A Spirited Valentine ...

[ParentsOf4]

Disney's most recent 10Q includes the following tidbit:

The Company currently expects its fiscal 2017 capital expenditures will be approximately $0.4 billion higher than fiscal 2016 capital expenditures of $4.8 billion primarily due to increased investments at our domestic parks and resorts partially offset by decreased investments at our international parks and resorts.​

The $4.8B number is for company-wide capex. Domestic Parks & Resorts (P&R) accounted for $2.180B of this, with International P&R accounting for another $2.035B.

Let's play with some numbers to see what it implies for 2017.

International P&R capex averaged $563M for the first 3 quarters of 2016, dropping to $346M in the 4th quarter as Shanghai construction competed. In 1Q2017 it was down further, to $291M. Let's wag an average of $350M per quarter for 2017, or an estimated $1.4B at the international parks for fiscal 2017.

In 2016, total P&R capex was $4.2B. The $400M mentioned above brings this up to $4.6B. Subtract off the $1.4B from International P&R, and that leaves $3.2B to be spent domestically. Let's then assume depreciation growth of 9% in 2017 (the same as 2016) on top of 2016's $1.273B Domestic P&R depreciation. Rounding a bit, let's assume $1.4B in domestic maintenance capex, leaving $1.8B in Domestic Parks & Resorts growth capital expenditures in 2017.

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year.

 

[JoeCamel]

Disney's most recent 10Q includes the following tidbit:

The Company currently expects its fiscal 2017 capital expenditures will be approximately $0.4 billion higher than fiscal 2016 capital expenditures of $4.8 billion primarily due to increased investments at our domestic parks and resorts partially offset by decreased investments at our international parks and resorts.​

The $4.8B number is for company-wide capex. Domestic Parks & Resorts (P&R) accounted for $2.180B of this, with International P&R accounting for another $2.035B.

Let's play with some numbers to see what it implies for 2017.

International P&R capex averaged $563M for the first 3 quarters of 2016, dropping to $346M in the 4th quarter as Shanghai construction competed. In 1Q2017 it was down further, to $291M. Let's wag an average of $350M per quarter for 2017, or an estimated $1.4B at the international parks for fiscal 2017.

In 2016, total P&R capex was $4.2B. The $400M mentioned above brings this up to $4.6B. Subtract off the $1.4B from International P&R, and that leaves $3.2B to be spent domestically. Let's then assume depreciation grown of 9% in 2017 (the same as 2016) on top of 2016's $1.273B Domestic P&R depreciation. Rounding a bit, let's assume $1.4B in domestic maintenance capex, leaving $1.8B in Domestic Parks & Resorts growth capital expenditures in 2017.

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year.

Finally!

 

[monothingie]

Disney's most recent 10Q includes the following tidbit:

The Company currently expects its fiscal 2017 capital expenditures will be approximately $0.4 billion higher than fiscal 2016 capital expenditures of $4.8 billion primarily due to increased investments at our domestic parks and resorts partially offset by decreased investments at our international parks and resorts.​

The $4.8B number is for company-wide capex. Domestic Parks & Resorts (P&R) accounted for $2.180B of this, with International P&R accounting for another $2.035B.

Let's play with some numbers to see what it implies for 2017.

International P&R capex averaged $563M for the first 3 quarters of 2016, dropping to $346M in the 4th quarter as Shanghai construction competed. In 1Q2017 it was down further, to $291M. Let's wag an average of $350M per quarter for 2017, or an estimated $1.4B at the international parks for fiscal 2017.

In 2016, total P&R capex was $4.2B. The $400M mentioned above brings this up to $4.6B. Subtract off the $1.4B from International P&R, and that leaves $3.2B to be spent domestically. Let's then assume depreciation growth of 9% in 2017 (the same as 2016) on top of 2016's $1.273B Domestic P&R depreciation. Rounding a bit, let's assume $1.4B in domestic maintenance capex, leaving $1.8B in Domestic Parks & Resorts growth capital expenditures in 2017.

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year.

Yet it's nothing compared to the inflation adjusted numbers of the mid-late 90's. Back then the only competition Disney had was itself, and look at what they did. Compare that to the last 15-16 years. Sad.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Quality over quantity. Spending doesn't change that themed entertainment at The Walt Disney Company remains an overly expensive form of advertising intended for saps with a long history of being run by people with no experience or interest in the industry.

 

[monothingie]

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year

Few hundred million d***? I thought TWDC was a family company. For shame.

 

[rushtest4echo]

Disney's most recent 10Q includes the following tidbit:

The Company currently expects its fiscal 2017 capital expenditures will be approximately $0.4 billion higher than fiscal 2016 capital expenditures of $4.8 billion primarily due to increased investments at our domestic parks and resorts partially offset by decreased investments at our international parks and resorts.​

The $4.8B number is for company-wide capex. Domestic Parks & Resorts (P&R) accounted for $2.180B of this, with International P&R accounting for another $2.035B.

Let's play with some numbers to see what it implies for 2017.

International P&R capex averaged $563M for the first 3 quarters of 2016, dropping to $346M in the 4th quarter as Shanghai construction competed. In 1Q2017 it was down further, to $291M. Let's wag an average of $350M per quarter for 2017, or an estimated $1.4B at the international parks for fiscal 2017.

In 2016, total P&R capex was $4.2B. The $400M mentioned above brings this up to $4.6B. Subtract off the $1.4B from International P&R, and that leaves $3.2B to be spent domestically. Let's then assume depreciation growth of 9% in 2017 (the same as 2016) on top of 2016's $1.273B Domestic P&R depreciation. Rounding a bit, let's assume $1.4B in domestic maintenance capex, leaving $1.8B in Domestic Parks & Resorts growth capital expenditures in 2017.

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year.

Not nearly enough to quench the salty tears of the crybabies though... no amount will ever be enough for that.

 

[WDW1974]

So, sitting here and the Grammys aren't entertaining me much. I did find it amusing that most of the talent in the 'car' skit with Corden didn't know the words to Sweet Caroline. Yeah, I think about the same of today's music as I do the typical blogger/podcaster/Lifestyler.

Anyway, I do hope and plan on getting to some of the comments, but more news first ... let's start with China (and let's all realize without getting into politics that there are people in the current administration who would like to see us start a war, which would not only kill us all but also be very bad for Disney and UNI's business interests over there).

--- Universal Beijing: As I type this, UNI's Chinese partners should be safely ensconced in Orlando for a week-long series of meetings and planning sessions. You might see groups out in the parks or around the resorts or City Walk. BTW, don't be surprised if one of the huge sound stages at the front of the park that are used for HHNs gets taken over in short order. The big model has to go somewhere (HINT, HINT!) and it looks like it will be right in the middle of the action (with other offices moved into the facility). Right now, Beijing is looking to be about 18-24 months behind schedule.

Following the SDL model, you can expect they'll catch up to a point and then delay and open 6-12 months later than currently scheduled. The resort is looking less and less impressive (beyond the Jurassic World centerpiece, which has had the budget axe taken to it, and the signature restaurant nearby) all the time. The first park seems to largely be a best of type park with almost no unique local product because the UNI planners believe the Chinese audience wants a western experience with nods to the culture more in terms of food and merchandise. I do not agree, but what do I know? The team also sadly lost a key member of the team last month. ... The UNI braintrust also keeps ignoring Beijing's harsh climate in the design phase, which makes no sense and likely will result in this place being a ghost town during large parts of the year. I don't know how many FB photos I've seen of UNI's people in Beijing wearing masks that look like they were just the victims of a gas attack. Much like Disney in Shanghai, UNI just seems so intent on getting into the market that any/all common sense goes out the window.

Beijing is becoming more interesting for what isn't going in, then what is with an early focus on food and beverage and retail that, frankly, I haven't seen since DCA 1.0. ***No, I am in no way comparing the parks lineups on Opening Day. Beijing will be superior in so many ways that such a comparison is foolish.

--- State of Disney in China: All of those plans you have heard for HKDL are still planned, but they aren't set in stone yet and things may well change. The SAR isn't happy with Iger and Burbank, shocking. Taking some of the top WDI talent that worked on SDL and moving them over to this expansion is designed to make HK feel like it is as important to the company (sadly, it isn't) as Shanghai. Castle envy? Who knew ... who knew ...

The Iron Man ride, the company's first real Marvel attraction, hasn't been a huge draw, even though Marvel is quite popular over there. Could it be because the tech is still based on the mid-80s Star Tours?

SDL continues to do relatively well and likely will meet Burbank's goal of 10 million in its first 12 months of operation, but the Guests are not spending on food or merchandise like Americans or Japanese (where have we heard this before? ... oh yeah, Paris!) Phase II (no, not TSL) planning is well underway, but there isn't a rush because the park is successful but not too successful (meaning they don't need to add massive capacity just yet). Disney wasn't thrilled by Rogue One's box office in China. It would seem that out of Bob Iger's vanity acquisitions that Marvel is far more popular in China than BB-8 and Rey and Chewie.

A third hotel will quite likely be greenlighted by the end of the year, but Disney Town remains a struggling venue. The Lion King production is often playing to many empty seats even with discounts offered. And the restaurants and shops are largely a ghost town beyond the very popular Starbucks and World of Disney.

MORE ...

 

[MisterPenguin]

Did someone say "China"?

NY Times: A Tax Overhaul Would Be Great in Theory. Here’s Why It’s So Hard in Practice.

tl;dr - a Republican plan to fundamental shift how international taxes work to something that is arguably good and fair has the potential to create devastating disruptions in the very process of switching to a new system, which would hurt companies like Disney.

 

[FigmentJedi]

SDL continues to do relatively well and likely will meet Burbank's goal of 10 million in its first 12 months of operation, but the Guests are not spending on food or merchandise like Americans or Japanese (where have we heard this before? ... oh yeah, Paris!) Phase II (no, not TSL) planning is well underway, but there isn't a rush because the park is successful but not too successful (meaning they don't need to add massive capacity just yet). Disney wasn't thrilled by Rogue One's box office in China. It would seem that out of Bob Iger's vanity acquisitions that Marvel is far more popular in China than BB-8 and Rey and Chewie.

Apparently it's because the Prequels were how China was introduced to Star Wars and because of that, that's the trilogy they prefer. When the Original Trilogy was re-released to theaters in China ahead of Episode 7, it got a tepid response and they thought it was dated and stale.

Disney's focus on pandering to the Original Trilogy or Bust sections of the Western Star Wars fandom doesn't work in China because it's not their Star Wars.

 

[HMF]

Disney's focus on pandering to the Original Trilogy or Bust sections of the Western Star Wars fandom doesn't work in China because it's not their Star Wars.

Just as it is with the many millennials who grew up with the Prequels.

 

[Rodan75]

Just as it is with the many millennials who grew up with the Prequels.

Makes you wonder if they will green light a Obi-wan Yoda movie. Or tie the new trilogy to Ewan in some way.

 

[HMF]

Makes you wonder if they will green light a Obi-wan Yoda movie. Or tie the new trilogy to Ewan in some way.

Doubt it, It would upset the "George Lucas raped my childhood" crowd that Disney likes pandering to. To hell with the millennials, We must give Gen X what they want. A re-tread of the original movie with a distracting amount of fan service.

 

[Mike S]

I'm a millenial that prefers the OT because I watched those on VHS first. Original non special editions as well. I still have the tapes too

How do you expect Disney to handle a sequel trilogy to the original movies while still trying to please fans of the prequels even though they're separated much further back in the timeline? You can't do it. On the other hand Rogue One did have ties to the prequels with Leia's adopted father making an appearance from Episode III and the fact that Vader's castle is on Mustafar. Guess there wasn't enough bad acting in it though...

 

[articos]

Disney's most recent 10Q includes the following tidbit:

The Company currently expects its fiscal 2017 capital expenditures will be approximately $0.4 billion higher than fiscal 2016 capital expenditures of $4.8 billion primarily due to increased investments at our domestic parks and resorts partially offset by decreased investments at our international parks and resorts.​

The $4.8B number is for company-wide capex. Domestic Parks & Resorts (P&R) accounted for $2.180B of this, with International P&R accounting for another $2.035B.

Let's play with some numbers to see what it implies for 2017.

International P&R capex averaged $563M for the first 3 quarters of 2016, dropping to $346M in the 4th quarter as Shanghai construction competed. In 1Q2017 it was down further, to $291M. Let's wag an average of $350M per quarter for 2017, or an estimated $1.4B at the international parks for fiscal 2017.

In 2016, total P&R capex was $4.2B. The $400M mentioned above brings this up to $4.6B. Subtract off the $1.4B from International P&R, and that leaves $3.2B to be spent domestically. Let's then assume depreciation growth of 9% in 2017 (the same as 2016) on top of 2016's $1.273B Domestic P&R depreciation. Rounding a bit, let's assume $1.4B in domestic maintenance capex, leaving $1.8B in Domestic Parks & Resorts growth capital expenditures in 2017.

Even if I'm off a few hundred million, d***, that's a boatload of money being spent at Walt Disney World and Disneyland this year.

Making up for a lengthy period of cutting back.

 

[HMF]

How do you expect Disney to handle a sequel trilogy to the original movies while still trying to please fans of the prequels even though they're separated much further back in the timeline? You can't do it.

Maybe, but they did not have to have a marketing campaign embracing anti-prequel sentiment or make TFA so painfully similar to the OT as though very little had changed in the 30 years between Jedi and TFA.

 

[WDW1974]

Want to respond to a few posts now, but a question and don't want to derail the thread on page three, but just am curious and you can respond without going on a tangent.

How many of you guys/gals buy those "Art of" coffee table books? I ask because I was in a T.J. Maxx recently and saw they had them for Big Hero 6, The Force Awakens and Rogue One ... all marked from $40 down to $20. I do have a few friends who obsessive compulsively buy all the "Art of" for Pixar films, but I had no idea that WDFA, Lucas and, yes, Marvel all are doing them.

 

[Mike S]

Maybe, but they did not have to have a marketing campaign embracing anti-prequel sentiment or make TFA so painfully similar to the OT as though very little had changed in the 30 years between Jedi and TFA.

Funny that you mention the movie being similar to the OT...

 

[WDW1974]

I will be interested to see what happens should they start charging parking and resort fees. My family carries APs and we always stay on site just to be immersed in the experience of it, but if the prices of the hotels go much higher I absolutely will not be staying in Disney resorts any longer.

I generally don't tell people how to spend their money ... but you should stay elsewhere already unless you are getting at least 40% off value season rates. I don't get this immersion people mention today. No disrespect intended, but WDW is a mess of construction, highways, buses and sprawl. There certainly was a bubble in the 70s and 80s and even the 90s largely. There isn't now. You're just a prisoner of The Mouse. I hope you at least have a car and can head off-property.

 

[WDW1974]

Please, please, please ... let's not make this all about Star Wars films. I was planning some SWE info later on, but I don't want another thread that devolves into the merits of movies (most of them were lousy or mediocre at best anyway!)

 

[WDW1974]

That's why I am so skeptical of everyone clamoring for new attractions, shows, etc. Not because new stuff is not needed but because I don't trust today's Disney to do anything that won't damage the parks artistically. (See: Avatar, Epcot, Tomorrowland, etc.

The parks are largely a mess. For all the talk about story and theme, Disney throws it away all the time now for IP and merchandise. It's still why I will continue to say DAK is by far the best WDW theme park and one of the best anywhere. I have been saying for 15 years or more that the MK lands are largely meaningless and it is true. The other two parks are just messes.

That said, Pandora is a bad example to use. As much as I would have rather seen something unique, it will fit at DAK and be a very, very kewl addition.