A Good Read ...

[WDW1974]

Been meaning to put this up and while it in many ways belongs on the Business Board, I'd beseech the mods to leave it here as I am interested in having people get some idea where WDW fits into a massive media corporation like TWDC.

The most interesting/amusing thing to me is how boring The Weatherman's Letter to Shareholders is. So dry, so emotionless, so blah.

Michael Eisner actually wrote (or dictated thoughts) his letters and they always were full of emotion and felt real. He once told me that was one of the things he enjoyed a lot because he felt the tales of getting his kids letters to colleges (that they would of course be accepted to because their daddy ran Disney) or his NY sports allegiances (he won't be pulling for the Pats this weekend) humanized both him and the corporation. Iger is the polar opposite.

But anyway, it is interesting to read the letter (and scan through parts of the report) because many here think TWDC=WDW. They don't quite get where it fits or how it fits and even this dry letter and annuall report can help on that. Disney is helluva lot more than the resort in the swamp.

The numbers and charts aside, it is a good learning tool for many, especially the younger fans.

http://a.media.global.go.com/investorrelations/annual_reports/WDC-10kwrap-2011.pdf

~GFC Forever!~

 

[C.FERNIE]

meg crofton does not apear once! interesting... :wave:

 

[wdwmagic]

Been meaning to put this up and while it in many ways belongs on the Business Board, I'd beseech the mods to leave it here as I am interested in having people get some idea where WDW fits into a massive media corporation like TWDC.

It is technically in the wrong place, but I agree it is worth a read, so we'll leave it here for a while and then move it to the Business Board later.

 

[TalkingHead]

"On behalf of all of us who work at Disney, I want you to know that we are all committed to excellence, creating insanely great family entertainment and focusing on what counts to deliver incredible entertainment experiences and
shareholder value. Thank you for your support and confidence in us."

That's the Weatherman for you.

Now read that again and cue up the video of the Splash Mountain Animatronic Cemetary finale. That's what you get when you combine modern-day shareholder value, "insanely great family entertainment" and "incredible entertainment experiences."

:hurl:

 

[Kiff]

Trying to get a value on the parks and resort division from the report. Closest thing I can find is the balance sheet accounts on page 108. If i'm reading it right it looks like the value of all properties is just bellow 20 Billion. Impressive.

 

[Captain Neo]

wait I didn't even see WDW mentioned in Iger's letter

 

[TalkingHead]

wait I didn't even see WDW mentioned in Iger's letter

I noticed that, too. I wonder if that kind of omission ever occurred on Eisner's watch. By extension, I wonder in how many annual report CEO letters Iger has avoided mentioning WDW.

 

[WDW1974]

It is technically in the wrong place, but I agree it is worth a read, so we'll leave it here for a while and then move it to the Business Board later.

Thanks, Steve.

Much appreciated. I do think it can give fans perspective on WDW, where it fits into P&R and the corp as a whole and also let people know what other business units are part of Disney and their roles as well.

Oh, and thanks for the PM. Will shoot you an answer tomorrow, but you pose an interesting question!

 

[WDW1974]

Originally Posted by Captain Neo
wait I didn't even see WDW mentioned in Iger's letter

I noticed that, too. I wonder if that kind of omission ever occurred on Eisner's watch. By extension, I wonder in how many annual report CEO letters Iger has avoided mentioning WDW.

You know, I didn't even realize that when I read it. I need to reread ... funny how much space he devoted to Steve Jobs (second graph on to the end) but no WDW ... interesting.

By the way, Mr. Disney Restroom Expert Blogger ... I answered your question down on the other (Splash Mtn?) thread. I would hope you notice! :wave:

 

[COProgressFan]

I actually don't have any problem with these interactive games. I think the Kim Possible game is mildly entertaining. Personally, I don't see much excitement in holding up cards to a screen to make something happen in the Sorcerer game, but I can see how it would be fun for the 12 and under set. I also have no connection whatsoever to any "gaming" culture and have no idea how this fits in. But if the games don't really interrupt the experiences of guests not playing, I don't mind.

Of course would also rather see the fire house function as a firehouse (as much as a fake fire house can).

But if this is the future of a Disney park experience, and this is all they can come up with to entertain in new ways, I'm disappointed. If the AAs in Splash were working, there were new parades, pyro, and entertainment, and there was more than a couple C ticket dark rides coming to FL, then I would think this is a nice little addition. But management seems to have it set in their minds that things like this Sorcerer game are what it's all about...and it's not.

People come to Disney parks for high quality live entertainment and attractions. I just don't get why Disney doesn't want to put resources into that anymore. That's their core business (or at least it was).

 

[TP2000]

Those reports are always fascinating to read! Thanks for the link wdw1974, it is appreciated.

And yes, the letter from Iger is interesting as well by what he mentions and what he doesn't mention. Disney is a big global company with lots of important business, and WDW is just one little element of that a 5 hour Gulfstream VI ride away from Southern California for Iger and his lieutenants. Without a big thing opening in the upcoming fiscal year (through October, 2012), there's really no good reason to mention WDW in that letter format.

Paris and Tokyo also escaped mention in this letter, although he would really only mention Paris since Tokyo has so little impact on the bottom line with the licensing agreement they have with the OLC. But there's not much going on in Paris in 2012 either.

 

[Magenta Panther]

With Iron Man, Thor and Captain America, we have just begun to mine Marvel’s rich roster of characters
and stories, and leverage them across our businesses to create all-important franchises

Meh. Just keep them out of the parks, is all I ask.

Opening weekend was a big success for The Muppets, the first theatrical release in 12 years for Kermit and Miss Piggy

Yeah, and then it dropped nearly 70% on the second weekend. It was all downhill from there, from what I've read. Guess that's why Iger couldn't bring himself to call the movie a hit. Because it apparently wasn't. And why there's been no announcement of a sequel. Because I guess it won't be happening.

But the Lion King's success was truly awesome. It proved that what audiences really want to see from Disney is DISNEY - not oddball acquisitions the company doesn't need - even if the product happens to be a 20-year-old old-fashioned 2D-animated film. It'd be nice if the heads of the company would keep that in mind. But alas, to a corporate suit, buying = creativity. It's the only type of creativity that CEOs like Iger appear to understand.

 

[Nemofinder]

[

Opening weekend was a big success for The Muppets, the first theatrical release in 12 years for Kermit and Miss Piggy

Yeah, and then it dropped nearly 70% on the second weekend. It was all downhill from there, from what I've read. Guess that's why Iger couldn't bring himself to call the movie a hit. Because it apparently wasn't. And why there's been no announcement of a sequel. Because I guess it won't be happening.

The Muppets have made 109 million dollars world wide. Its more than doubled its budget which is alot more than some movies do today. It had a staggered opening and is very popular in Europe. Sequels aren't necessarily an indication of success. The Nolan Batman Movies wait four years between sequels and their success critically and at the box office. The popularity of The Muppets will be manifested in different ways. I expect more activity on their youtube channel and probably more time on tv. I believe the Muppets are back. Batb-3D on the other hand... I only wish it were more popular

 

[WDW1974]

The Muppets while respectable was by no means a 'hit' and Disney has been having discussions on just what to do with them. They had hoped for much bigger numbers.

I know many people look at numbers, but the Industry doesn't view things the same way ... and that is why the Muppets may go back to insignificance and as a lover of both the franchise and the new film, I hope that doesn't happen!

 

[RSoxNo1]

The Muppets have made 109 million dollars world wide. Its more than doubled its budget which is alot more than some movies do today. It had a staggered opening and is very popular in Europe. Sequels aren't necessarily an indication of success. The Nolan Batman Movies wait four years between sequels and their success critically and at the box office. The popularity of The Muppets will be manifested in different ways. I expect more activity on their youtube channel and probably more time on tv. I believe the Muppets are back. Batb-3D on the other hand... I only wish it were more popular

Unfortunately for us Muppets fans, the worldwide $109 million box office for a $40 million movie is good for the company, but not great. At this point, what it might do is allow for another Muppet movie with a slightly larger budget. The Muppets still have the ability to be completely revived as a franchise, but this was really nothing more than a significant step. Had the movie made $150 million+ state side, then it would be a bit more cut and dry.

 

[bgraham34]

I had heard Disney was expecting at least 225 worldwide. So this might be the end of the muppets revival. We just have to hope that home video market does really well.

 

[TalkingHead]

You also have to factor in the cost of advertising the Muppets movie, which cuts into the profit.

And since Iger is interested in franchises (he even uses that word in the letter), I don't know if that bodes well for the Muppets because of the good-but-not-great box office numbers.

 

[Bolna]

Looking around in there for information on the parks I came across an interesting figure: attendance.

The American parks were up 1% in attendance. The international parks 6%. Seemed a nice increase, especially if you consider that TDL was closed for some time and I am sure a lot of Japanese family did not have the money to spend at a theme park if they were hit by the disaster. So I can't imagine that TDL's attendance did rise (and that is kind of confirmed when they state that revenues from there decreased). So this leaves Paris and Hong Kong. I did look for the figures in the Euro Disney Annual Review for fiscal year 2011 and it turns out that they had an increase from 15 million to 15.6 million visitors which is a 4% increase.

So, the winner in 2011 must have been Hong Kong Disneyland. An obscure place a lot of people might not really be aware that it exists in the Disney universe. And if I am right, their version of the Toy Story Playland (a total waste of money, space and talent - at least in Paris, I can't believe it's different in HK) only opened very late in the 2011 fiscal year. So it must be something else they do right over there...

I am not one to claim that everything at the international parks is golden (I have gone through my own phase of despair when I saw DLP crumble away from what I first saw in 95), but for those who say that it does not matter what state WDW is in, they are still making money: Maybe more money could be made if things were better?

 

[RSoxNo1]

Disney seems to feel that the stateside parks are incapable of substantial growth, and as such will invest in them only as needed. I believe the metric that Jim Hill stated was "a substantial addition every 3.75 years". I don't necessarily agree with Disney's perception here though.

Disney seems to think that the parks are in a mature stage, as evidence by their kicking the tires on a sale of the parks last year. I think the reality is that the parks are in an established stage, and there is still plenty of room for growth. Growth can take a variety of forms, but most fans view this solely as the addition of new attractions.

This is part of the problem - Disney seems to be looking at other growth models for the parks right now. Things like Next Gen and DVC expansion are examples of this. Sure, they'll still build new attractions, but it won't be the bulk of their spending. I think this is what's upsetting many fans - they see $1 billion spent in Next Gen and don't see the value added to their vacation that comes from say the $1.2 billion being spent over at DCA.

I think this is also people's opposition to Avatar. It's the next big expansion after Fantasyland, and people aren't really attached to the franchise so the preference would be to spend the money elsewhere. It gets to the point where Disney has to turn a deaf ear to the fans because nothing is every the right move for everyone involved.

Count me amongst those that would love to see money that's being earmarked for next gen and DVCs spent in the parks, but that's because it's stuff that I know. I understand what additions to the parks mean. I don't know what Next Gen is, anymore than the majority of people on here, and I don't stay on property very often so the DVCs don't add value to my vacation.

It's selfish, but I also have the option to spend my money elsewhere. If I feel that I can't get value out of a Disney vacation anymore I'll begin to cut things. I've already started to make this decision by not staying on property. If it ever gets to the point where my time spent in the parks is not worth the cumulative price of Disney's tickets, the flight, rental car, and offsite lodging then I'll find a new place to spend my money. Those of us that are complaining about it, are doing so because we feel that the breakeven point for our dollar may be approaching sooner than we think.

 

[prberk]

I still say that they have forgotten the value of Walt Disney World as a television backdrop -- and hence, really forgotten how WDW and the parks in general (DL included) fit into the media conglomerate that is Disney.

From the day that Walt Disney opened his new weekly series, "Disneyland," from the steps of Main Street, USA, at his new park in 1955, the Disney parks have been integrally tied into the image and allure of television. It needs to be again. But I think that Iger and his friends sit up in Burbank (itself a television tourist mecca with NBC and Universal Hollywood nearby) and forget how the parks and live interaction with guests and television work such "brand" loyalty and "synergy" into their "product" so well.

It seems that he remembers that the company is a media giant, with television and "content" so important. But he seems to forget how the parks -- a truly interactive experience, as opposed to a virtual one -- connect with that.

WDW get more corporate love when they remember that connection.

Even Michael Eisner understood that. When Universal opened Harry Potter, NBC's Today Show broadcast live from it. Even they got it.

Disney still does some of this, but not enough. Can't you see "The Wonderful World of Disney" back with a new intro each week, from some relevant resort -- or "Adventures by Disney" -- location?

And for that matter, can't you see hosting even non-Disney shows, like Discovery Channel series, in Epcot or Animal Kingdom.

Bottom line is that the parks are (and always have been) integrally tied to the media, and Disney should remember that ... and then they will know what to do with them in a global media company.

Paul