Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

Status
Not open for further replies.

GoofGoof

Premium Member
you also tend to not see people who have been at an outside theme park all day at an airport Hilton, too. So, there's that.

I've never seen anything at universal I haven't seen at Disney, and vice-versa.

I think part of the issue is people use the monorail resorts and Boardwalk area as an extension of the parks. Especially when it's blazing hot out they want somewhere to sit and cool off in A/C. I'm not in favor of restricting access to those who are actually staying at the resorts or anything like that, but you will tend to see less "well dressed" people hanging around the lobby than you would at a deluxe hotel in Manhattan or somewhere that would restrict access.
 
- Disney did create these people. Disney dumbed down its product until it got the dumb guests to match. The kind who spend $200 on bottled water as they drag their brats from one m&g to another toy store.
We, elitists, went to WDW for live jazz, elegant dining, and remarkably sophisticated themed environments.
I do not know you but I really would like to shake your hand right now.
 

MattM

Well-Known Member
It's funny that you mention this because the exact opposite is becoming more prevalent in the retail world, not more so. While it's true that some business have tried (and continue to experiment) to push the plastic only route, the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of small and medium sized businesses are trying to get back to the cash only business. Even many of your large retailers are trying to get the consumer if they aren't using cash to automatically force the [VISA, MasterCard, etc.] debit card to accept as a debit only due to lower cost.

New credit card industry regulations in the States allow for businesses to set a minimum credit card purchase, which was a violation of the merchant agreement beforehand, and the ability to set lower pricing for cash only. A restaurant that we frequent monthly does exactly that, offering a percentage discount for not using credit cards and cash only.

While in certain situations people lose complete sense when using plastic whether it's a vacation, or a big box clothing store that offers all of their products at half off for example, while it's just a gimmick bringing the price of the product to what should be the true set retail price, the vast majority of establishments don't gain much from the use of credit cards and the downside is far greater with the plastic due to the transaction and merchant fees. Those countless mall eateries where someone charges $1.50 for a beverage and by the time the transaction costs are settled, they barely post a profit on the transaction, or in the vast majority actually are at a loss after the price of the product, materials, wages, etc.

I would be interested to see where new data has differed, if you have it. I've found that more small/mid sized businesses accepting credit cards have increased with new low cost options such as Square, etc (and both visa and AmEx's most recent earnings conference calls confirmed this) . The trade off is higher prices overall, though, or at least companies are foolish if they don't factor in the cost of the cc transactions. Ultimately, though, the stores are going to be forced to to do, or continue doing, what the consumer demands.

Just one thing though, if a mall place charging a 1.50$ for a soft drink can't make any money, there is something terribly wrong. A 22oz drink costs pennies, with the cup, lid, and straw. Say, very conservatively, that after cc fees they made 90 cents and have 10 cents total in the product, that is a huge profit margin.

The thing I hear more and more these days? "I don't have any cash."

I don't understand that, personally. It's amazing how much cheaper you can get items when you pull out a wad of cash.

I'm sure it's a generational thing, but I don't even carry a credit card.
 
Overheard last night at my local froyo joint.

8-9 year-old girl and her parents discussing where to go for their end of summer vacation. Parents suggest WDW's MK, child says 'no, I don't want to go there. It's boring. Can we go to Universal instead?''

Disney is losing its audience across multiple demos. Stale is stale. Magic bands don't compete with MAGICal cutting edge attractions if you aren't an addict. The paradigm has absolutely shifted.


This must be why the Magic Kingdom had higher attendance last year then IOA and USO combined, and more then 2 million people visited the Animal Kingdom then IOA
http://thedisneyblog.com/2013/06/06/global-themepark-attendance-for-2012-via-tea-report/

This isn't a knock on Universal, but the demise of Disney's popularity seems to highly exagerated
 

MattM

Well-Known Member
I think part of the issue is people use the monorail resorts and Boardwalk area as an extension of the parks. Especially when it's blazing hot out they want somewhere to sit and cool off in A/C. I'm not in favor of restricting access to those who are actually staying at the resorts or anything like that, but you will tend to see less "well dressed" people hanging around the lobby than you would at a deluxe hotel in Manhattan or somewhere that would restrict access.
Oh, overall, I absolutely agree with you. Only difference is, at Disney, all that money is ultimately going to the same pot as opposed to the manhattan hotels competing against each other. (and I'm with you, I don't want that in MY hotel lobby, which is why we found new hotels)

That's why you all should go try the ritz grande lakes, or the Waldorf. Great properties (even better than the portofino,which is indeed a nice resort. See? I agree with 74 sometimes:))
 

Beholder

Well-Known Member
Sadly, I'm not sure Disney created the dressed down/dumbed down mentality. I've been seeing people wear their pajamas and those "I can hardly squeeze my 500lb frame into these sweat pants" pants out dining, shopping, and just about everywhere for quite a while now. Disney just ignores it. It's a cultural shift in standards that I think is causing this, and that truly scares me. Of course, that's just speculation and observation on my part, so, what do I know? I may be way off.
 

alphac2005

Well-Known Member
I would be interested to see where new data has differed, if you have it. I've found that more small/mid sized businesses accepting credit cards have increased with new low cost options such as Square, etc (and both visa and AmEx's most recent earnings conference calls confirmed this) . The trade off is higher prices overall, though, or at least companies are foolish if they don't factor in the cost of the cc transactions. Ultimately, though, the stores are going to be forced to to do, or continue doing, what the consumer demands.

Just one thing though, if a mall place charging a 1.50$ for a soft drink can't make any money, there is something terribly wrong. A 22oz drink costs pennies, with the cup, lid, and straw. Say, very conservatively, that after cc fees they made 90 cents and have 10 cents total in the product, that is a huge profit margin.

The thing I hear more and more these days? "I don't have any cash."

I don't understand that, personally. It's amazing how much cheaper you can get items when you pull out a wad of cash.

I'm sure it's a generational thing, but I don't even carry a credit card.

$1.50 for a soda doesn't mean a fountain drink, it could be a can or bottle. If they are charging $1.50 for a bottle and cost is half that, add in your labor costs, cost of doing business including leasing space, franchise percentage fees, etc., and add in the transaction fees and presto, you're a zil.

I totally agree. Our household runs on a cash only basis and it's like a chore for places to make change when you pay them because it's as though the employee has an extra thing that they have to do and they are annoyed by it. You're completely dead-on about merchant services that are providing a per transaction fee and percentage with no further fees. Take that $1.50 as an example, though. You're still .30 a transaction plus 2.9%. Extrapolate that with the aforementioned info and there isn't much of anything, if at all on a cc transaction there.

I can tell you for my company, let me just be vague in saying that there was a time that our merchant fees were four digits per month. The new pricing schemes today have saved my business a small fortune month after month. It's terrific. One other thing to note about what the issuers have been doing with their stats: All of these new found "small businesses" include people buying these readers doing a transaction or two between friends and many industries that were forever cash only, such as arts festivals. The vast majority of those booths, artists, etc. now offer plastic and swipe via their mobile device, ipad, etc. The truth is that it's not causing additional purchases than they would have had with cash, but rather actually getting that customer because just as you've mentioned above, they don't carry cash. So because of this cashless shift in society, the merchant has to accept the plastic to get the sale even though they now have a cut taken out, but had this been years past, they would have banked the sale, cash only. It's a necessary evil of doing business.
 

asianway

Well-Known Member

MattM

Well-Known Member
It's a necessary evil of doing business.

Agree with everything you said. Just quoted this last part because it is the truth.

And I think they main reason that workers are annoyed with having to make change from bills these days is because they find it difficult to compile that correct bills/coins to make the change. That is a different problem altogether.
 

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
It started with this:
202px-CakeCastle.jpg

Whoever thinks executives can't make a bad decision, remember the Pepto Castle.

NGen is just the latest, more expensive version of it. A bad decision that proves management isn't infallible.
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Yes, but having done Magicbands, FP+ and MM+ yesterday (granted, just one day, and I (as well as some other testing families I ran into in lines, etc, had gripes), I am a changed man. It's a VERY good investment in the long run, if they can get it to work well (and it worked pretty darned well for my testing)...

I used to think it was just a "KTTW" replacement, but it's not. It does completely change the experience, and actually does encourage more spontaneity.

Hard to explain, but I'll talk all about it in my trip report (no, not a plug for it, just saying that's where I'll go into details about my experience, pros and cons).

One joke that always broke the ice for other Magicband testers I ran into though was "How many times did you see Donald on the website?"

They always got the joke!

I'll leave it with, it's not what I expected it would be. And, having done it, I wish it was already in use on a wider level.
 

bcalltimandanna

Active Member
I have more of an issue with Disney becoming a real estate and hotel company and, therefore, adding timeshare to EVERY resort it can, than I do with removing a water feature.

They've removed so much from that resort as is. From shuttering Tangaroa Terrace to tooning up the dinner show to removing the fish from the entry waterfalls and the birds from inside to hacking down all the big trees on top of said water feature. So, I guess I am Ok with it depending on what replaces it.
Thanks for the response. I haven't been the same since they got rid of moana mickeys. Remember the Fiesta Food and Fun Center at the Contemporary? Ahhhh...those were my glory days
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
True - but the real world shows merchants come out ahead by offering credit cards - even with paying processing fees (and why do you think Disney likes you charging to a house account instead of a credit card every time??? swipe fees baby..). Even with losing the standard 3% or so per for transaction fees.. the increased revenue and higher spending offset it.

This isn't debatable - it's proven behavior in the retail/service industry.

Now where Disney is not like a Target or something.. is the in park transactions tend to be small. That's why I brought up the McDonalds case... because it shows that even when the cost of something is not the limiting factor... cashless systems have shown to increase spending.

And again.. please read the post I was replying to. I was replying to the notion that people have a cap on what they spend, and won't spend more just because of some alternate form of payment. That too has largely been shown otherwise in other retail/services.

Right, but what I am trying to explain is that people already barely use cash in the parks - they are already using an alternate form of payment. And the Room Key charge has always been available, as well. They theory you are talking about is sound, but your application is missing the details that make it work.

The effect you are talking about has to do with using cash vs. non-cash forms of payment. It's not about exponentially the further you get away from the cash the effect increases to that degree - in order for that to begin to be true, you would have to start with people going from cash to bracelet, when in most cases they are going from credit card to bracelet, or even room key to bracelet (which would see minimal if not impact at that point).

And, in the end, people are still paying in dollars. What would make a big difference would be if, say, they used an entirely different currency system. Kind of like a "Free to Play Game" where you can pay dollars for a certain amount of in-game currency. If everything in game was labeled by dollar amount, people would spend less than if it costs "100 Smurfberries" - even though they bought the Smurfberries with cash and could figure out the exchange rate should they desire.

So if Disney made the bracelets have their own currency - say, "Disney Smiles" - and you loaded them up on the bracelet with cash, that would have the effect you are talking about. Say, you paid $100 for 25 Disney Smiles. When you went to Pecos Bills, a soda costs 1 Disney Smile, and a burger costs 2 Disney Smiles. Hey, 3 Disney Smiles for lunch! Great. Until you realize you just paid $12 for what you would have spent $10 on before.

In this case, people are already spending virtual money - and while I know we should never underestimate the stupidity of the average tourist - it's a big stretch to think that just because it's now a bracelet you swipe besides a card it's somehow going to markedly increase spending. And certainly not enough to justify a billion dollars. Not in a million years. People are dumb, but if you can afford to go to Disney I honestly think you can't be that stupid about money that somehow a bracelet makes you run around the parks spending huge sums more money than you would with your credit card or room key to begin with.

As an aside, it would be hilarious if not so tragic that what we have to talk about Disney's big recent investment is to what degree they can trick people into spending more on food and crap. We are arguing about what degree Disney can manipulate people into spending more money. You know how Universal did that? They built some amazing rides that made the place a world-wide destination for fans. And more are coming. That's how you REALLY increase spending - making people come from all over and live a once in a lifetime experience that makes you not care about the bill later. Not playing people for fools thinking that by paying with a novelty item bracelet over credit cards or room keys is going to bump up the bottom line enough so they can be lazy and not try to actually compete in bringing guests with spectacular experiences, just marginally easier ways to shop...
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Right, but what I am trying to explain is that people already barely use cash in the parks - they are already using an alternate form of payment. And the Room Key charge has always been available, as well. They theory you are talking about is sound, but your application is missing the details that make it work.

The effect you are talking about has to do with using cash vs. non-cash forms of payment. It's not about exponentially the further you get away from the cash the effect increases to that degree - in order for that to begin to be true, you would have to start with people going from cash to bracelet, when in most cases they are going from credit card to bracelet, or even room key to bracelet (which would see minimal if not impact at that point).

And, in the end, people are still paying in dollars. What would make a big difference would be if, say, they used an entirely different currency system. Kind of like a "Free to Play Game" where you can pay dollars for a certain amount of in-game currency. If everything in game was labeled by dollar amount, people would spend less than if it costs "100 Smurfberries" - even though they bought the Smurfberries with cash and could figure out the exchange rate should they desire.

So if Disney made the bracelets have their own currency - say, "Disney Smiles" - and you loaded them up on the bracelet with cash, that would have the effect you are talking about. Say, you paid $100 for 25 Disney Smiles. When you went to Pecos Bills, a soda costs 1 Disney Smile, and a burger costs 2 Disney Smiles. Hey, 3 Disney Smiles for lunch! Great. Until you realize you just paid $12 for what you would have spent $10 on before.

In this case, people are already spending virtual money - and while I know we should never underestimate the stupidity of the average tourist - it's a big stretch to think that just because it's now a bracelet you swipe besides a card it's somehow going to markedly increase spending. And certainly not enough to justify a billion dollars. Not in a million years. People are dumb, but if you can afford to go to Disney I honestly think you can't be that stupid about money that somehow a bracelet makes you run around the parks spending huge sums more money than you would with your credit card or room key to begin with.

As an aside, it would be hilarious if not so tragic that what we have to talk about Disney's big recent investment is to what degree they can trick people into spending more on food and crap. We are arguing about what degree Disney can manipulate people into spending more money. You know how Universal did that? They built some amazing rides that made the place a world-wide destination for fans. And more are coming. That's how you REALLY increase spending - making people come from all over and live a once in a lifetime experience that makes you not care about the bill later. Not playing people for fools thinking that by paying with a novelty item bracelet over credit cards or room keys is going to bump up the bottom line enough so they can be lazy and not try to actually compete in bringing guests with spectacular experiences, just marginally easier ways to shop...
I won't say the band made me wish to spend more, but I will say it certainly did make it easier to do so!
 

TarzanRocked99-

Well-Known Member
Have the figured out the Magic Band thing with Swan/Dolphin and DTD Hilton yet?
Swan/Dolphin is looking to integrate with the system in the next couple years, however there are some major concerns IT wise about the access Disney wants into the internal network and what else they will be able to see once in there.
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Swan/Dolphin is looking to integrate with the system in the next couple years, however there are some major concerns IT wise about the access Disney wants into the internal network and what else they will be able to see once in there.
Right...as if they run top secret systems....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom