDW and cities.

 

[stlphil]

The transportation system is NOT complimentary (and I'm talking real dollars here) at least not for me and every other DVC member. A quantifiable portion of our yearly dues goes directly for the Disney transportation supplied to our resort. I'm sure there are chargebacks for all the resorts, but in the case of DVC resorts this is paid explicitly by us members and is real dollars and cents.

The dues paid by DVC members are only supposed to cover actual costs. Of course these could be manipulated by Disney if they really wanted to, particularly for existing resorts. For example, if Disney ran a monorail out to Old Key West, theoretically they could/would cover the cost of this by raising member dues. (Yes, I realize this is somewhat of an oversimplification.)

The same thing indirectly would go for the resort hotels. Put a monorail station in a resort, and Disney could immediately charge maybe $50 or more a night for the room. Suddenly, e.g., the All Stars are not a Motel 6 with big plastic icons, they are resorts on the WDW monorail system and could command significantly higher rates. $50 x 3000rooms x 365 days= $50M+ per year. Add a $1 per day increase to the park admission to cover transportation and you've got around $100M a year to play with. (And I don't think any of us have a true cost of monorail expansion; as pointed out earlier right-of-way acquisition is negligable at WDW.)

Again, you may argue about the amount of increase (okay you may not get 50 bucks with the All Stars), but there are a lot of resorts and a lot of ways to market this. The point is that there are lots of bucks potentially available here for monorails that are not available for busses, since no one is going to pay a premium for expansion to the bus system.

 

[crusader]

You're using the "nothing is free" basis, which of course is true. All revenue streams at WDW support the transportation system, the same way they support the water fountains.

That doesn't make it any less complimentary to anyone who doesn't ante up one dollar to patronize this establishment.

It's an allocated costing system. You are a patron. You pay for it all. Joe Smith isn't a patron, and when he takes his daughter to the Boardwalk from DTD to trick-or-treat, or see the gingerbread house or rides the monorail from the MK through the Contemporary to play in the playground and hops the boat to Ft. Wilderness to sit on the beach and watch the Electric Water Pageant or hangs out at the AKL to gaze at the animals - you wound up paying for it. Meanwhile, he sported a backpack with essentials, and received everything complimentary. It's no different than having a family member visit you. They're comp'd. You're not.

Utilizing the transportation system as a true sales initiative is a brilliant marketing scheme. It's advertised and sold to the consumer as an entitlement, yet discreetly offers no discrimination. That way, everyone gets to "be our guest" without requiring them all to pay for it.

 

[2Xited4Disney]

I am not trying to argue but if there really is a guy like "joe smith"... Who lives in Orlando, or somehwere else in the world, and he does all the stuff you mentioned. Then he is probably a Disney fan,which in turn means that he will probably go to a Disney Theme Park at some point. I have learned that there are two type of people in life. The people who have discovered Disney and like it, and those that think "why would I want to spend money to see a mouse." Clearly Joe Smith is the first.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Joe Smith isn't a patron, and when he takes his daughter to the Boardwalk from DTD to trick-or-treat, or see the gingerbread house or rides the monorail from the MK through the Contemporary to play in the playground and hops the boat to Ft. Wilderness to sit on the beach and watch the Electric Water Pageant or hangs out at the AKL to gaze at the animals - you wound up paying for it. Meanwhile, he sported a backpack with essentials, and received everything complimentary.

****cough, cough........red herring.........cough, cough****

 

[raidermatt]

Nicely put, Mr. Kidds.

Still, even a smoked fish deserves some buckshot.

Fine, there is an occasional Joe Smith, but the numbers are so few and far between, its completely insignificant. It is an extremely rare bird indeed who didn't buy SOMETHING, whether it was dinner, snacks, parking, a t-shirt, drinks, etc.

The point remains, the system is funded through the 99.99% who do use it and are paying for something. In most cases, lots of things. Further, any value it has above and beyond its efficiency can translate into increased revenue through more purchases, higher park attendance, and greater demand for resort rooms.

Hence the need to take those factors under serious consideration in any discussion that talks about "cost efficiency".

The basic problem remains that any significant upgrades or expansion, be it monorail, light rail, teleportation, whatever, will require a significant capital outlay, and that's something that the company is very reluctant to do.

 

[crusader]

So now the word free is based on consumption.

I love it.

The point remains, the system is funded through the 99.99% who do use it

Really. Prove it.

No, Better yet - Prove 99.99% of the riders pay 99.99% of the costs.

 

[crusader]

Fine, there is an occasional Joe Smith, but the numbers are so few and far between, its completely insignificant.

Yeah, when all else fails, dismiss the concept entirely. Joe Smith is so insigificant in fact that Mousesavers has dedicated a whole page to his free loving society.

http://www.mousesavers.com/freestuff.html

 

[FoodLover]

Yeah, when all else fails, dismiss the concept entirely. Joe Smith is so insigificant in fact that Mousesavers has dedicated a whole page to his free loving society.

http://www.mousesavers.com/freestuff.html

I don't get your point. From the page on my site you linked to:

"Cost to ride the monorails: free to all Disney resort guests and anyone with a multi-day pass."

"Cost for any of the above [boat rides]: free to all Disney resort guests and anyone with a multi-day pass."

I have never advocated abusing the Disney transportation system. It is for resort guests and those with a multi-day pass.

Mary
MouseSavers.com

 

[DisneyKidds]

Seeing as this conversation has gone from rediculous to absurd, I'm not sure there is a point.......at least not one with any relevance to the topic of WDW transportation options.

 

[Bstanley]

Up until now I had never considered that with just a bit of forethought I could take my family to WDW for a LOT less money.

By staying offsite, not entering the Theme Parks, not eating at the resort restaurants plus simply telling my kids that riding the monorails, buses and boats are attractions and that viewing the animals at AKL is better than visiting the park I could save a fortune!

Tee hee - those 40 million people a year that actually bought passes are such saps...

 

[raidermatt]

Really. Prove it.

No, Better yet - Prove 99.99% of the riders pay 99.99% of the costs.

Prove its not and prove they don't.

Productive way to have a discussion, isn't it?

How about this. What percentage of the non-employees who use the system would you guess purchase absolutely nothing from Disney. Not staying at a resort (including the S/D, which pay for the service), purchased no park ticket, purchasing absolutely no food, beverage, or merchandise. No dinner, no t-shirt, no lunch, no cotton candy, no coffee, nothing.

As for how much of the cost of the transportation system the paying guests cover, that's actually an important question, isn't it? But of course none of us know the answer. What we do know is that its an important question for WDW in particular because of its financing and revenue structure, which is far different than Chicago's.

We also know that in the end, the profit generated more than covers the ongoing costs of the system, as evidenced by the fact that the resort does in fact make a profit. Therefore, all ongoing costs are more than covered by the profits from the various purchases made.

The real question is whether a greater investment in the transportation system, above and beyond the occasional upgrade of the bus system, can generate enough of a proft increase in the future to justify the capital investment and possible ongoing cost increase.

Of course none of us have the data to prove that one way or the other. Some believe it can be done, others don't. My point, however, has been and continues to be that there are unique circumstances with WDW that make a comparison to any city in the world nothing more than a starting point, not the conclusion.

Further, there are a lot of judgements that need to be made to reach that ultimate conclusion, and they go far beyond a simple "cost efficiency" analysis as it's been used in this discussion.

And even further, even if the ultimate analysis did show that expanding the monorail, for example, would bring solid returns in the future, the short term thinking largely employed by the company would likely scrap the idea regardless, which is a mistake.

Yeah, when all else fails, dismiss the concept entirely.

Or analyze it critically and logically, which sometimes does result in the invalidation of a concept.

Joe Smith is so insigificant in fact that Mousesavers has dedicated a whole page to his free loving society.

You're kidding with this, right? The existence of a board with tips for free and cheap stuff is proof that significant numbers of people are utilizing Disney's transportation and spending absolutely nothing?

Before I even address this particular smoked fish, is that what you are really putting forth?

 

[DisneyKidds]

Matt.....stop clouding the issue with thought, reason, logic and productive discussion points. You are distracting everyone from the clearly irrefutable fact that the WDW transportation system is free, gratis, complimentary, and that is all that really matters in the discussion.

 

[raidermatt]

Oops. My bad.

And props to Mary for defending her own honor so quickly, and also reminding us that while Disney may not actively pursue the GWIRBs, the rules about the system's usage still exist.