As it opens new attraction, Disney prepares to cut capital spending

[March Hare]

I am surprised this hasn't been posted yet

From the Orlando Sentinel:

The opening of the 12-acre "Cars Land" caps a five-year, billion-dollar overhaul of Disney California Adventure, the second gate at Disneyland, which failed to meet expectations after opening in 2001.

But it also marks the crest of a $6 billion wave of capital spending across Disney's U.S. theme-park and resort holdings. And senior Disney executives now vow to cut back.

"We should be coming down substantially — substantially — in domestic spending," Disney Chief Financial Officer Jay Rasulo said during a recent presentation to stock analysts.

"We don't have any other big projects right now" in the U.S., Disney President and Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger said during a separate presentation. The lone exception, Iger added, is a "land" planned for Disney's Animal Kingdom based on the movie"Avatar,"which isn't expected to open until at least 2016.

Such comments are meant to cheer investors who are pressing Disney to improve profit margins at its parks and plow more cash into dividend payments and stock buybacks. But they also alarm some of Disney's most passionate fans, who argue that its theme parks — particularly those at Walt Disney World, the company's biggest and busiest resort — need more investment, not less, to prevent them from becoming stale.

so it looks like they are not going to try and compete with anyone and more proof that Walt's ideals of not caring about investors over the visitors to his parks are going away let the bean counters and greed take over :thedolls:

not sure if I can post the link so if I can't please feel free to remove it but the story was too long to copy it here and there is more
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/the-daily-disney/os-disney-parks-capital-spending-20120614,0,7260737.story

[DizneyFreak2002]

Shhhhhh can't tell this to WDW fans... They won't believe you... Wait, you quoted an article?? Got to be proof Rasulo said that, right??? I mentioned this last week as I have a Tweet from Jason Garcia himself saying Rasulo said this and was told there was NO WAY Rasulo would ever say something like that...

WDW is now the real estate arm of the company... If it isn't a DVC project, then it is nothing... And forget Avatar... Budget has already been cut and the scope of the project has been watered down... Meanwhile, down the street in Universal, major things are being fast tracked... MAJOR THINGS...

Rest on your laurels WDW... you'll soon find out you are WAY behind the game and can not catch up....

[Jared]

Rest on your laurels WDW... you'll soon find out you are WAY behind the game and can not catch up....
I totally respect your passion, and you know I agree with most of your points on this issue, but the quoted comment goes a little too far.

If Universal can catch up with Disney -- which it certainly has -- from as far behind as it was, it's silly to say that Disney can't leapfrog the competition again someday. It may not be tomorrow or this year or this decade, but you know as well as I that a new management team is coming. With that will come change.

Maybe it'll take Universal to truly surpass Disney for the real change to happen. But I can't agree that Disney has fallen -- or will fall -- irreparably behind.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I totally respect your passion, and you know I agree with most of your points on this issue, but the quoted comment goes a little too far.

If Universal can catch up with Disney -- which it certainly has -- from as far behind as it was, it's silly to say that Disney can't leapfrog the competition again someday. It may not be tomorrow or this year or this decade, but you know as well as I that a new management team is coming. With that will come change.

Maybe it'll take Universal to truly surpass Disney for the real change to happen. But I can't agree that Disney has fallen -- or will fall -- irreparably behind.

Disney can bury the competition now... But, in Orlando, the question is, do they have the guts to try?? Sadly, no...

I think Universal Orlando has surpassed WDW in may aspects already... And WDW management is resting on their laurels... Sometimes, the giant is caught sleeping, and doesn't rise again... We all know Disney has the ability to put out some amazing things... If these things are for anywhere but WDW... What does management have a fear of in FL??? Since when is good enough, well, good enough with Disney??? That is the attitude of the leadership in place in TDO... I said it before, and will continue to say it, the only way for things to change in WDW is for managers to lose their jobs, you know, "spend more time with their families"...

[Jared]

I agree that Disney needs a new management team to enact real change. We both know that day is coming sooner rather than later.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I agree that Disney needs a new management team to enact real change. We both know that day is coming sooner rather than later.

Can't come soon enough... I'm going to PM you a little later with something... Hopefully, you'll give it some thought... :) I promise, it isn't bad...

[March Hare]

I'm not going to go as far as saying they are going to rest on their laurels I just think it is bad management to cut spending on capital improvements just as all the competition is spending more. It just infuriates me when companies only worry about the few share holders screaming they want larger dividends and not trying to improve business to increase profits over the long hall it is called being penny wise and pound foolish. I am watching the company I have worked for, for over 20 years, crumble because we were bought out by a publicly traded company and they have done nothing for our customers while they squeeze every penny out of us for the share holders to get their money making us go from #1 in our area to dead last all the while their stock price went from over $40 a share to under $4 because they are a failing company now. So lets worry about share holders while we kill a strong business it is just stupidity and I am sure Walt is rolling over in his grave rant end:-o

[Dixie Springs]

DizneyFreak's "real estate arm" characterization is spot-on. DVC is a gold mine. I don't want to start any arguments about how awesome or stupid the idea of membership is. The point is that it's big bucks. Otherwise there wouldn't be a timeshare salesman/booth in your Disney hotel lobby.

Sheer money decisions hit Disney fans hard (I'm still stewing over the Empress Lilly becoming Fultons - gads, that was named after his wife!). We can't help it. All the business lectures don't help (and I'm a free-market lover).

I agree also with the Universal 'threat'. For hardcores, nothing compares to the Disney vibe, but how many of us are there? Particularly when we are becoming less enchanted.

Band-wagon rant complete. :mickey:

[BrerGnat]

Well, honestly, what do you expect? They just spent $6 BILLION in five years in the U.S. $6 BILLION. That kind of spending cannot continue indefinitely. That's how companies go bankrupt. There has to be a balance of spending and return of investment.

None of us here can even fathom that kind of money, so who are we to moan and groan that this spells the end of Disney? That's ridiculous.

Look at your OWN household spending. I don't know about you, but if I have a month where I spend a gross amount over and above what is "normal", I cut back for a few months after that to bring everything back into balance. Companies have to do the same thing.

And, honestly, I don't understand any of the anger here. DIsneyland just completed a massive overhaul of DCA, and spent quite a bit of money at Disneyland park as well refurbishing and retooling Main Street and the Matterhorn. That park has finally gotten the attention it was lacking for a LONG time. For years and years, WDW got all the attention and it only makes sense that they want to build up the West coast parks to be more of a vacation destination. It stands to reason that WDW will have its turn with "improvements" in the coming years. They are already spending a fortune at MK, and I have no doubt that the final product will be worth the time and money spent.

And, as much as I agree that Universal is making a huge push to be competitive, I really don't think, in the long run, that they will outdo DIsney. They never have yet. The kind of money that they are spending to make improvements in the parks cannot be maintained. Universal has a history of opening attractions and then just letting them turn stale. They use movies for their rides that don't have "staying power" and the attractions become irrelevant rather quickly (in terms of theme park ride shelf life). I mean, come on. Look at how many rides have been "rethemed" at Universal over the years, yet the actual experiences don't change too much. Despicable Me is going to be IRRELEVANT 5 years from now, same as Jimmy Neutron. Shrek is kinda out, ditto Twister, Waterworld, Men In Black, etc. Universal doesn't even only use its own movie properties. Most of the rides are based on movie licenses obtained by Universal. Universal can make claims that they have "all new" this or that, but really, it's just replacing one movie franchise with another when they realize NO ONE wants to ride something based on a movie/show that NO ONE has heard of or cares about. Even the Harry Potter land was a RE THEME of an area at IoA that was a failure.

You can be as critical of DIsney as you want. On the other hand, when one tries to make claims that because Universal has done ONE thing right in it's park history by choosing a popular franchise with staying power and built a land to house it, and that makes them SUPERIOR in the long run, well, that's just short sighted.

DIsney will be fine. Universal will (probably) do well enough in the future to stay competitive. But, the truth is, DIsney doesn't HAVE to try as hard as Universal because they simply have a superior product and always have.

Disney is not always right. They make a LOT of stupid decisions. However, sometimes, they do hit the nail on the head and pull something brilliant out of their hats. Carsland is going to be popular for a LONG LONG time. That movie is already 6 years old and kids are STILL going crazy for it. Cars merchandise sales ALONE have made over $8 BILLION for Disney. That's what you call a winner. :thumbsup:

Sounds like a lot of hating on Disney for what they are doing in CA. Why not replace the badmouting with a trip over there to see what it's all about? You might come away with a bit more appreciation with what Disney has done.

[Hammer]

Well, honestly, what do you expect? They just spent $6 BILLION in five years in the U.S. $6 BILLION. That kind of spending cannot continue indefinitely. That's how companies go bankrupt. There has to be a balance of spending and return of investment.

None of us here can even fathom that kind of money, so who are we to moan and groan that this spells the end of Disney? That's ridiculous.

Look at your OWN household spending. I don't know about you, but if I have a month where I spend a gross amount over and above what is "normal", I cut back for a few months after that to bring everything back into balance. Companies have to do the same thing.

And, honestly, I don't understand any of the anger here. DIsneyland just completed a massive overhaul of DCA, and spent quite a bit of money at Disneyland park as well refurbishing and retooling Main Street and the Matterhorn. That park has finally gotten the attention it was lacking for a LONG time. For years and years, WDW got all the attention and it only makes sense that they want to build up the West coast parks to be more of a vacation destination. It stands to reason that WDW will have its turn with "improvements" in the coming years. They are already spending a fortune at MK, and I have no doubt that the final product will be worth the time and money spent.

And, as much as I agree that Universal is making a huge push to be competitive, I really don't think, in the long run, that they will outdo DIsney. They never have yet. The kind of money that they are spending to make improvements in the parks cannot be maintained. Universal has a history of opening attractions and then just letting them turn stale. They use movies for their rides that don't have "staying power" and the attractions become irrelevant rather quickly (in terms of theme park ride shelf life). I mean, come on. Look at how many rides have been "rethemed" at Universal over the years, yet the actual experiences don't change too much. Despicable Me is going to be IRRELEVANT 5 years from now, same as Jimmy Neutron. Shrek is kinda out, ditto Twister, Waterworld, Men In Black, etc. Universal doesn't even only use its own movie properties. Most of the rides are based on movie licenses obtained by Universal. Universal can make claims that they have "all new" this or that, but really, it's just replacing one movie franchise with another when they realize NO ONE wants to ride something based on a movie/show that NO ONE has heard of or cares about. Even the Harry Potter land was a RE THEME of an area at IoA that was a failure.

You can be as critical of DIsney as you want. On the other hand, when one tries to make claims that because Universal has done ONE thing right in it's park history by choosing a popular franchise with staying power and built a land to house it, and that makes them SUPERIOR in the long run, well, that's just short sighted.

DIsney will be fine. Universal will (probably) do well enough in the future to stay competitive. But, the truth is, DIsney doesn't HAVE to try as hard as Universal because they simply have a superior product and always have.

Disney is not always right. They make a LOT of stupid decisions. However, sometimes, they do hit the nail on the head and pull something brilliant out of their hats. Carsland is going to be popular for a LONG LONG time. That movie is already 6 years old and kids are STILL going crazy for it. Cars merchandise sales ALONE have made over $8 BILLION for Disney. That's what you call a winner. :thumbsup:

Sounds like a lot of hating on Disney for what they are doing in CA. Why not replace the badmouting with a trip over there to see what it's all about? You might come away with a bit more appreciation with what Disney has done.

Agree with Natalie on all of her points. Companies need to keep some sort of budget or they will weaken themselves financially, leaving them ripe for takeover. Remember, Universal had an influx of cash after being purchased from Comcast and that definitely helped.

I still do not like going to Disneyland. I make that flight accross the country maybe 2 times a decade. I hate long flights. I need a flight to not take longer than the battery life on my portable DVD player (5 hours) as I am not a relaxed flyer :). I won't even do the flight often to go to San Francisco and Wine country, and I love it up there!
Also, I can combine visiting my Mom with WDW, so Florida is a win/win for me!

[Jared]

Agree with Natalie on all of her points. Companies need to keep some sort of budget or they will weaken themselves financially, leaving them ripe for takeover. Remember, Universal had an influx of cash after being purchased from Comcast and that definitely helped.

I still do not like going to Disneyland. I make that flight accross the country maybe 2 times a decade. I hate long flights. I need a flight to not take longer than the battery life on my portable DVD player (5 hours) as I am not a relaxed flyer :). I won't even do the flight often to go to San Francisco and Wine country, and I love it up there!
Also, I can combine visiting my Mom with WDW, so Florida is a win/win for me!
I totally understand, Christine. Nobody would ever begrudge anybody for loving Walt Disney World. I know I do. I have an annual pass and will probably spend two weeks in the parks in 2012. I enjoy every second of the time I spend in those parks.

But right now, at 11:30 a.m. on June 18, I don't see how anybody can empirically argue that Disneyland doesn't offer a vastly superior experience than its Florida counterpart. What's more, there are serious plans for two new E-Ticket attractions and a third gate in California. This is (probably) happening, and it's a wonderful thing.

The Wizarding World of Harry Potter is, in my mind, the single most significant development in the theme park industry since EPCOT Center opened. It has fundamentally changed Universal, and that's why they are adding a new Potter-themed land at the other park, plus Wizarding Worlds in California and abroad.

Here's the difference: Disneyland, in addition to the $2 billion it spent on California Adventure, is ready to upstage Potter years in advance. With the Wizarding World up and running -- and phase two on its way -- Walt Disney World has decided to stay pat.

This is not an issue of money. It's an issue of philosophy, and the guests are the ones who suffer from it.

Of course, this raises the question: Why do I (and so many others who feel the way I do) keep going back? The answer is because a watered-down Walt Disney World is still a wonderful, magical, exciting experience. Hopefully, it always will be. That doesn't mean we can't wish for Disney to do what it's capable of doing. Seeing them raise the bar in California only make it more frustrating.

[BrerGnat]

Seeing them raise the bar in California only make it more frustrating.

Seeing them raise the bar should make you feel confident that the Disney parks will not settle for their parks becoming "stale."

What many people here fail to realize is that, as much as many here don't go to Disneyland because it's "too far", people who live on the west coast feel the SAME WAY about WDW. I lived in California from 1994 to 2011 and in that time, I came across people who had been to WDW only a handful of times. For a long time, those people felt that Disneyland really needed some attention. Now, you are upset that the Disney company has done something to keep Disneyland fresh? That seems selfish. Go to Disneyland and enjoy what they've done over there. It doesn't have to be "WDW vs. Disneyalnd." If you are frustrated with how WDW is these days, make a trip to the other coast. It's hard to come away from Disneyland AT THIS POINT IN TIME, disappointed.

Remember, Disneyland is what started all of this. WDW was created as a response to it's popularity. Just because WDW is bigger, that does not mean that it should get all the money for improvements.

For what it's worth, I was at WDW last December. I really didn't find a THING to complain about. It was a great vacation and everything seemed tip top shape. We are going to Disneyland in November since we have to fly out there for a wedding, and I'm very excited about it. I can't wait to experience the new DCA for myself after watching the project take shape over the past 5 years.

[Stu29573]

I have been planning a trip to WDW in November of next year for quite a while now. However, seeing what Disneyland and CA now have to offer, it may be time to fly to the other coast. Being in Texas, its about the same distance either way. The only thing that is holding me back at all is that I enjoy the totally enveloping environment of WDW and I dont know if I want to give that up. Much thought is needed......:confused:

[AgentC]

. . .

The Wizarding World of Harry Potter is, in my mind, the single most significant development in the theme park industry since EPCOT Center opened. It has fundamentally changed Universal, and that's why they are adding a new Potter-themed land at the other park, plus Wizarding Worlds in California and abroad.
. . .


I'm going a little off track here.

I agree that Universal has done a wonderful job with TWWoHP and that someone there was very smart to get the rights to the attractions. And they are very smart to keep pursing Potter themed lands.

But the writer in me :D says that rather than the single most significant development in theme parks, JK Rowling created books that changed our cultural landscape in way that hadn't been done for a long time.

She got kids and parents reading and immersed in a world that was so real that people would show up at bookstores at midnight for the release of the newest edition. And the movies fanned the flames. There was and still is such an enormous in Potter, that Universal would have almost had to try to mess it up for it not to be a success.

Universal executed the ideas beautifully, but they executed JK Rowlings vision not Universal's vision. We wouldn't even by discussing in Universal is better than WDW if not for JK Rowling.

Okay soapbox away. :)

[Joannelet]

Universal has a history of opening attractions and then just letting them turn stale. They use movies for their rides that don't have "staying power" and the attractions become irrelevant rather quickly (in terms of theme park ride shelf life). I mean, come on. Look at how many rides have been "rethemed" at Universal over the years, yet the actual experiences don't
change too much. Despicable Me is going to be IRRELEVANT 5 years from now, same as Jimmy Neutron. Shrek is kinda out, ditto Twister, Waterworld, Men In Black, etc..... Even the Harry Potter land was a RE THEME of an area at IoA that was rethemed.


Natalie I totally get what you are saying but there is some things I want you to think about. Disney finally started working on Cars Land AFTER universal started pulling Harry Potter together. While Disney will never lose to Universal they take too long on a lot of their popular movies. Cars was a huge success in 1995. It is 2012....
Universal hit the Harry Potter nail on the head. It was still in its prime when it opened and they put as much detail into it like Disney would have to it. Disney is right about adding Cars Land...they NEEDED to.
This whole Avatar thing is what would concern me. I didn't see the movie but I do know it made a ton of money, people love the movie and it is current right now but it won't be done till 2016? These are the things that annoy me. Look at Phineas and Ferb even. The merchandise for popular current things took so long to come out as well as the characters. The same thing with things becoming stale can be said about Disney as well....the honey I shrunk the kids play area (although it can be rethemed to A Bugs Life), the Tangled meet and greet is now rethemed to Brave- I know these are areas as opposed to Universal rides but it is still retheming of some sort to keep it current which they should do. They need to.
Again Universal will never surpass Disney but while some technology on rides in Universal surpasses Disney's at times, Disney's movies just stand longer.....And I have only been a handful of times to Universal...it is not something I go to again and again like Disney. Disney has something for everyone for ages 0 to 100. :)(even pregnant women) I was prego in Universal and couldn't go on one thing!
They do need to stop spending and start gaining for a while and that is fine too. There was a long time before that this occurred as well. It is what happens. Cars land in Cali and Fantasyland expansion in WDW will keep us busy for a while. :)
Disney no matter what will always be the best. It is all in the name as long as management doesn't take the customer service part of that company away it will never go under. Their guest services exceed any company out there. Companies all over try to emulate the Disney standard. as long as their greeting us with fairy tales and pixie dust that magic aspect of it will never stop someone from wanting to go again and again. Universal will never have that magic about it...no matter how many Harry Potter magic wands they sell :)
P.S.
I cannot wait to go to Cars Land!

On the other hand Disneyland definitely needed Cars Land and the overhaul that it got. My gosh that park was such a mismatch. It was too all over the place. I went there in 2008 and said my gosh it's like they threw all 4 WDW parks together in one park. There was no rhyme or reason to any of it.

[Jared]

Now, you are upset that the Disney company has done something to keep Disneyland fresh? That seems selfish.
Natalie, I don't understand why you think anybody is complaining about Disney's unbelievable work at California Adventure? Just the opposite -- Disney fans everywhere are thrilled about all the work in California. In fact, it's proof of what the company is still capable of doing. It's an incredible achievement, and I know I'm planning a Disneyland trip in 2013.

As for the parks seeming "stale," that's inevitable when you're a repeat guest. That's never been my complaint. In fact, I've never felt bored at the Walt Disney World parks. My problem -- and the problem of many others -- is that the corporation is treating Walt Disney World as a real-estate development business, while Disneyland is world-class themed resort. Am I jealous? You bet.


I agree that Universal has done a wonderful job with TWWoHP and that someone there was very smart to get the rights to the attractions. And they are very smart to keep pursing Potter themed lands.
Very true. It makes you wonder what would have happened if Disney closed the deal with Rowling.

[March Hare]

Well, honestly, what do you expect? They just spent $6 BILLION in five years in the U.S. $6 BILLION. That kind of spending cannot continue indefinitely. That's how companies go bankrupt. There has to be a balance of spending and return of investment.


I'm not saying they have to spend $6 Billion they just need to spend enough to fix, maintain, and maybe even improve things and just occasionally add new rides. I wouldn't expect a major overhaul like this more than once every 10-20 years. It just seems that every time we turn around they are bowing down to share holders and letting things go almost to the point of dangerous and sometimes beyond, some share holders are parasites and only care about making a quick buck. I love going to WDW I don't like seeing everything in disrepair. I also understand that some things will take a while to fix like the Yeti but come on some things just need a new coat of paint or a new parts that would be very simple for them to make in a work shop and replace when the park is closed. Every time they say they are going to cut back on spending they don't fix anything unless they have to. I think they could spend a little more and give the share holders a little less and keep things up between the major projects. Up keep is just as important as spending because both can kill a company, one by loss of money the other by loss of customers and yes even Disney can fail with bad management decisions they are not as invincible as people think.

[AgentC]

Very true. It makes you wonder what would have happened if Disney closed the deal with Rowling.

Agreed. Definitely a lost opportunity for WDW or Disneyland. I'm not sure if we will see something like the HP affect again for a long time.

[DizneyFreak2002]

oh lordy... more people sprouting off at the mouth...

The DCA redo was necessary because they screwed up that park from the start... So, they spent X amount of billions MORE than the original budget because of poor poor planning..

With that said, let's look at what is on the drawing boards shall we???

Rasulo said they will be cutting spending correct??? Well, the money they are going to spend, where is it going???

Well, DL is set to get TWO, that's right TWO huge e-tickets and a THIRD gate... WDW: um... um... a Grand Flo DVC, um... Poly DVC... um... Avatar (still a maybe but signs are slowly pointing to it happening)... Um... nothing....

Why does TDA feel the need to build some Potter swatters out there in good old CA??? But, WDW doesn't... Even though IOA/Uni has cut into WDW's business, even though IOA's attendance has skyrocketed while WDW's hasn't barely moved... Ohh, WDI has Potter swatters at the ready for WDW, but, well, we know how TDO works...

Carsland is an example of what WDI is capable of doing when management lets them do their work instead of meddling... Though, WDI has their own issues with costs... Oh, and please, someone, please show me where people are bashing Carsland... I have yet to read anything bad about it... I'd be interested in reading so though...

AgentC, you say Universal didn't create their own world, they created JK's world.. True.. And what a world she created (not perfect, but WOW)... Let me ask you, people want a Star Wars land right??? Whose property would that be based off of??? Surely not Disney's since they don't own nor did they create Star Wars... If they ever did a Star Wars land, they would have to recreate George Lucas' vision, not their own... I have no doubt it would be great, but let's not mistake here that Disney would be creating their own world... They won't...

BTW, JK wanted Potter in Disney... She went to Disney... Disney all but had the rights wrapped up... UNTIL, they refused to build HER WORLD... They wanted one little attraction tucked away in one of their theme parks... She wanted her world to be brought to life.. She also wanted control over her own property (don't blame her, I'd want control over what I created too)... Disney, nah, they wanted no part of that... I remember vividly that Universal execs all but conceded Potter to Disney while they looked toward Lord of the Rings... In fact, one of their upper managers was on record saying Disney beat them on Potter... Then, a week later, BAM Universal had it...

We are slowly seeing the same thing with Avatar... What was supposed to be a huge beautiful land could possibly be getting gutted to 1 clone attraction, a restaurant, and a gift shop.. And if that is what happens, FAIL... I pray that guy who told me this is wrong... I pray daily he is wrong... Only time will tell... But, here is a chance to bring something innovative to WDW, bring back that WOW factor that has been lacking in recent years, and show WDW fans what WDI is fully capable of... And, management may once again be messing with things...

Ohh, and yea... unless it is a DVC project, WDW has NOTHING in the can after new Fantasyland... (other than maybe Avatar)..

So, is there any wonder why WDW fans are jaded today??? Any wonder why you are seeing more and more negativity??? Sit back and think and you'll have your answers...

[Polynesian Dweller]

One of the things not mentioned in the article, or at least I didn't see it, is the Disney's bankers have been unhappy with the level of loan debt they are reaching due to FLE, Carsland, building ships etc. Businesses do these large projects via lender loans not with their own capital which needs to be kept around for a lot of reasons.The banks are pushing which makes large investors concerned but it starts with lenders.

Thus they have to get debt loan down to sustainable levels but that doesn't mean they will stop altogether. What is of concern is that they pay attention to the competition and produce high quality attractions and maintain what they have. We'll have to see if they have the will to do that.

[ChipNDale79]

Ohh, and yea... unless it is a DVC project, WDW has NOTHING in the can after new Fantasyland... (other than maybe Avatar)..

Sure they do, the great FastPass + system, where we are going to be scheduling our bathroom breaks in advance soon.:mickey:

[AgentC]

AgentC, you say Universal didn't create their own world, they created JK's world.. True.. And what a world she created (not perfect, but WOW)... Let me ask you, people want a Star Wars land right??? Whose property would that be based off of??? Surely not Disney's since they don't own nor did they create Star Wars... If they ever did a Star Wars land, they would have to recreate George Lucas' vision, not their own... I have no doubt it would be great, but let's not mistake here that Disney would be creating their own world... They won't...

BTW, JK wanted Potter in Disney... She went to Disney... Disney all but had the rights wrapped up... UNTIL, they refused to build HER WORLD... They wanted one little attraction tucked away in one of their theme parks... She wanted her world to be brought to life.. She also wanted control over her own property (don't blame her, I'd want control over what I created too)... Disney, nah, they wanted no part of that... I remember vividly that Universal execs all but conceded Potter to Disney while they looked toward Lord of the Rings... In fact, one of their upper managers was on record saying Disney beat them on Potter... Then, a week later, BAM Universal had it...

.


I think I conceded that didn't I? Maybe just not very well. :)


I agree that Universal has done a wonderful job with TWWoHP and that someone there was very smart to get the rights to the attractions. And they are very smart to keep pursing Potter themed lands.

Yes, the Universal executives made the right decision doing what JK wanted and Disney should have (or at least in my opinion should have.)

And I would be fine with Disney creating someone else's world or creating their own world. Just sometimes people take JK out of the equation on TWWoHP.She is a writer who I immensely respect and a very important part of TWWoHP, so I wanted to give credit where credit was due. :)

[Ian]

Well, honestly, what do you expect? They just spent $6 BILLION in five years in the U.S. $6 BILLION. That kind of spending cannot continue indefinitely. That's how companies go bankrupt. There has to be a balance of spending and return of investment.I agree with Nat on this. Did anyone really think they'd plow another $6b into the parks after this burst of development? Come on ... they can't keep spending at this rate. They have to have some down time to reap the benefits of the money they've invested in the parks.

We can endlessly debate whether they will or not, but that's the way they're approaching at and at least from a pure business standpoint it's the correct approach.


Seeing them raise the bar should make you feel confident that the Disney parks will not settle for their parks becoming "stale." Eh ... I don't agree here. DL and WDW are worlds apart (no pun intended) in terms of their approach to spending and guest sat. I don't think you can take what does/does not happen in DL and translate it over to WDW. It's a totally different leadership team with very different priorities.

[BrerGnat]

Eh ... I don't agree here. DL and WDW are worlds apart (no pun intended) in terms of their approach to spending and guest sat. I don't think you can take what does/does not happen in DL and translate it over to WDW. It's a totally different leadership team with very different priorities.

Fair enough. Perhaps TDO will take a page out of the book that Glendale is working from, and stop with the "Interactive this and that" garbage and actually develop something worthy of financial investment.

[Jared]

[QUOTE=Ian;2275340]I agree with Nat on this. Did anyone really think they'd plow another $6b into the parks after this burst of development? Come on ... they can't keep spending at this rate. They have to have some down time to reap the benefits of the money they've invested in the parks.

We can endlessly debate whether they will or not, but that's the way they're approaching at and at least from a pure business standpoint it's the correct approach.
I generally agree with you here, Ian. I don't think we cannot expect Disney to spend the sort of money they spent at California Adventure anywhere else, at least for the foreseeable future. Anybody who thinks otherwise is fooling himself.

But I can ignore the fact that Hollywood Studios desperately needs a DCA-style makeover. Or that Animal Kingdom needs to be finished. Or that Epcot's Future World is a freaking train wreck. I can ignore all of that if Disney would just keep what they have working. I don't consider that unnecessary or "extra" expenditures. That's the cost of doing business. Whatever capital Walt Disney World has to spend at this point should go toward making sure that 99.9% of guests who float through Splash Mountain see it at an appropriate show quality. That goes for every attraction in the park.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Sure they do, the great FastPass + system, where we are going to be scheduling our bathroom breaks in advance soon.:mickey:

Ohhh you... I'm going to have to preface each post with BE PREPARED TO BOOK YOUR BATHROOM BREAKS 180 DAYS OUT... LoL...

[DizneyFreak2002]

Sure they do, the great FastPass + system, where we are going to be scheduling our bathroom breaks in advance soon.:mickey:


I think I conceded that didn't I? Maybe just not very well. :)



Yes, the Universal executives made the right decision doing what JK wanted and Disney should have (or at least in my opinion should have.)

And I would be fine with Disney creating someone else's world or creating their own world. Just sometimes people take JK out of the equation on TWWoHP.She is a writer who I immensely respect and a very important part of TWWoHP, so I wanted to give credit where credit was due. :)

Maybe I missed ya saying that... And you are right, they do take JK out of the equation... I try to give Universal credit for building HER world... I sometimes fail at that...

So, yea, i agree with you.. JK does deserve the credit...

[Ian]

But I can't ignore the fact that Hollywood Studios desperately needs a DCA-style makeover. Or that Animal Kingdom needs to be finished. Or that Epcot's Future World is a freaking train wreck. I can ignore all of that if Disney would just keep what they have working. I don't consider that unnecessary or "extra" expenditures. That's the cost of doing business. Whatever capital Walt Disney World has to spend at this point should go toward making sure that 99.9% of guests who float through Splash Mountain see it at an appropriate show quality. That goes for every attraction in the park.I agree, but TDO does not. And you know why as well as I do ... because people keep showin' up and they keep forkin' over the big bucks to do so.

They may ramp up spending again and try and address some of those issues you mentioned, but they'll spread the costs out over a long period of time so it's not unpalatable to the Wall Street types.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I agree with Nat on this. Did anyone really think they'd plow another $6b into the parks after this burst of development? Come on ... they can't keep spending at this rate. They have to have some down time to reap the benefits of the money they've invested in the parks.

We can endlessly debate whether they will or not, but that's the way they're approaching at and at least from a pure business standpoint it's the correct approach.

Eh ... I don't agree here. DL and WDW are worlds apart (no pun intended) in terms of their approach to spending and guest sat. I don't think you can take what does/does not happen in DL and translate it over to WDW. It's a totally different leadership team with very different priorities.

Honestly Ian, I don't think anyone here is expecting 6 billion to be dumped yearly... The 6 billion HAD to be spent to fix the mess that DCA was from the start...

The issue really should be HOW they are spending it, and HOW they are going to spread out what they spend... Again, DL has two huge E-tickets getting green light and a 3rd huge project (a rumored 3rd gate) darn near close... So, say they spend 1 billion or even 1 and a half billion, how much is going to be allocated to WDW for expansion/growth?? Nothing... DL is getting the wonderful toys... WDW??? more DVC.. Which further proves how they view WDW... As a real estate investment... The theme parks??? A necessary evil they can continue to dumb down because people drool over peanuts imbedded into the walkway...

[DizneyFreak2002]

Fair enough. Perhaps TDO will take a page out of the book that Glendale is working from, and stop with the "Interactive this and that" garbage and actually develop something worthy of financial investment.

No.. TDO will never take a page out of the playbook in Glendale unless Glendale drops the hammer on them, like they did with Fantasyland and Star Tours... TDO's funding is going all to NextGen (data mining is all this NextGen is) and the interactive queue garbage... THAT is how their money is being spent.. Oh and more DVC... The only way TDO will change is by cleaning house...

THIS is why WDW fans are becoming jaded, and ARE jaded... Has nothing to do with negativity... Has everything to do with poor poor management... And Walmarting (some people even say toddler-a-zation of WDW, I'll stick with Walmarting) over the last 10 years...

[Aurora]

Shhhhhh can't tell this to WDW fans... They won't believe you... Wait, you quoted an article?? Got to be proof Rasulo said that, right??? I mentioned this last week as I have a Tweet from Jason Garcia himself saying Rasulo said this and was told there was NO WAY Rasulo would ever say something like that...

WDW is now the real estate arm of the company... If it isn't a DVC project, then it is nothing... And forget Avatar... Budget has already been cut and the scope of the project has been watered down... Meanwhile, down the street in Universal, major things are being fast tracked... MAJOR THINGS...

Rest on your laurels WDW... you'll soon find out you are WAY behind the game and can not catch up....

Nit-picking a little here, but what you actually said was:

"Jason Garcia has mentioned that Jay Rasulo is on record saying after FLE, NO MORE MONEY SPENT ON U.S. theme parks... I did confirm that with him via twitter.. Jason Garcia writes for the Orlando Sentinal and was in a conference with Rasulo when Rasulo uttered those words..."

And in the article it stated Rasulo said "We should be coming down substantially — substantially — in domestic spending." The rest of the article guesses it will spend $1 to $1.5 billion in domestic parks in 2014.

And at end of article, another analyst says "I don't think there is any messaging from above, from Bob Iger or Jay Rasulo, that somehow the parks need to hold back on spending," he said.

I'm surely not tearing my clothing and putting on sackcloth.

[joonyer]

What's the biggest difference between Universal/IOA and Walt Disney World?

Land. Universal has very little land surrounding its theme parks in Orlando. WDW already owns tens of thousands of acres in undeveloped land surrounding 4 of the most famous (their current condition notwithstanding) theme parks in the world.

If Universal wants to increase revenue/profits in Orlando, its best option is to add new attractions, and make their parks more popular.

But the most cost effective option for Disney to increase revenue/profits at WDW is to sell land. Since they don't want to actually part with title to the land, thus avoiding the tacky development of the property by third parties (a la DisneyLand), they are renting it instead. Thus the proliferation of DVC properties. Expect more of the same in the future. It's easy and makes huge profit margins compared to investing in really expensive new attractions.

On the other hand, What does DisneyLand and California Adventure have in common with Universal Orlando. You guessed it; very little land surrounding the parks. Disney has no other choice but to invest in the parks themselves if they want to increase revenue there.

I don't know if it was exactly what Walt foresaw when he chose to buy so much land in Florida, (I know he wanted to avoid tacky cheesy over-development across the street from the parks), but the current management certainly sees gold in that there swamp!

[Jared]

I agree, but TDO does not. And you know why as well as I do ... because people keep showin' up and they keep forkin' over the big bucks to do so.

They may ramp up spending again and try and address some of those issues you mentioned, but they'll spread the costs out over a long period of time so it's not unpalatable to the Wall Street types.
You're right, Ian, but wouldn't you agree this is a shortsighted approach? Eventually, people will take notice. It started with the crazy diehard fans, then the relatively normal repeat visitor. Eventually, if this keeps going the way it's going, there will be a time when even Mortimer M. Mouse, first-time visitor from Estonia, is disappointed by the offerings.

I still say that maintenance and upkeep are the cost of doing business. Whether the Walt Disney Company wants to be in the theme-park business (in Florida anyway) is up for debate.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Nit-picking a little here, but what you actually said was:

"Jason Garcia has mentioned that Jay Rasulo is on record saying after FLE, NO MORE MONEY SPENT ON U.S. theme parks... I did confirm that with him via twitter.. Jason Garcia writes for the Orlando Sentinal and was in a conference with Rasulo when Rasulo uttered those words..."

And in the article it stated Rasulo said "We should be coming down substantially — substantially — in domestic spending." The rest of the article guesses it will spend $1 to $1.5 billion in domestic parks in 2014.

And at end of article, another analyst says "I don't think there is any messaging from above, from Bob Iger or Jay Rasulo, that somehow the parks need to hold back on spending," he said.

I'm surely not tearing my clothing and putting on sackcloth.

Semantics... You know and anyone with common sense would know they HAVE TO spend money to operate the parks... The NO MORE MONEY is for anything new and any expansions, thus, keeping WDW stale and stagnant.. I thought that would go without saying...

[Ian]

You're right, Ian, but wouldn't you agree this is a shortsighted approach?I believe it is, yes. But then again I don't have an MBA. I think I have decent business sense, but maybe these guys know more than I do. I've never run a theme park. I've never run a hotel. I seriously don't know if I'm right or wrong.

Maybe their plan is to tightrope walk the line between just good enough and just bad enough so they can milk every dime of profit they can out of the place without getting to the point where people stop coming.

It's not the way I'd run the parks and I think out in Tokyo OLC has proven that doing it the right way still works, but then again I don't know if OLC is publicly held and has to answer to shareholders.

[Aurora]

Semantics... You know and anyone with common sense would know they HAVE TO spend money to operate the parks... The NO MORE MONEY is for anything new and any expansions, thus, keeping WDW stale and stagnant.. I thought that would go without saying...

Possibly true, but I'm still not wringing my hands; the reason is that the whole thing didn't sound much like a long-term plan, but a reaction to the amount of spending they HAVE done in the last few years. And whatever the Avatar expansion turns out to be (which at this point is anyone's guess), it's still something.


Maybe their plan is to tightrope walk the line between just good enough and just bad enough so they can milk every dime of profit they can out of the place without getting to the point where people stop coming.

I have to admit, I think this is their plan, because the parks have been the company's profit fall-back for several years.

There are many people on these boards who would say they shouldn't be spending any more money on expansion anyway, and would point to the Yeti as the company's ultimate symbol of neglect and need to spend money on maintenance.

In any case, the crowds still keep coming. And I'm planning our next trip.

[waymickey]

Nothing... DL is getting the wonderful toys... WDW??? more DVC.. Which further proves how they view WDW... As a real estate investment... The theme parks??? A necessary evil they can continue to dumb down because people drool over peanuts imbedded into the walkway...

:D peanuts and giant footprints.


What's the biggest difference between Universal/IOA and Walt Disney World?

Land. Universal has very little land surrounding its theme parks in Orlando. WDW already owns tens of thousands of acres in undeveloped land surrounding 4 of the most famous (their current condition notwithstanding) theme parks in the world.

If Universal wants to increase revenue/profits in Orlando, its best option is to add new attractions, and make their parks more popular.

But the most cost effective option for Disney to increase revenue/profits at WDW is to sell land. Since they don't want to actually part with title to the land, thus avoiding the tacky development of the property by third parties (a la DisneyLand), they are renting it instead. Thus the proliferation of DVC properties. Expect more of the same in the future. It's easy and makes huge profit margins compared to investing in really expensive new attractions.

On the other hand, What does DisneyLand and California Adventure have in common with Universal Orlando. You guessed it; very little land surrounding the parks. Disney has no other choice but to invest in the parks themselves if they want to increase revenue there.

I don't know if it was exactly what Walt foresaw when he chose to buy so much land in Florida, (I know he wanted to avoid tacky cheesy over-development across the street from the parks), but the current management certainly sees gold in that there swamp!

I think this is the bottom line. DVC makes money and you can not go very far in any park or resort without seeing their Kiosk asking you to buy.

I am a Disney fanatic however the past three trips left me a bit sad. I am not interested in Universal so my money will be probably spent on a Disney Cruise. No fastpasses/ x-passes, no long lines, no DVC Kiosk asking me to buy, but still Disney.

[joonyer]

. . . . I am a Disney fanatic however the past three trips left me a bit sad. I am not interested in Universal so my money will be probably spent on a Disney Cruise. No fastpasses/ x-passes, no long lines, no DVC Kiosk asking me to buy, but still Disney.

Actually, I think they DID have a DVC kiosk on the last cruise I went on. ;)

[Ian]

Actually, I think they DID have a DVC kiosk on the last cruise I went on. ;)Confirmed ... they definitely have DVC kiosks on the cruises!

[waymickey]

Confirmed ... they definitely have DVC kiosks on the cruises!

:confused: well glad I missed it then. Seems every time I walk past one in the parks i get a sales pitch. Kinda like when you see the kiosks in the mall and they want to put some miracle cream on your hands and you can't find a a place to hide so you walk by as fast as you can looking the other way... That is how I feel when I see them in the parks.

[Dixie Springs]

The Disney Cruise is a nice 'break' from WDW, while still enjoying the quality & magic that brought us to WDW in the first place. Yes, the DVC kiosks lurk, just don't make eye contact. Waiting for the DVC kiosks in TDS.:ack:

[Ian]

:confused: well glad I missed it then. Seems every time I walk past one in the parks i get a sales pitch. Kinda like when you see the kiosks in the mall and they want to put some miracle cream on your hands and you can't find a a place to hide so you walk by as fast as you can looking the other way... That is how I feel when I see them in the parks.Just tell them you already own. They don't handle add-ons (your guide does), so as soon as you say you already own they completely ignore you. ;)

[Jared]

Weird. I've never been accosted by an overly aggressive DVC salesman. Either I'm lucky or really good at ignoring them.

[Buttercup]

What's the biggest difference between Universal/IOA and Walt Disney World?

Land. Universal has very little land surrounding its theme parks in Orlando. WDW already owns tens of thousands of acres in undeveloped land surrounding 4 of the most famous (their current condition notwithstanding) theme parks in the world.

If Universal wants to increase revenue/profits in Orlando, its best option is to add new attractions, and make their parks more popular.

But the most cost effective option for Disney to increase revenue/profits at WDW is to sell land. Since they don't want to actually part with title to the land, thus avoiding the tacky development of the property by third parties (a la DisneyLand), they are renting it instead. Thus the proliferation of DVC properties. Expect more of the same in the future. It's easy and makes huge profit margins compared to investing in really expensive new attractions.

On the other hand, What does DisneyLand and California Adventure have in common with Universal Orlando. You guessed it; very little land surrounding the parks. Disney has no other choice but to invest in the parks themselves if they want to increase revenue there.

I don't know if it was exactly what Walt foresaw when he chose to buy so much land in Florida, (I know he wanted to avoid tacky cheesy over-development across the street from the parks), but the current management certainly sees gold in that there swamp!
:thumbsup::ditto:
All these billions we want Disney to spend on the parks has to come from somewhere. If DVC rakes some of that in, then I say go ahead and develop DVC resorts. Just as long as that's not the ONLY thing they develop.
I'm of the mindset that sometimes California is going to get all the new toys, and sometimes Florida is. Sure, you can argue that all of the new Fantasyland expansion in Florida isn't bringing us any huge thrill rides, but that doesn't mean it's a waste. I'm looking forward to the theming and ambience they're creating. That's something Disney does REALLY well, unlike most other parks. I'd say that's worth the money they're spending on it. I agree that DHS and Future World could use a big facelift as well, but it can't all happen at once. Gotta sell some more DVC memberships to save up for those big refurbs! :D

[BrerGnat]

Weird. I've never been accosted by an overly aggressive DVC salesman. Either I'm lucky or really good at ignoring them.

Me neither! They always just approach us to ask if our kids want some stickers. That's IT! We always take the stickers, thank them, and keep walking. They never even TRY to lure us otherwise.

[sportsguy2315]

During my CP, I only talked to one DVC person...and that was because he was from a town an hour away from where I grew up. No pitch, just talking about home.

[DizneyFreak2002]

The people at the DVC carts are not aggressive... The only time they ever talk to you is if you approach their kiosk and start skimming the booklet they have out... And even then its usually "Hi, my name is Soupy Sales. If you have any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer them." They they pretty much try to look busy... And the only time I ever seen them talking to people who aren't by the kiosk is when they say hello to passersby or maybe wave at a little kid, as Disney employees tend to do...

[Quadstriker]

I've never seen a DVC associate be anything but friendly, polite, and helpful.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I've never seen a DVC associate be anything but friendly, polite, and helpful.

That is exactly what they are... And as Nat said, maybe they chat it up with your kid, give them stickers, and all that "magical" jazz... But harping on you go listen to them??? Nah, they aren't that...

[March Hare]

:thumbsup::ditto:
All these billions we want Disney to spend on the parks has to come from somewhere. If DVC rakes some of that in, then I say go ahead and develop DVC resorts. Just as long as that's not the ONLY thing they develop.
I'm of the mindset that sometimes California is going to get all the new toys, and sometimes Florida is. Sure, you can argue that all of the new Fantasyland expansion in Florida isn't bringing us any huge thrill rides, but that doesn't mean it's a waste. I'm looking forward to the theming and ambience they're creating. That's something Disney does REALLY well, unlike most other parks. I'd say that's worth the money they're spending on it. I agree that DHS and Future World could use a big facelift as well, but it can't all happen at once. Gotta sell some more DVC memberships to save up for those big refurbs! :D

I agree they need to sell DVC memberships but soon supply is going to be larger that demand and at that point they will have to depend on park profit so the upkeep is just as important. They go hand in hand if they parks go down hill then they will have more trouble selling memberships. Would many people buy a DVC membership if it was sold buy Six Flags probably not it is just a amusement park not a destination like WDW. I will say it again I am not saying they have to spend $6 billion just enough to make sure the parks don't go down hill. They just need to slow down on building the DVC properties and use that money to repair what needs to be repaired and make sure that they are not looking run down.

[Ian]

I agree they need to sell DVC memberships but soon supply is going to be larger tha demand .... That's my fear with DVC. They're going to over-build. The other thing that concerns me is that they've become so reliant on that income stream that if it dries up what will they do then?? I can't even imagine the budget cuts that would follow a collapse of the DVC revenue stream!

[DizneyRox]

Isn't that the beauty of DVC? All they need to do is sell it, Members take care of the rest. Disney would never just buy back a contract out of the goodness of their hearts, the only way they would get it back is through a foreclosure, and they can somewhat control that if they really wanted to.

The initial build is covered by the purchase pric, and upkeep is paid for through dues. If non-members top staying in themI assume they can just raise the dues.

The only real way out of the contract is just just let it lapse in 2042 (or whenever your contract expires).

[WRWDisney]

While Disney will never lose to Universal they take too long on a lot of their popular movies. Cars was a huge success in 1995. It is 2012....

Hate to be picky, but your are 11 years early. Cars was released in the US in June of 2006. Cars 2, five years later. Cars Land, a year after that (or only 6 years after the first film was released) (just a couple of weeks after the Disney acquisition of Pixar was completed).

Hate to nit-pick but Toy Story, the very first Pixar feature came out in 1995, Cars was the 7th.

[Ian]

Isn't that the beauty of DVC? All they need to do is sell it, Members take care of the rest. Disney would never just buy back a contract out of the goodness of their hearts, the only way they would get it back is through a foreclosure, and they can somewhat control that if they really wanted to.

The initial build is covered by the purchase pric, and upkeep is paid for through dues. If non-members top staying in themI assume they can just raise the dues.

The only real way out of the contract is just just let it lapse in 2042 (or whenever your contract expires).True ... I guess there really is very little risk to Disney with DVC. They already got their money and yeah the owners pay for the rest.

[Quadstriker]

The only real way out of the contract is just just let it lapse in 2042 (or whenever your contract expires).

There's a resale market too.

[DizneyRox]

There's a resale market too.
Yes, but someone else is then assuming the upkeep of the resorts. It is very hard to get Disney themselves to take back that responsibility. As mentioned, it would have to be through foreclosure, etc, even then they will just sell those points back out.

A good gauge is the likelyhood of Disney pulling out the ROFR in resales. I haven't heard anyone post that they DID NOT make it through that, and there are some incredibly prices resales. Even the limited booking ability of resale points hasn't seemed to impact the resale market. Disney DOES NOT want to hold DVC points, and as much as they want you to beleive that they are running gangbusters and there's a limited time left to own [insert your favorite DVC resort here]. The truth is the recent DVC properties have taken much longer to sell out than they led on (at least during the sales pitches).

[Ian]

A good gauge is the likelyhood of Disney pulling out the ROFR in resales.If you think about it, it doesn't make very much sense for Disney to exercise ROFR when they have inventory to sell of their own.

Our guide told us they typically only exercise ROFR on some of the older, more desirable properties (like BCV, BWV, etc.) so they can maintain a small inventory of those points to sell when buyers aren't interested in any of the newer properties.

[Disney Hungarian]

That's my fear with DVC. They're going to over-build. The other thing that concerns me is that they've become so reliant on that income stream that if it dries up what will they do then?? I can't even imagine the budget cuts that would follow a collapse of the DVC revenue stream!
It is like watching a train wreck. I don't want to see what happens, but can't look away. Disneyland was profitable, so they went to build WDW. WDW did fine with the MK. Profits were good. Disney passes and Epcot is built, without the foresight that Disney had. Major plan changes happened. MGM opened. AK opened. Now you just have to look at the business differences between DL and WDW to see the problem. DL does not have the major infrastructure expenses that WDW has. WDW has its own water system, road system, and transportation system. Not to mention all of the landscaping of all of the developed areas, ME and their own fire depts. DL has a fraction of these costs. To put it in a somewhat odd perspective. WDW has the 7th largest navy in the world. Ticket prices are not that much different between DL and WDW, and WDW has make the money to pay for all of this somehow. The hotels help, DVC has been a cash cow for WDW. I'm afraid to look when that goes off the tracks, but can't turn away.

[ChipNDale79]

It is like watching a train wreck. I don't want to see what happens, but can't look away. Disneyland was profitable, so they went to build WDW. WDW did fine with the MK. Profits were good. Disney passes and Epcot is built, without the foresight that Disney had. Major plan changes happened. MGM opened. AK opened. Now you just have to look at the business differences between DL and WDW to see the problem. DL does not have the major infrastructure expenses that WDW has. WDW has its own water system, road system, and transportation system. Not to mention all of the landscaping of all of the developed areas, ME and their own fire depts. DL has a fraction of these costs. To put it in a somewhat odd perspective. WDW has the 7th largest navy in the world. Ticket prices are not that much different between DL and WDW, and WDW has make the money to pay for all of this somehow. The hotels help, DVC has been a cash cow for WDW. I'm afraid to look when that goes off the tracks, but can't turn away.

The hotels help a lot, WDW charges 2 or 3 times what offsite hotels pay and people choose to stay on property. These hotels help pay for a large portion of the things you mentioned. There's a lot more things to spend your money on at WDW than there are at DLR, I have no idea, but I would be the profit margin at both resorts are nearly the same.

[DizneyRox]

If you think about it, it doesn't make very much sense for Disney to exercise ROFR when they have inventory to sell of their own.

Exactly why I tell people to lowball DVC resales. Disney most likely isn't going to use it unless it's extreme and they figure they can unload it quickly enough to make a decent property. In reality, the difference between $46 and $45 a point on a 100 point contract is... you guess it, $100. $5 a point is 'only' $500.

If I really needed to sell my contract, I probably wouldn't let $500 stand in my way. From a seller perspective, I don't care if the actual buyer buys it or Disney does. Either way, I sold it. And from a buyer perpective, well, there's a ton of properties out there, Disney won't buy them all!

ROFR is just a tool to scare folks. It means nothing...

I'm sure someone at Disney just had a heartattack reading that! It's true though...

[Ian]

The hotels help a lot, WDW charges 2 or 3 times what offsite hotels pay and people choose to stay on property. These hotels help pay for a large portion of the things you mentioned. There's a lot more things to spend your money on at WDW than there are at DLR, I have no idea, but I would be the profit margin at both resorts are nearly the same.Actually the margin on hotels is terrible. That's why they love DVC ... puts heads in beds, but all the overhead is shouldered by the owners. It's actually genius from a business standpoint.

The hotels are only there so they can sell you overpriced food and merchandise. They make a bit off of them, but they are certainly not the biggest money-maker for WDW.

They make the big money on the food and goodies. The mark-up on their food is insane and ditto the merch. They sell you t-shirts ... t-shirts ... for like $45.

Sounds kinda like Ralph Lauren lol ;)

[March Hare]

Isn't that the beauty of DVC? All they need to do is sell it, Members take care of the rest. Disney would never just buy back a contract out of the goodness of their hearts, the only way they would get it back is through a foreclosure, and they can somewhat control that if they really wanted to.

The initial build is covered by the purchase pric, and upkeep is paid for through dues. If non-members top staying in themI assume they can just raise the dues.

The only real way out of the contract is just just let it lapse in 2042 (or whenever your contract expires).

I agree that the DVC properties that have been sold will be a constant cash flow but with every DVC they build they seem to sell them slower and less then they expect. So they run the risk of over building which would mean they would have to pay for the upkeep and that would take more money away from the parks. The resale could become another problem because of the fact that they do sell for so much less than Disney.

[DizneyFreak2002]

I agree that the DVC properties that have been sold will be a constant cash flow but with every DVC they build they seem to sell them slower and less then they expect. So they run the risk of over building which would mean they would have to pay for the upkeep and that would take more money away from the parks. The resale could become another problem because of the fact that they do sell for so much less than Disney.

I really think we are reaching over saturation... If the plans come to realization, then that means Grand Floridian (which is already in the middle of construction), Polynesian, and maybe 2 new hotels (on the site where the originally planned Venetian hotel was to be built and still possibly at Fort Wilderness, those plans aren't cancelled yet just delayed until other projects are done first)... And then, there is that rumor of a DVC attached to World Showcase (which I hate the idea and hope the talk is just that talk)... I don't want to leave out another tower at the Contemporary, but I really haven't heard much talk about that... Seems more like a blimp on the screen than something in the pipeline...

[PharmD]

The article does mention substantial reduction in spending but come one we are talking about 1 billion dollars. That's alot of dough. And if my memory serves me correct that's the most money spent in a 5 year period for Disney that I can remember. And all of that during a time that the economy has been <snip>. While I will admit that my last trip we did notice some slippage in the quality of the Disney experience, some minor cosmetic things in the room, Disney by far is light years ahead of Universal. I mean come on the quality and "atmosphere" at Universal can't even come close. The quality at Universal is way behind Disney and unless something catastrophic occurs I can't ever see anybody passing Disney. And in my book there is no better value than a Disney trip.

[Jared]

I really think we are reaching over saturation... If the plans come to realization, then that means Grand Floridian (which is already in the middle of construction), Polynesian, and maybe 2 new hotels (on the site where the originally planned Venetian hotel was to be built and still possibly at Fort Wilderness, those plans aren't cancelled yet just delayed until other projects are done first)... And then, there is that rumor of a DVC attached to World Showcase (which I hate the idea and hope the talk is just that talk)... I don't want to leave out another tower at the Contemporary, but I really haven't heard much talk about that... Seems more like a blimp on the screen than something in the pipeline...
That said, we still haven't reached the breaking point for DVC. A friend of mine, for instance, tried to book a room using her points to attend the Intercot 15th anniversary party in October. Everything was sold out pretty much everywhere, outside of a few undesirable rooms at Saratoga Springs.

Just saying.

[Mrs Bus Driver]

Well, honestly, what do you expect? They just spent $6 BILLION in five years in the U.S. $6 BILLION. That kind of spending cannot continue indefinitely. That's how companies go bankrupt. There has to be a balance of spending and return of investment.

None of us here can even fathom that kind of money, so who are we to moan and groan that this spells the end of Disney? That's ridiculous.

Look at your OWN household spending. I don't know about you, but if I have a month where I spend a gross amount over and above what is "normal", I cut back for a few months after that to bring everything back into balance. Companies have to do the same thing.

And, honestly, I don't understand any of the anger here. DIsneyland just completed a massive overhaul of DCA, and spent quite a bit of money at Disneyland park as well refurbishing and retooling Main Street and the Matterhorn. That park has finally gotten the attention it was lacking for a LONG time. For years and years, WDW got all the attention and it only makes sense that they want to build up the West coast parks to be more of a vacation destination. It stands to reason that WDW will have its turn with "improvements" in the coming years. They are already spending a fortune at MK, and I have no doubt that the final product will be worth the time and money spent.

And, as much as I agree that Universal is making a huge push to be competitive, I really don't think, in the long run, that they will outdo DIsney. They never have yet. The kind of money that they are spending to make improvements in the parks cannot be maintained. Universal has a history of opening attractions and then just letting them turn stale. They use movies for their rides that don't have "staying power" and the attractions become irrelevant rather quickly (in terms of theme park ride shelf life). I mean, come on. Look at how many rides have been "rethemed" at Universal over the years, yet the actual experiences don't change too much. Despicable Me is going to be IRRELEVANT 5 years from now, same as Jimmy Neutron. Shrek is kinda out, ditto Twister, Waterworld, Men In Black, etc. Universal doesn't even only use its own movie properties. Most of the rides are based on movie licenses obtained by Universal. Universal can make claims that they have "all new" this or that, but really, it's just replacing one movie franchise with another when they realize NO ONE wants to ride something based on a movie/show that NO ONE has heard of or cares about. Even the Harry Potter land was a RE THEME of an area at IoA that was a failure.

You can be as critical of DIsney as you want. On the other hand, when one tries to make claims that because Universal has done ONE thing right in it's park history by choosing a popular franchise with staying power and built a land to house it, and that makes them SUPERIOR in the long run, well, that's just short sighted.

DIsney will be fine. Universal will (probably) do well enough in the future to stay competitive. But, the truth is, DIsney doesn't HAVE to try as hard as Universal because they simply have a superior product and always have.

Disney is not always right. They make a LOT of stupid decisions. However, sometimes, they do hit the nail on the head and pull something brilliant out of their hats. Carsland is going to be popular for a LONG LONG time. That movie is already 6 years old and kids are STILL going crazy for it. Cars merchandise sales ALONE have made over $8 BILLION for Disney. That's what you call a winner. :thumbsup:

Sounds like a lot of hating on Disney for what they are doing in CA. Why not replace the badmouting with a trip over there to see what it's all about? You might come away with a bit more appreciation with what Disney has done.

You said it better then I could. Disney isn't perfect but they finally fixed DCA and those guys in the front office want to keep their jobs so yeah they have to keep the investors happy. I know that I will eventually make a trip to CA and so will a lot of others. Win/win for Disney. And if you want them keeping up maintenance on the rides we all love so much (Splash Mountain comes to mind) then they are going to quit spending so freely else where. Okay my :twocents: now I will get down off my :soapbox:

[Mrs Bus Driver]

Actually the margin on hotels is terrible. That's why they love DVC ... puts heads in beds, but all the overhead is shouldered by the owners. It's actually genius from a business standpoint.

The hotels are only there so they can sell you overpriced food and merchandise. They make a bit off of them, but they are certainly not the biggest money-maker for WDW.

They make the big money on the food and goodies. The mark-up on their food is insane and ditto the merch. They sell you t-shirts ... t-shirts ... for like $45.

Sounds kinda like Ralph Lauren lol ;)

I expect high prices when I go to a resort. Yes that is the way they make money. Have you been to a movie lately. $4.50 for a box of .89 cent candy (and you know the stores are making a profit) and don't get me started on the cost of popcorn. All I'm saying is if you want to cut costs on a vacation bring your own food otherwise be prepared to pay. Yes they are a business and they are in business to make money. IF it costs too much or people are bored with it profits will go down and Disney will deal with it or go broke. Just my :twocents: :mickey:

[DizneyFreak2002]

That said, we still haven't reached the breaking point for DVC. A friend of mine, for instance, tried to book a room using her points to attend the Intercot 15th anniversary party in October. Everything was sold out pretty much everywhere, outside of a few undesirable rooms at Saratoga Springs.

Just saying.

Yep... just like we haven't reached the breaking point on the price of theme park tickets, but that day is coming too...

I think, the reason they put Fort Wilderness on the back burner is because they know Poly will be very popular and will sell well, and a DVC attached to the World Showcase would probably sell well too... A new resort is a little riskier...

You are right though, we aren't at that saturation point yet...

[DizneyFreak2002]

The article does mention substantial reduction in spending but come one we are talking about 1 billion dollars. That's alot of dough. And if my memory serves me correct that's the most money spent in a 5 year period for Disney that I can remember. And all of that during a time that the economy has been <snip>. While I will admit that my last trip we did notice some slippage in the quality of the Disney experience, some minor cosmetic things in the room, Disney by far is light years ahead of Universal. I mean come on the quality and "atmosphere" at Universal can't even come close. The quality at Universal is way behind Disney and unless something catastrophic occurs I can't ever see anybody passing Disney. And in my book there is no better value than a Disney trip.

I'll have to disagree... I used to bash Universal unmercifully... But they have for sure caught up to Disney and in some places surpassed them... And the next 5 years, Universal will be on more even footing with Disney... Just don't look at attendance, look at the big picture... Universal isn't the "six flags trash park" Disney fans think it is, or want it to be...

[Aurora]

I'll have to disagree... I used to bash Universal unmercifully... But they have for sure caught up to Disney and in some places surpassed them... And the next 5 years, Universal will be on more even footing with Disney... Just don't look at attendance, look at the big picture... Universal isn't the "six flags trash park" Disney fans think it is, or want it to be...

Totally agree with you here. Our first trip to Universal was in 2008 and we were pleasantly surprised by the rides, the atmosphere and the level of service. Went back last year especially for Harry Potter, stayed on site at the Royal Pacific, and again, loved everything. Not only that, but last year we felt the CMs at Universal surpassed those at Disney for friendliness and service.

We're now at a point where if we don't visit Universal at some point on our vacation, the kids will be disappointed. And that is at least one day (and a hotel night) we don't spend at Disney parks.

[Jared]

Totally agree with you here. Our first trip to Universal was in 2008 and we were pleasantly surprised by the rides, the atmosphere and the level of service. Went back last year especially for Harry Potter, stayed on site at the Royal Pacific, and again, loved everything. Not only that, but last year we felt the CMs at Universal surpassed those at Disney for friendliness and service.

We're now at a point where if we don't visit Universal at some point on our vacation, the kids will be disappointed. And that is at least one day (and a hotel night) we don't spend at Disney parks.
Absolutely. Objectively, there's no way you could look at Universal without concluding that it has caught up -- and in some ways surpassed -- what Disney offers in Florida. (This is not the case in California, and by all accounts, that will continue to be the case.)

Listen, I am a huge Disney loyalist. I don't really want to sacrifice a day at WDW for Universal. But there is too much good going on over there to be ignored.

That said, I may postpone my next visit until after Potter phase two is complete. Tickets there are expensive, especially since I already have the Disney annual pass. (I may not renew, however, as am I hoping to take a trip to Disneyland in 2013.)

[DizneyFreak2002]

Totally agree with you here. Our first trip to Universal was in 2008 and we were pleasantly surprised by the rides, the atmosphere and the level of service. Went back last year especially for Harry Potter, stayed on site at the Royal Pacific, and again, loved everything. Not only that, but last year we felt the CMs at Universal surpassed those at Disney for friendliness and service.

We're now at a point where if we don't visit Universal at some point on our vacation, the kids will be disappointed. And that is at least one day (and a hotel night) we don't spend at Disney parks.

And you are only one family taking one day out of your Disney trip... Imagine how many other families are doing the same, and maybe for 2 or 3 days?? And that is just for Universal... SeaWorld, LegoLand, Busch Gardens, even Kennedy Space Center pull people away for a day... I know people who take 2 days and head to the coastal beaches... Last year, Universal got 3 days from me... Sadly, SeaWorld didn't get any...

Universal is getting a massive make over... Comcast really truly believes in the parks... The money being reinvested will really make Universal a destination, especially once Potter expansion opens up... The two things they lack is a value and moderate hotel... At least one of those may be on the horizon though, with a rumored 4th onsite hotel and a water park which may be part of the hotel theme... Then say bye bye to Wet 'n' Wild...

I said it before, I'll say it again, Disney fans should want Universal to succeed... Universal's success is good for everybody...

[wdw_bound]

I'm going a little off track here.

I agree that Universal has done a wonderful job with TWWoHP and that someone there was very smart to get the rights to the attractions. And they are very smart to keep pursing Potter themed lands.

But the writer in me :D says that rather than the single most significant development in theme parks, JK Rowling created books that changed our cultural landscape in way that hadn't been done for a long time.

She got kids and parents reading and immersed in a world that was so real that people would show up at bookstores at midnight for the release of the newest edition. And the movies fanned the flames. There was and still is such an enormous in Potter, that Universal would have almost had to try to mess it up for it not to be a success.

Universal executed the ideas beautifully, but they executed JK Rowlings vision not Universal's vision. We wouldn't even by discussing in Universal is better than WDW if not for JK Rowling.

Okay soapbox away. :)

I absolutely agree with this! :thumbsup:

Our DD was old enough to read the first book just before #4 came out. We read Sorcerer's Stone together, and I quickly became hooked, as did DH. Not only did we pre-order the rest of the series as soon as possible (and then stalked the UPS guy mercilessly), we actually ordered 2 each time because we couldn't agree on who (me or DH) should get to read it first. DD was equally hooked. One of the joys of having had DS so much later is that we ALL get to experience the joy of the story all over again, as he is just now old enough to read #1.

Thank you, Ms. Rowling, for creating such a wonderful literary franchise!

[Mousemates]

..... While I will admit that my last trip we did notice some slippage in the quality of the Disney experience, some minor cosmetic things in the room, Disney by far is light years ahead of Universal. I mean come on the quality and "atmosphere" at Universal can't even come close. The quality at Universal is way behind Disney and unless something catastrophic occurs I can't ever see anybody passing Disney.

My first thought when I read your statement was "I wonder how long its been since they spent time at Universal." I will agree that it isn't there yet, but I will disagree with "can't even come close"...especially when they have one of the most flawlessly themed, visually stunning areas in any themepark...not to mention that its signature ride has no rival anywhere in WDW.

WDW is still an annual trip for us...and likely will be for the forseeable future...but universal has genuine appeal for us to and we will likely be taking a day or two there every couple of years...and if my adrenaline junkie son had his way, the # of trips there would increase, while visits to WDW would decrease.

[Ian]

I expect high prices when I go to a resort. Yes that is the way they make money. Have you been to a movie lately. $4.50 for a box of .89 cent candy (and you know the stores are making a profit) and don't get me started on the cost of popcorn. All I'm saying is if you want to cut costs on a vacation bring your own food otherwise be prepared to pay. Yes they are a business and they are in business to make money. IF it costs too much or people are bored with it profits will go down and Disney will deal with it or go broke. Just my :twocents: :mickey:I think you my have read my post without reading the post I quoted. The point had nothing to do with the price of snacks or t-shirts. It was a comment on the significant revenue streams for the parks when it comes to margin.

[Mrs Bus Driver]

I think you my have read my post without reading the post I quoted. The point had nothing to do with the price of snacks or t-shirts. It was a comment on the significant revenue streams for the parks when it comes to margin.
My apologies I went back and read your post. So sorry I miss read what you were saying:blush:.

[March Hare]

The article does mention substantial reduction in spending but come one we are talking about 1 billion dollars. That's alot of dough. And if my memory serves me correct that's the most money spent in a 5 year period for Disney that I can remember. And all of that during a time that the economy has been <snip>. While I will admit that my last trip we did notice some slippage in the quality of the Disney experience, some minor cosmetic things in the room, Disney by far is light years ahead of Universal. I mean come on the quality and "atmosphere" at Universal can't even come close. The quality at Universal is way behind Disney and unless something catastrophic occurs I can't ever see anybody passing Disney. And in my book there is no better value than a Disney trip.

While I am glad they spent the $6 billion on the upgrades. Most of that money was spent at DCA and not WDW which is where they have the most competition and yes Universal is a major threat. Your statement about minor cosmetic problems is an understatement, a missing hand is not minor nor is nonworking animatronics. I guess my problem is if they can spend $6 billion and not fix the "minor" problems then how are they going to get fixed when they cut spending. The fact that they can fix DCA where they have significantly less competition and leave WDW to get less of a referb. Lets face it Fantasyland is more of a face lift not a major new section like Carsland and the Avatar section of AK sounds like it is going to be a joke. So I do think Universal will catch up and surpass sooner then most people think as long as TDO continues to neglect WDW. I would like to know when good enough became good enough for Disney they always use to go above and beyond.

[Mrs Bus Driver]

Just want to add something I observed many years back at DL. It was the first time I took my kids there and it was while they were building DCA. What I noticed was that maintenance and up keep on DL was terrible. I was so disappointed by how bad it looked. Just didn't live up to my memories. However my kids didn't notice, they were just glad to be there. Any way it was a few years before I went back, first thing I noticed was how good DL looked. I can't say this for sure but I believe while they were working on DCA they made cut backs to DL. Don't know if this holds up or not but maybe the same is true for WDW and when the work is done else where things will improve. :mickey:

[March Hare]

Just want to add something I observed many years back at DL. It was the first time I took my kids there and it was while they were building DCA. What I noticed was that maintenance and up keep on DL was terrible. I was so disappointed by how bad it looked. Just didn't live up to my memories. However my kids didn't notice, they were just glad to be there. Any way it was a few years before I went back, first thing I noticed was how good DL looked. I can't say this for sure but I believe while they were working on DCA they made cut backs to DL. Don't know if this holds up or not but maybe the same is true for WDW and when the work is done else where things will improve. :mickey:

I hope you are right but the upkeep at WDW has been bad longer than the referbs have been going on. As a matter of fact they haven't even come up with a way to fix the yeti yet and that has been years. They seem to focus on the west coast more than WDW which should be there showcase. After all it was where Walt believed all his ideas could come to be.

[DizneyFreak2002]

Just want to add something I observed many years back at DL. It was the first time I took my kids there and it was while they were building DCA. What I noticed was that maintenance and up keep on DL was terrible. I was so disappointed by how bad it looked. Just didn't live up to my memories. However my kids didn't notice, they were just glad to be there. Any way it was a few years before I went back, first thing I noticed was how good DL looked. I can't say this for sure but I believe while they were working on DCA they made cut backs to DL. Don't know if this holds up or not but maybe the same is true for WDW and when the work is done else where things will improve. :mickey:

DL went through that stage, you are correct... Want to know what it took to improve the park??? Canning the inept management team in TDA... Unless TDO gets the boot, things will not change...

[DizneyFreak2002]

I hope you are right but the upkeep at WDW has been bad longer than the referbs have been going on. As a matter of fact they haven't even come up with a way to fix the yeti yet and that has been years. They seem to focus on the west coast more than WDW which should be there showcase. After all it was where Walt believed all his ideas could come to be.

They have several plans to fix the yeti... Problem is, TDO does not want to pay for it, when they should... They want WDI to pay for it, and technically, this isn't WDI's problem... TDO lacks maintenance, they are in ownership of the ride... The ride breaks, they pay to fix it... But, well, those bonus checks are more important than quality and good show...

[Jared]

They have several plans to fix the yeti... Problem is, TDO does not want to pay for it, when they should... They want WDI to pay for it, and technically, this isn't WDI's problem... TDO lacks maintenance, they are in ownership of the ride... The ride breaks, they pay to fix it... But, well, those bonus checks are more important than quality and good show...
In fairness, I think this issue in particular is a bit more nuanced than you're suggesting. I can definitely see how TDO might blame Imagineering for faulty design on the yeti. It seems like this specific problem is more than just routine maintenance -- this may have been a major flaw from the outset.

[Ian]

Just want to add something I observed many years back at DL. It was the first time I took my kids there and it was while they were building DCA. What I noticed was that maintenance and up keep on DL was terrible.


DL went through that stage, you are correct... Want to know what it took to improve the park??? Canning the inept management team in TDA... Unless TDO gets the boot, things will not change...DizneyFreak is right on this one. They had to fire the entire management team and it basically took a passholder revolt to get it done. WDW doesn't have that kind of deeply loyal, passionate fan base making up a large portion of its visitors. That's one of the things that hurts WDW.


In fairness, I think this issue in particular is a bit more nuanced than you're suggesting. I can definitely see how TDO might blame Imagineering for faulty design on the yeti. It seems like this specific problem is more than just routine maintenance -- this may have been a major flaw from the outset.Yeah I can sort of see both sides. Bottom line, though, is that the fact that the company is so dysfunctional that they can have this kinda "You did it! No you did it!" infantile arguments going on at the expense of the guests is very disheartening to me.

[DizneyFreak2002]

In fairness, I think this issue in particular is a bit more nuanced than you're suggesting. I can definitely see how TDO might blame Imagineering for faulty design on the yeti. It seems like this specific problem is more than just routine maintenance -- this may have been a major flaw from the outset.

Yea, I'm sure there is, or was a design flaw... Seems like WDI wanted to show off its muscle and really miscalculated the power needed to operate the yeti...

Simple solution though: split the costs...

[DizneyFreak2002]

DizneyFreak is right on this one. They had to fire the entire management team and it basically took a passholder revolt to get it done. WDW doesn't have that kind of deeply loyal, passionate fan base making up a large portion of its visitors. That's one of the things that hurts WDW.


There have been attempts, but no one ever really put an effort into it... But, that doesn't mean it cannot succeed... We just need some passionate people to dedicate time to the cause..

#OccupyWDW... Lol

[March Hare]

DizneyFreak is right on this one. They had to fire the entire management team and it basically took a passholder revolt to get it done. WDW doesn't have that kind of deeply loyal, passionate fan base making up a large portion of its visitors. That's one of the things that hurts WDW.
This is another thing that infuriates me and is more proof the share holders are the ones in charge. There should be no need of a passholder revolt. Businesses and share holders need to wake up and realize that if the parks continue to be neglected they will all lose money eventually because of lost profits do to lower attendance. You can only cut so much before you have to sell stuff off to raise profits which lowers the companies worth which hurts everyone from the CEO to the Workers to the share holders.


Yeah I can sort of see both sides. Bottom line, though, is that the fact that the company is so dysfunctional that they can have this kinda "You did it! No you did it!" infantile arguments going on at the expense of the guests is very disheartening to me.
I can also see both sides but I will say that it is probably more likely the fact that both their budgets have been cut to the bare bones from the top. The fault of this does lay on both teams not just for the fact that they don't want to take blame but for the fact that they are just yes men. I say the whole tree needs to be shaken to get rid of the bad apples and replace them all with people who will uphold Walt ideals and dreams. A long lasting company does for the customers not for the few "day traders" that want quick profits and move on.

[Tekneek]

A long lasting company does for the customers not for the few "day traders" that want quick profits and move on.

It seems to be too late for that kind of reasoning. Disney is "all in" at the Wall Street casino.

[Crow]

This is another thing that infuriates me and is more proof the share holders are the ones in charge. There should be no need of a passholder revolt. Businesses and share holders need to wake up and realize that if the parks continue to be neglected they will all lose money eventually because of lost profits do to lower attendance. You can only cut so much before you have to sell stuff off to raise profits which lowers the companies worth which hurts everyone from the CEO to the Workers to the share holders.


I can also see both sides but I will say that it is probably more likely the fact that both their budgets have been cut to the bare bones from the top. The fault of this does lay on both teams not just for the fact that they don't want to take blame but for the fact that they are just yes men. I say the whole tree needs to be shaken to get rid of the bad apples and replace them all with people who will uphold Walt ideals and dreams. A long lasting company does for the customers not for the few "day traders" that want quick profits and move on.

its a company, its not a dream anymore......yes we forgot it was a small mouse Walt sorry.
i couldnt even see the strobe Yeti last time

[March Hare]

It seems to be too late for that kind of reasoning. Disney is "all in" at the Wall Street casino.

I would disagree with this only because they still have a large fan base. They can turn it around as long as they replace the management with people who start to care about the long term profits instead of the dividends of share holders. That is a small window of opportunity though because as soon as Universal surpasses Disney it will take a lot to catch up.

[Tekneek]

I would disagree with this only because they still have a large fan base. They can turn it around as long as they replace the management with people who start to care about the long term profits instead of the dividends of share holders. That is a small window of opportunity though because as soon as Universal surpasses Disney it will take a lot to catch up.

I believe that they only care about Universal in so much as it might damage revenues and the share price. If they can keep increasing profits and be #2, they might get away with it. Death by MBA.

If they cared about being better than everybody else in the execution of their parks, they wouldn't bank a $1 billion profit with known operational concerns that are still not being addressed.

[AgentC]

I believe that they only care about Universal in so much as it might damage revenues and the share price. If they can keep increasing profits and be #2, they might get away with it. Death by MBA.

If they cared about being better than everybody else in the execution of their parks, they wouldn't bank a $1 billion profit with known operational concerns that are still not being addressed.

My opinion here is not Disney specific but as an employee of a major corporation for the last 15 years. No company who has been number 1 ever really wants to become number 2, even if they are making a profit. Companies who aren't number 1 are always trying to move up the ladder which can make them more eager and innovative.

At my company I've seen us change from a company that wanted to expanded and make a certain amount of money to a company where cost cutting was the most important thing. Suddenly we have a new executive who no one expected. Now, we are a company that wants to make our customer happy and through happy customers make our stockholders happy. It takes just one person to turn a massive ship around.

Do I think this is going to happen with Disney? I have no idea. If someone told me my company would be heading down the path we are now last year, I would not have believed it.

Anything is possible.

[March Hare]

My opinion here is not Disney specific but as an employee of a major corporation for the last 15 years. No company who has been number 1 ever really wants to become number 2, even if they are making a profit. Companies who aren't number 1 are always trying to move up the ladder which can make them more eager and innovative.

At my company I've seen us change from a company that wanted to expanded and make a certain amount of money to a company where cost cutting was the most important thing. Suddenly we have a new executive who no one expected. Now, we are a company that wants to make our customer happy and through happy customers make our stockholders happy. It takes just one person to turn a massive ship around.

Do I think this is going to happen with Disney? I have no idea. If someone told me my company would be heading down the path we are now last year, I would not have believed it.

Anything is possible.

I am very happy to hear this has happened to your company and it gives me hope. The company I have worked for the last 23 years has been going down the cost cutting path right now and I am truly fearful that if it doesn't turn around real soon we will be out of business. This is what I see happening with Disney as of late. The "Walmarting" effect has taken over companies as of late. I am sick and tired of companies blaming the economy when they are the ones that control it. When you cut jobs, spending, and raise prices only to squeeze every penny of profit out then you are the only ones to blame for the failure of the companies you are " in charge" of. Just a note the companies before you that have done the same thing have lost their faithful share holders and are stuck with the day traders and there for see your stock price plummet. I have seen this first hand as the stock prices went from over $40 to under $4 a share.

[DizneyFreak2002]

My opinion here is not Disney specific but as an employee of a major corporation for the last 15 years. No company who has been number 1 ever really wants to become number 2, even if they are making a profit. Companies who aren't number 1 are always trying to move up the ladder which can make them more eager and innovative.

At my company I've seen us change from a company that wanted to expanded and make a certain amount of money to a company where cost cutting was the most important thing. Suddenly we have a new executive who no one expected. Now, we are a company that wants to make our customer happy and through happy customers make our stockholders happy. It takes just one person to turn a massive ship around.

Do I think this is going to happen with Disney? I have no idea. If someone told me my company would be heading down the path we are now last year, I would not have believed it.

Anything is possible.

It could be possible once Iger is gone and he takes Rasulo and Staggs with him... Then the new CEO, from outside the company and a creative mind, can replace the Crofton Minions in Orlando... :)

[Tekneek]

It could be possible once Iger is gone and he takes Rasulo and Staggs with him... Then the new CEO, from outside the company and a creative mind, can replace the Crofton Minions in Orlando... :)

Maybe they need a partnership at the top again. Eisner/Wells was good. Left to pilot the ship by himself, Eisner lost his way.

The magic of Disney was not made just by the brilliant mind of Walter E. Disney. It took the brilliant mind of Roy O. Disney, as well. The company was lucky to have them. They were even luckier to put Eisner/Wells together. Will they be able to find that kind of partnership again? Might be easier than finding one person that knows how to manage both sides?

I still don't think a company that is determined to be the best would post a $1 billion profit without everything being top notch. They've 'managed' their way to that, while putting the parks on a decidedly non-Disney maintenance schedule. Why? Because the marketplace doesn't seem to care much if everything looks real nice or works properly. The company itself is no longer worried about putting on a bad show, as long as people line up to see it.

[Ian]

Listen I have news for you guys ... this is not an uncommon occurrence. There are entire books, corporate training sessions, seminars and all manner of other things geared around teaching companies to think "outside in" and not "inside out."

It's a natural progression to some degree. Companies go through life-cycles where they start out customer focused and then, through a series of small steps, gradually become focused internally instead. They start to view the customer almost like an enemy ... they're never happy, they complain about everything, they don't do what we want them to do, they don't behave the way we want them to behave ... and that builds a level of animosity that eventually pervades the entire organization from the top down.

The good news it typically changes eventually and the cycle starts all over again.

[Aurora]

Listen I have news for you guys ... this is not an uncommon occurrence. There are entire books, corporate training sessions, seminars and all manner of other things geared around teaching companies to think "outside in" and not "inside out."

It's a natural progression to some degree. Companies go through life-cycles where they start out customer focused and then, through a series of small steps, gradually become focused internally instead. They start to view the customer almost like an enemy ... they're never happy, they complain about everything, they don't do what we want them to do, they don't behave the way we want them to behave ... and that builds a level of animosity that eventually pervades the entire organization from the top down.

The good news it typically changes eventually and the cycle starts all over again.

The question is, what's the catalyst? Is it customer demand? A new leader who recognizes things must change for the good of the company? A precipitous drop in stock price? A board of trustees revolt?

Maybe I'm wrong, but none of these seem imminent right now.

[Ian]

The question is, what's the catalyst? Is it customer demand? A new leader who recognizes things must change for the good of the company? A precipitous drop in stock price? A board of trustees revolt?Yes. ;)

But seriously it can be any of those things or a combination of them or something just blind luck (as Cindy mentioned in her post).

I do agree, though, that none of those things seems imminent, although I'm not sure. I've seen and heard a few things that maybe indicate TDO as it exists today isn't long for this "world".

[Jared]

A corporate shake-up is a lot closer than you probably think. Bob Iger is likely out as CEO within the next 18 to 24 months. I would be surprised if Rasulo and Staggs don't go with him. Alan Horn's appointment as studio chief may mark the beginning of a new leadership group that hopefully will mean good things for the company. The TDO that you know is definitely not long for this "World."

[March Hare]

Yes. ;)

But seriously it can be any of those things or a combination of them or something just blind luck (as Cindy mentioned in her post).

I do agree, though, that none of those things seems imminent, although I'm not sure. I've seen and heard a few things that maybe indicate TDO as it exists today isn't long for this "world".

First of all with my experience it will probably take a combination. I have seen first hand a drastic drop in stock price and a CEO that has decided to cut even deeper even though it has only hurt the company in the first place. A share holder that is worth while having will stick around through a rebuilding period because they know what the company is capable of.

Second of all I hope you are right but i am not sure it will be enough. I think they really need to start at the top and work all the way to the bottom and get rid of anyone who won't keep true to Walt's way of running the business. They need to go back to the old saying of "you need to spend money to make money" and fix the problems they have let go so they will entice more repeat customers.

[joonyer]

I just hope that whatever needs to happen to get Disney "moving forward" as Walt envisioned it happens soon. It's not like I have another lifetime to wait for them to get it going right again. :thumbsup:

[March Hare]

I just hope that whatever needs to happen to get Disney "moving forward" as Walt envisioned it happens soon. It's not like I have another lifetime to wait for them to get it going right again. :thumbsup:

I have to agree with you. Unfortunately it looks like it may get worse before it gets better not only have they not been keeping up with the basic maintenance they are rushing work to open attractions faster. Under the old management they would have tested and retested everything before it opened it to the public to make sure there weren't any problems like rides scraping on the infrastructure

[Cinderelley]

What many people here fail to realize is that, as much as many here don't go to Disneyland because it's "too far", people who live on the west coast feel the SAME WAY about WDW. I lived in California from 1994 to 2011 and in that time, I came across people who had been to WDW only a handful of times. For a long time, those people felt that Disneyland really needed some attention.

I live in Arizona and made yearly trips to Disney World before my health problems.
Even though I am so close to California, I don't go to Disneyland precisely because it was lacking. I have fun when I am there, but it isn't enough to make me plan a trip for it.

[Cinderelley]

Well, I just read through all the pages of this thread. :jaw:

Everyone has very interesting points. Part of the differing viewpoints I believe have to do with individual tastes. Everyone enjoys something different, and if something you enjoy isn't taken away, it isn't a big deal. If the things you go there for are taken away, there's no incentive to return.

As I've been sitting down and planning my trip for next year, I am finding that only about half of the stuff I normally would take the new people to see is still there. There are about 6 days where there really isn't anything I can say I definitely want to take them to see. It leaves me wondering if we should wander over to Universal to check out the Harry Potter stuff. That is a thought that never would have been seriously entertained in my mind before. My head was too full of imagining my friends having a blast with Chip and Dale at Liberty Tree Tavern or laughing hysterically at the Adventurer's Club. All of us girls would have done BBB for MNSSHP, even though there is only one "child" going with us. We work nights and live on the west coast. With the time difference and our normal sleep schedule, very rarely are we awake for morning emh. Evening emhs were our staple though. I can't even think of enough TS restaurants that I really want to go back to in order to fill every night of our trip. I know it sounds small, but this is a big part of our trips. Very rarely do we have the time to see each other in everyday life. A sit down meal each day gives us a chance to catch up on everything.

Back to my first point, a large portion of this trip is centering around a little 5 year old girl. She will be seeing Disney for the first time - the princesses, the rides, the fireworks, everything. We know we will have a wonderful time with her. I am sure it is the same for those of you who still see Disney through rose colored glasses.

On the other hand, those who are going that have been with me before are already talking about the things that are gone that they wish they could do again. I haven't even mentioned the shortening of the evening emh hours or the fact that BBB has an age limit now. I am sure those who are unhappy with things the way they are now miss the "glory" days of the things they used to enjoy.

With those empty days in my vacation plans, it has made me wonder if my love for WDW is more of a nostalgia thing. The children have been bugging me to go on another cruise. Cruises have the advantage of doing for me one of the things that I love about WDW, I can drop my luggage and cares off at the airport and not worry about them until I am headed home. Unless things are really different on our next trip, I'm sure a lot of our vacation dollars will be spent places other than WDW in the future.

[DizneyRox]

... The children have been bugging me to go on another cruise. Cruises have the advantage of doing for me one of the things that I love about WDW, I can drop my luggage and cares off at the airport and not worry about them until I am headed home. Unless things are really different on our next trip, I'm sure a lot of our vacation dollars will be spent places other than WDW in the future.
It's great, I've been cruising for the past couple of years, I have two more booked now and it's everything I remembered it was. Of course some things have changed, but not as drastically as Disney (WDW in particular).

[Gator]

Investors are who the company has to answer to. They're the ones who hold sway over how a business is operated. I'd that Disney has done a good job of proving good returns to investors while upgrading attractions.

As for the cuts, welcome to the new USA. We have an economy sputtering with no help in sight, which means less revenue at the parks from patrons, all while expenses for food, healthcare, and wages go up up up. My own business, a medical business, has seen over 10% cuts in business revenue. So you know what we have to do? Cut. Cut everything. And we do this without taking too much away from our customers.

Everyone has to do it. Disney is no exception, much to everyone's dismay.

[ChipNDale79]

Investors are who the company has to answer to. They're the ones who hold sway over how a business is operated. I'd that Disney has done a good job of proving good returns to investors while upgrading attractions.

As for the cuts, welcome to the new USA. We have an economy sputtering with no help in sight, which means less revenue at the parks from patrons, all while expenses for food, healthcare, and wages go up up up. My own business, a medical business, has seen over 10% cuts in business revenue. So you know what we have to do? Cut. Cut everything. And we do this without taking too much away from our customers.

Everyone has to do it. Disney is no exception, much to everyone's dismay.

But is the economy at Disney really sputtering? If it were, then the promos would not have been rolled back, nor would they have raised prices.

The bottom fell out of the economy in 2008, since then, the cost of a Disney vacation has increased over 20%.

[March Hare]

Investors are who the company has to answer to. They're the ones who hold sway over how a business is operated. I'd that Disney has done a good job of proving good returns to investors while upgrading attractions.

As for the cuts, welcome to the new USA. We have an economy sputtering with no help in sight, which means less revenue at the parks from patrons, all while expenses for food, healthcare, and wages go up up up. My own business, a medical business, has seen over 10% cuts in business revenue. So you know what we have to do? Cut. Cut everything. And we do this without taking too much away from our customers.

Everyone has to do it. Disney is no exception, much to everyone's dismay.

I understand that some cuts need to be made do to the economy. I am just worried that the cuts may go to far and put them behind their competitors and it is not like I am looking for anything new I am just looking for upkeep. Which has been the problem even when they were spending the money. If the parks don't fix the blatant problems people will start going else where, or worse yet telling others not to bother going to "that run down park" as well.

[DizneyFreak2002]

But is the economy at Disney really sputtering? If it were, then the promos would not have been rolled back, nor would they have raised prices.

The bottom fell out of the economy in 2008, since then, the cost of a Disney vacation has increased over 20%.

Disney is making billions, their economy is strong... Just like the economy of many major firms in the U.S. to the tune of trillions in profits...

My issue isn't with cuts, it is with how they cut and what they cut, all in the name of saving a buck (or making sure their bonus checks are larger and larger)...

[Cinderelley]

It's great, I've been cruising for the past couple of years, I have two more booked now and it's everything I remembered it was. Of course some things have changed, but not as drastically as Disney (WDW in particular).

We LOVED our Alaskan cruise. We used Royal Caribbean, not Disney.

[Tekneek]

Disney doesn't "have to" cut anything. They've posted huge profits. They continue to raise rates by large amounts. Disney is a booming economy. You only "have to" cut something when you risk insolvency by not doing so.