Why Does Epcot Need Outside Investment to Green Light New Attractions?

[MarkC]

I am both a stockholder and an annual passholder. I understand where the company is coming from. I want maximum fun and enjoyment but I want them to keep prices affordable. I want them to return maximum value for my stock investment, so I want that corporate sponsorship. Companies wrestle with these decisions every day. Its a fine line and there is no way to keep everyone happy.

[darthmacho]

Wondering when they'll close down restrooms because Charmin or AngelSoft won't pony up.

I pray that doesn't happen. It would really mess up my ABRs (Advanced Bathroom Reservations) for my August trip!

[tiggerbuddy]

Now...With all this said...
Can I please have my HORIZONS back !!!

[Super Ninja]

I am both a stockholder and an annual passholder. I understand where the company is coming from. I want maximum fun and enjoyment but I want them to keep prices affordable. I want them to return maximum value for my stock investment, so I want that corporate sponsorship. Companies wrestle with these decisions every day. Its a fine line and there is no way to keep everyone happy.

You also have to spend money to make money. Or other wise you end up like K-Mart I think. A company that refuses to spend money to update its stores and then is shocked when customers don't want to shop in dilapidated buildings that haven't been renovated since the mid-70's.

Right now the theme parks are Disney's major source of income. I think less investment in the parks right now would be a stupid move. That should include Epcot I think.

[Drachengeist]

I would have to agree more with Ian.
Anybody with access to the annual report know how much operating profit the parks made last year? Disney as a whole? Sure they want sponsorship. Jump up and down when you get it!
But dont keep that wallet welded shut just because you cant get it. When I first started going to Disney World (early 80s) a 3 day park hopper was right at $40, Parking was $1/day
Inflation...some, extra expenses for Disney Studios/Animal Kingdom....sure. But a lot of that loot is staying in pockets instead of being reinvested into what made the money in the first place.

[Super Ninja]

I would have to agree more with Ian.
Anybody with access to the annual report know how much operating profit the parks made last year? Disney as a whole? Sure they want sponsorship. Jump up and down when you get it!
But dont keep that wallet welded shut just because you cant get it. When I first started going to Disney World (early 80s) a 3 day park hopper was right at $40, Parking was $1/day
Inflation...some, extra expenses for Disney Studios/Animal Kingdom....sure. But a lot of that loot is staying in pockets instead of being reinvested into what made the money in the first place.

This is one of the worst aspects of large corporations. Instead of the profit being produced by the successful divisions of the business being reinvested in those parts of the company, it goes to keep afloat money losers that the other people in charge think are "more important" or in many cases are their pet projects.

[slottedpig]

Revenue by division

Media Networks 18.7 Billion
Parks 11.8 Billion
Studio 6.3 Billion
Consumer Products 3.0 Billion
Interactive Media 1.0 Billion

Operating Income by Division

Media Networks 6.1 Billion
Parks 1.6 Billion
Studio 0.6 Billion
Consumer Products 0.8 Billion
Interactive Media -0.3 Billion


ESPN, Disney Channel, and ABC are the real income generators recently. More so than the parks which also includes the cruise line.

[Ian]

Yeah, the ESPN franchise is insanely profitable. Cable providers are terrified not to carry it, so Disney uses it as a part of their cable channel package to leverage higher rates for less desirable properties.

I'm not sure I like it, because it drives up your cable rates somewhat artificially, but it's obviously good business practice since you can see what it does for profits.

[ronandjulie]

Maybe Disney has trouble finding Sponsors because the ROI isn't worth it? When I was a kid, and a young adult, almost everything was sponsored. Now we see many empty buildings and outdated attractions. Too bad.

[Ian]

Maybe Disney has trouble finding Sponsors because the ROI isn't worth it? When I was a kid, and a young adult, almost everything was sponsored. Now we see many empty buildings and outdated attractions. Too bad.

I don't know if it's that the ROI isn't worth it or if the public perception that the ROI isn't worth it is what turns people off.

Remember the stink about Citibank sponsoring Citi Field right in the middle of the mortgage meltdown? I think some companies fear the backlash.

Although I don't know if that holds water either, because a lot of the corporate sponsors pulled out before the economy collapsed, so maybe you're right.

[Aurora]

Maybe Disney has trouble finding Sponsors because the ROI isn't worth it? When I was a kid, and a young adult, almost everything was sponsored. Now we see many empty buildings and outdated attractions. Too bad.

I believe that's it. There are far more efficient ways for companies to spend their marketing and branding money, with laser-like customer targeting, less fishing and more immediate feedback. With the low-cost reach of the Internet and iPads, sponsoring attractions like Epcot's is way too esoteric nowadays.

[Ian]

I believe that's it. There are far more efficient ways for companies to spend their marketing and branding money, with laser-like customer targeting, less fishing and more immediate feedback. With the low-cost reach of the Internet and iPads, sponsoring attractions like Epcot's is way too esoteric nowadays.

Just to credential myself before I say this, I work for an ad agency ...

I'm not sure I agree. What your brand gets from being associated with Disney World is hard to quantify, but based on market research I've seen done for other sponsorship deals it definitely works. Trust me, companies wouldn't be shelling out $20 and $30 million for stadium licensing deals if they weren't getting an ROI for it.

You look at something like what GM has with Test Track ... you get people in a car mindset by going on the ride and then BAM hit them with a showroom full of shiny new cars on the way out. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that showroom generated annual sales in excess of what their sponsorship dollars are!

[Epcyclopedia]

I believe that's it. There are far more efficient ways for companies to spend their marketing and branding money, with laser-like customer targeting, less fishing and more immediate feedback. With the low-cost reach of the Internet and iPads, sponsoring attractions like Epcot's is way too esoteric nowadays.

As mentioned above by Ian, GM's own research has repeatedly shown that the Epcot show room at both World of Motion and Test Track has proven a key-influencer in people's car buying decisions after they visit.

I wish I had archived that article back in the day with the exact percentage of respondents back in the day, but it was impressive.

You have to remember that if properly presented an Epcot-style sponsorship is "all positive" without any sales pressure, as in it's not a sales room, it's just a showcase.. you just see it. No one wants you to sign or buy or anything. There's no expectation. So even people who hate that situation are willing to look.

Add to that the throughput - 2000 an hour or so for most Epcot attraction for an 12 hour day. That's a lot of people. People who are not just seeing an advertisement that's annoying them between their TV shows, but interacting with your product and "enjoying" your brand and the idea of it.

There are still people who buy Kikkoman soy sauce entirely because of its connection with a defunct restaurant in Magic Kingdom's Adventureland.

It has to be done right and it has to be done well - GM and their show room at the end of the attraction has always been the right way of doing things. The more obscure barely-connected-way of HP and United Technologies, etc.. aren't the right way and they've failed and are continuing to fail. The only reason HP is still around at all is internal contracts with Disney. Same for Siemens. Disney buys their products for internal use.

What Epcot could really use is an interested consumer product brand... Apple seems to fit the bill.. but doesn't seem interested.

[Epcyclopedia]

Oh, and one more thing - the vehicles that GM puts out in the show room are put through the paces for seatbelts, knobs, buttons, etc.. durability/use.. in a matter of days.

Much moreso than they could simulate in a lab. It's something they discovered very quickly in the World of Motion days. If they want to try a new seat-belt or button design or something they simply plop it in the showroom and let the masses try to break it.

[Aurora]

It has to be done right and it has to be done well - GM and their show room at the end of the attraction has always been the right way of doing things. The more obscure barely-connected-way of HP and United Technologies, etc.. aren't the right way and they've failed and are continuing to fail. The only reason HP is still around at all is internal contracts with Disney. Same for Siemens. Disney buys their products for internal use.

You put it in a way that I was trying to say, but you said it much better. By esoteric I meant hard to measure. I also work in marketing and clients have always wanted measurable results, but now it's more directly connected to revenue, and I think trends in stock trading make it more difficult for a company to strategize for the long term.

[Aurora]

Trust me, companies wouldn't be shelling out $20 and $30 million for stadium licensing deals if they weren't getting an ROI for it.

You look at something like what GM has with Test Track ... you get people in a car mindset by going on the ride and then BAM hit them with a showroom full of shiny new cars on the way out. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that showroom generated annual sales in excess of what their sponsorship dollars are!

I agree with you on the GM sponsorship, but stadium sponsorships are a little different -- every time the sports announcer states "we're here at Cellular Field for the White Sox vs." whomever, it's a free ad. I never saw many promotional mass-media tie-ins for Nestle or Kraft while they were sponsoring The Land pavilion.

[Epcyclopedia]

Well, that's because the pavilion's major theme was never meant to be food and so it never really landed that message.

It was the mineral/mining pavilion, later the ecology/logging pavilion. Both those sponsors went belly up, but the motifs from the themes remained and got reformed into Kraft's "bounty of the Land" themed pavilion.

Face it - it's still the mining pavilion. It's almost certainly originally designed for the Mosaic corporation. (Google "Mosaic" mining company - "We help the world grow the food it needs" Note the distinct 'mosaic' logo and colors...)

The 2005 redesign where it got the most drastic overhaul pulled in the sky/tree/cloud elements along with biomes for Soarin that were stronger in the theoretical ecology pavilion. Those of course were the basis of the pavilion custom made for a logging a paper goods company.

The Land never landed the "food" part of the message because it was an afterthought.

[Ian]

There are still people who buy Kikkoman soy sauce entirely because of its connection with a defunct restaurant in Magic Kingdom's Adventureland.

Yes. I'm one of them.

I never saw many promotional mass-media tie-ins for Nestle or Kraft while they were sponsoring The Land pavilion.

Yeah, but as Epcyclopedia already pointed out they're just not very well done. There's no solid tie-in that particularly makes you leave feeling positive about the brand.

[Aurora]

Yeah, but as Epcyclopediaalready pointed out they're just not very well done. There's no solid tie-in that particularly makes you leave feeling positive about the brand.

Yeah, I think that might have been Exxon's problem too. Well, not the only one. "We love energy, and dinosaurs for sure, but we're looking for other ways for our cars to go besides fossil fuels."

Meh.

[Ian]

Yeah, I think that might have been Exxon's problem too. Well, not the only one. "We love energy, and dinosaurs for sure, but we're looking for other ways for our cars to go besides fossil fuels."

Meh.

Right, it would kind of be like, "The Living Seas ... brought to you by Gorton's Fish Sticks!"