"No expiration" option not available online

[ParentsOf4]

I was looking at tickets on the new Disneyworld website and noticed that the "no expiration" option was not offered. Thinking this simply was a problem with the new website, I contacted Disney. Disney informed me that they no longer intend to offer the "no expiration" option online. Instead, I would have to call the Disney Reservation Center for this option.

For someone who takes shorter trips to WDW, consider the following scenario:

Three visits of 3, 3, and 4 days spread out over a couple of years.

10-day ticket with the "no expiration" option: $593

3-day, 3-day, and 4-day tickets: $242 + $242 + $256 = $740

AP + 3-day ticket: $574 + $242 = $816

Is this a taste of things to come? Is this the second step? (The first step was in 2012 when Disney increased the price of the "no expiration" option by 22.2% in a single year.) Does Disney intend to completely eliminate the "no expiration" option?

If Disney intends to eliminate the "no expiration" option, I find this trend deeply disturbing. Rather than boosting sales by improving its product, Disney seems intent on eliminating anything that could even remotely be considered a value.

 

[Master Yoda]

For them most part Disney does not seem all that interested in guests that take short 2-4 day trips. I am assuming that this is because their data shows that this particular demographic spends less per day than those taking 7 day or longer trips. Logic would dictate that they turn as many of the 2-4 dayers into 7 dayers as they can. The way they can do that is to make a single 7 day trip less than 2 three day trips and ticket prices are an easy way to do that.

 

[xdan0920]

For them most part Disney does not seem all that interested in guests that take short 2-4 day trips. I am assuming that this is because their data shows that this particular demographic spends less per day than those taking 7 day or longer trips. Logic would dictate that they turn as many of the 2-4 dayers into 7 dayers as they can. The way they can do that is to make a single 7 day trip less than 2 three day trips and ticket prices are an easy way to do that.

I understand your point, and I realize you are trying to apply reason to what WDW is doing, and not necessarily endorsing it. But...

Isn't it more likely that Disney will be turning those 2-4 day guests into 0 day guests, rather then turning them into 7 day guests?

 

[Master Yoda]

I understand your point, and I realize you are trying to apply reason to what WDW is doing, and not necessarily endorsing it. But...

Isn't it more likely that Disney will be turning those 2-4 day guests into 0 day guests, rather then turning them into 7 day guests?

Sure that is possible, but depending on how the numbers work out (numbers we will never see making this somewhat of a futile discussion)that might not be a bad thing. If Disney is breaking even or even loosing money on guests that pop in and out on a weekend trip, loosing them might not be the worst option.

 

[Nemo14]

I'm really disappointed to hear this. We also do short trips, and the 10-day no expiration tickets last us a few years. Hopefully they will still be available through Undercover Tourist for a while.

 

[xdan0920]

Sure that is possible, but depending on how the numbers work out (numbers we will never see making this somewhat of a futile discussion)that might not be a bad thing. If Disney is breaking even or even loosing money on guests that pop in and out on a weekend trip, loosing them might not be the worst option.

But, it creates a brand loyalty issue. Using @ParentsOf4 experience as an example, that type of guest is taking multiple 3 day trips. He is building a loyalty to the Disney brand. Creating the type of memories that drives a family to keep returning to WDW, the type of memories that cause those families young children to continue to go, and to take their future families as well. Once you start losing those guests, you may never get them back. And all for what? To squeeze a few extra bucks out of them RIGHT NOW? It doesn't make sense to me.

Brand Loyalty is WDW's most essential asset. And they are eroding it.

 

[Master Yoda]

But, it creates a brand loyalty issue. Using @ParentsOf4 experience as an example, that type of guest is taking multiple 3 day trips. He is building a loyalty to the Disney brand. Creating the type of memories that drives a family to keep returning to WDW, the type of memories that cause those families young children to continue to go, and to take their future families as well. Once you start losing those guests, you may never get them back. And all for what? To squeeze a few extra bucks out of them RIGHT NOW? It doesn't make sense to me.

Brand Loyalty is WDW's most essential asset. And they are eroding it.

All true and there is no question that it is a risk, but their data might show otherwise.

We had kind of a similar thing in the industry I work in. Most companies would bend over backwards and give away the farm to get large commercial projects. Plant managers and owners saw 6 figure projects and assumed that they were making great money on them. When I started breaking out the actual numbers it turned out that those 6 figure projects were often break even propositions at best. Several were actually done at a loss when all was said done. We reassessed our priories and put our energy toward work with a much higher profit margin and we have been much better for it. We still quote those projects, but we stand firm with our prices and let other companies, several of which have closed down, give away their product.

For all we know, Disney has seen a similar dynamic. Eventually you have to evaluate your low or no profit customers and see if they are worth keeping.

 

[ParentsOf4]

All true and there is no question that it is a risk, but their data might show otherwise.

We had kind of a similar thing in the industry I work in. Most companies would bend over backwards and give away the farm to get large commercial projects. Plant managers and owners saw 6 figure projects and assumed that they were making great money on them. When I started breaking out the actual numbers it turned out that those 6 figure projects were often break even propositions at best. Several were actually done at a loss when all was said done. We reassessed our priories and put our energy toward work with a much higher profit margin and we have been much better for it. We still quote those projects, but we stand firm with our prices and let other companies, several of which have closed down, give away their product.

For all we know, Disney has seen a similar dynamic. Eventually you have to evaluate your low or no profit customers and see if they are worth keeping.

The difficulty in relating your experience with what appears to be Disney’s strategy is that it treats consumers as predictable automata whose behavior can be calculated mathematically. As xdan0920 alludes to, when forced into unpleasant choices, people often react negatively. It’s very possible that Disney is mixing it’s indirect vs. direct costs, especially if it has moved towards activity based costing which tends to move indirect costs to direct costs. Whether WDW has 46,500 visitors or 47,000 visitors per day, it costs Disney about the same to service both number of visitors. These extra 500 visitors explicitly selected their tickets (i.e. “no expiration” option) exactly because they are the most appealing to them. By eliminating ticket options that appeal to these visitors, Disney is effectively chasing away these extra 500 visitors, losing valuable revenue without saving any appreciable cost.

The person on the shorter visit will likely spend more per day than the person on the longer visit. The person on the shorter visit could be expected to purchase, for example, about the same amount of merchandise as the person on the longer visit. Whether I visit 1 or 10 days, I am likely to purchase some mementos. If I visit 10 consecutive days, I do not buy 10 times the amount of merchandise. I do not, for example, purchase 10 times as many Mickey t-shirts just because I stayed 10 times longer.

Similarly, the person visiting 1 day is more likely to eat onsite. That person’s time at WDW is more precious (since they have less of it) and that person is more likely to think, “I don’t have time to travel offsite to find less expensive food options. I’ll go with whatever’s available onsite from Disney.”

All things considered, I suggest that the person on the shorter visit is more likely, not less, to spend more per day than the person on the longer visit.

Disney’s lower-cost-per-day tickets are intentionally designed to keep visitors onsite longer exactly because Disney recognizes the value of their incremental spending. Disney is trying to get them to spend at least some money at WDW rather than spend it somewhere else. Disney recognizes that a little bit of more money is better than no money.

By possibly eliminating a class of ticket that appeals to certain types of visitors, Disney is effectively driving these visitors offsite, losing all of their money.

In the end, why should I spend $299 for a WDW 3-day hopper when I can get a Universal Annual Pass for considerably less?

 

[Master Yoda]

The difficulty in relating your experience with what appears to be Disney’s strategy is that it treats consumers as predictable automata whose behavior can be calculated mathematically.

When you are talking about a customer base of 100, or even a 1000 you would be correct. However, when you start seeing the number of people Disney does, treating them as predictable automatons is possible and in many cases practical.

As xdan0920 alludes to, when forced into unpleasant choices, people often react negatively. It’s very possible that Disney is mixing it’s indirect vs. direct costs, especially if it has moved towards activity based costing which tends to move indirect costs to direct costs. Whether WDW has 46,500 visitors or 47,000 visitors per day, it costs Disney about the same to service both number of visitors. These extra 500 visitors explicitly selected their tickets (i.e. “no expiration” option) exactly because they are the most appealing to them. By eliminating ticket options that appeal to these visitors, Disney is effectively chasing away these extra 500 visitors, losing valuable revenue without saving any appreciable cost.

Again quite correct, but if you loose money on those extra 500 guests is it really worth having them there? Sure there are intangibles that you have to consider, but if you feel those intangibles do not offset the loss then there is no point in having them there. What is better, 1 person you make $5 from or 500 people you loose 5 cents a piece on?

The person on the shorter visit will likely spend more per day than the person on the longer visit. The person on the shorter visit could be expected to purchase, for example, about the same amount of merchandise as the person on the longer visit. Whether I visit 1 or 10 days, I am likely to purchase some mementos. If I visit 10 consecutive days, I do not buy 10 times the amount of merchandise. I do not, for example, purchase 10 times as many Mickey t-shirts just because I stayed 10 times longer.

Similarly, the person visiting 1 day is more likely to eat onsite. That person’s time at WDW is more precious (since they have less of it) and that person is more likely to think, “I don’t have time to travel offsite to find less expensive food options. I’ll go with whatever’s available onsite from Disney.”

All things considered, I suggest that the person on the shorter visit is more likely, not less, to spend more per day than the person on the longer visit.

Disney’s lower-cost-per-day tickets are intentionally designed to keep visitors onsite longer exactly because Disney recognizes the value of their incremental spending. Disney is trying to get them to spend at least some money at WDW rather than spend it somewhere else. Disney recognizes that a little bit of more money is better than no money.

By possibly eliminating a class of ticket that appeals to certain types of visitors, Disney is effectively driving these visitors offsite, losing all of their money.

Like me you are guessing at numbers,scenarios, etc. The difference is you are guessing at why what Disney is doing is a bad thing. I am guessing at scenarios that will most likely explain the logic in their actions. I seriously doubt that TDO is sitting around a table thinking of ways to screw over guests. They are figuring out ways to maximize profits, which drive up stock prices and gets them that bonus that lets them buy their 4th Ferrari. The difference between them and us is they have hard core numbers in which to base their decisions on. If they are actively trying to eliminate the short term visitors it tells me that their data shows that the profit margin for short term guests is inadequate or non-existent. Could they be wrong? Absolutely. Time and the spreadsheets will reveal that.

In the end, why should I spend $299 for a WDW 3-day hopper when I can get a Universal Annual Pass for considerably less?

The simple answer, because Universal is not Disney. If you did not have some emotional connection to Disney that effects your decision making we would not even be having this conversation. Disney has its hooks in both of us, they know it and they will push it until the hooks break. Knowing where that point is will be the trick.

 

[Jo DeVil]

I may be missing the point, this option has not been removed? and is still offered? With so far no info on this type of ticket being removed?
So from another point of view,
I do all my research on line, ticket prices etc. so if I didn't know about the no expiration ticket and it was not offered on line, it would not be part of my research I would look at the list and pick which on was best for my family. Those of you that do know about it will call and ask why its not on line and they will tell you it is available as you have phoned. So maybe they are just not advertising it as an option any more????? Sorry but my glass is always half full TTFN Jo

 

[thomas998]

I understand your point, and I realize you are trying to apply reason to what WDW is doing, and not necessarily endorsing it. But...

Isn't it more likely that Disney will be turning those 2-4 day guests into 0 day guests, rather then turning them into 7 day guests?

I'm guessing that the typical 2 day guest is a guest on a tight budget... they probably think they don't spend enough in the parks to justify trying to get them to go because aside form the price of admission they don't get anything else from them.. compare that to your 7 day guest that is making the trip, and they will be more likely to get caught up in the Disney atmosphere and probably spend more, not just on food and drink in the park but on over priced ballons and mickey ears... Even the ones that you might consider budget minded... Go visit a lobby of a value resort and you'll see many families with kids dragging along all manner of over priced highly profitable Disney junk from the parks.... The company is out to make the most profit they can. If you owned a restaurant and only had 5 tables would you rather have those tables taken up by big spenders or by frugal folks.

I have nothing against people that like to save money, I hate spending it myself... but I can't blame a business for targeting people that spend more and ignoring the people that spend less.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Like me you are guessing at numbers,scenarios, etc. The difference is you are guessing at why what Disney is doing is a bad thing. I am guessing at scenarios that will most likely explain the logic in their actions. I seriously doubt that TDO is sitting around a table thinking of ways to screw over guests.

I think we are on the same wavelength. I think the only difference is that you might be assuming TDO is making smart business choices while I am assuming they're making bad choices for the following reasons, among others:

• Indications are Burbank is displeased with WDW's performance to the point where Burbank is making management changes while becoming increasingly involved in the WDW decision-making process.
• WDW attendance is down in 2 of the last 3 years while being essentially flat for a longer span, while simultaneously exploding at UOR and DLR demonstrating that, with the right business strategy, customers are ready to spend their vacation dollars at theme parks if offered the right product.
• Onsite occupancy rates are down to 78%, the lowest it's been since the post 9/11 crisis.
• WDW's continued focus on discounts. It's already looking as if TDO intends to blanket most of 2013 with discounts, a strategy that Iger has publically expressed displeasure with. A product that's doing well does not need discounts. It certainly doesn't need to be discounted year-round.
• TDO continued pursuit of short-term finance-based initiatives to solve its problems rather than stepping back and reevaluating their long-term strategy.
• Theme park quality has declined to the point where even casual WDW vacationers are noticing, leading to possible brand-name erosion that could adversely impact other business endeavors.
• Specific to this topic, Disney's ticket pricing structure (charging $10 per day for days 5 to 10) clearly shows that even at $10 per day, there is money to be made and Disney wants it.

Essentially, I'm questioning every decision coming out of TDO and, it seems, so is Burbank.

If there has been a decision to eliminate the "no expiration" option or, as suggested by Jo DeVil, to simply hide it from the public, I doubt this decision would have risen to the level where Burbank would have been involved. Therefore, I assume the decision came out of TDO without Burbank's approval. For the reasons I've listed, I am questioning all decisions out of TDO of late.

I'm not disagreeing with you; you may be right. However, I am looking at it differently.

P.S. By the way, I have been going to Universal lately exactly because WDW's ticket pricing structure has driven me away from the product.

 

[Master Yoda]

I think we are on the same wavelength. I think the only difference is that you might be assuming TDO is making smart business choices while I am assuming they're making bad choices for the following reasons, among others:

• Indications are Burbank is displeased with WDW's performance to the point where Burbank is making management changes while becoming increasingly involved in the WDW decision-making process.
• WDW attendance is down in 2 of the last 3 years while being essentially flat for a longer span, while simultaneously exploding at UOR and DLR demonstrating that, with the right business strategy, customers are ready to spend their vacation dollars at theme parks if offered the right product.
• Onsite occupancy rates are down to 78%, the lowest it's been since the post 9/11 crisis.
• WDW's continued focus on discounts. It's already looking as if TDO intends to blanket most of 2013 with discounts, a strategy that Iger has publically expressed displeasure with. A product that's doing well does not need discounts. It certainly doesn't need to be discounted year-round.
• TDO continued pursuit of short-term finance-based initiatives to solve its problems rather than stepping back and reevaluating their long-term strategy.
• Theme park quality has declined to the point where even casual WDW vacationers are noticing, leading to possible brand-name erosion that could adversely impact other business endeavors.
• Specific to this topic, Disney's ticket pricing structure (charging $10 per day for days 5 to 10) clearly shows that even at $10 per day, there is money to be made and Disney wants it.

Essentially, I'm questioning every decision coming out of TDO and, it seems, so is Burbank.


If there has been a decision to eliminate the "no expiration" option or, as suggested by Jo DeVil, to simply hide it from the public, I doubt this decision would have risen to the level where Burbank would have been involved. Therefore, I assume the decision came out of TDO without Burbank's approval. For the reasons I've listed, I am questioning all decisions out of TDO of late.

I'm not disagreeing with you; you may be right. However, I am looking at it differently.

P.S. By the way, I have been going to Universal lately exactly because WDW's ticket pricing structure has driven me away from the product.

I am assuming that they are making decision based on data. "Smart" will be determined by the results. I however, do tend to think that TDO wrongly gives more credence to the spread sheets and less to the human factor, but what do I know. They are the CEOs, CFO's, etc, that are supposed to be good at these things where as I am just an engineer that knows how to make things not fall down or blow away.

 

[Witchy Chick]

I am assuming that they are making decision based on data. "Smart" will be determined by the results. I however, do tend to think that TDO wrongly gives more credence to the spread sheets and less to the human factor, but what do I know. They are the CEOs, CFO's, etc, that are supposed to be good at these things where as I am just an engineer that knows how to make things not fall down or blow away.

You forgot the plethora of MBAs.....

 

[DisneyJoe]

I was looking at tickets on the new Disneyworld website and noticed that the "no expiration" option was not offered. Thinking this simply was a problem with the new website, I contacted Disney. Disney informed me that they no longer intend to offer the "no expiration" option online. Instead, I would have to call the Disney Reservation Center for this option.

My guess is that they were simplifying the website options - too many guests get confused with too many options. Even base, park hopper, and water parks and more confuse too many people.

Call in to get it, or add it to your ticket when you get to the park/resort.

 

[TinkerBelle8878]

I say go back to all tickets not expiring ever without the upcharge. I will never pay extra for this option. Nor parkhopping if that's not already included in the ticket price. The tickets are expensive enough and since those both used to be included in the total price, no thanks. They're getting enough money out of me with very little change in the parks from years ago. That's Magic My Way until Disney comes to their senses.

 

[ewensell3]

Call in to get it, or add it to your ticket when you get to the park/resort.

Or go to another ticket source...

http://www.undercovertourist.com

10-day no-expire park hopper at Undercover Tourist is $626.95* . That includes tax and standard shipping to the lower 48 states. After tax Disney's ticket will be $631. How much do they add on for shipping and "processing fees" nowadays? Sure, one can select "will call" to avoid shipping, but there's something reassuring about having the tickets physically in your hands before leaving home.

* - If you subscribe to the monthly newsletter at mousesavers.com , it usually has a link to Undercover which has an additional discount. At the moment they have the 10-day no-expire park hoppers for $603.95 via the discount link.

 

[rodserling27]

Or go to another ticket source...

http://www.undercovertourist.com

10-day no-expire park hopper at Undercover Tourist is $626.95* . That includes tax and standard shipping to the lower 48 states. After tax Disney's ticket will be $631. How much do they add on for shipping and "processing fees" nowadays? Sure, one can select "will call" to avoid shipping, but there's something reassuring about having the tickets physically in your hands before leaving home.

* - If you subscribe to the monthly newsletter at mousesavers.com , it usually has a link to Undercover which has an additional discount. At the moment they have the 10-day no-expire park hoppers for $603.95 via the discount link.

At that rate, might as well just get an Annual Pass and enjoy the (few) discounts that AP holders get!

 

[flynnibus]

can't see taking it off the website as anything but testing or phasing in the end of no expiration.

DLR doesn't have expiration already. Actually I've found the paid upgrade for no expiration on MYW tickets to be an odd-man-out. Disney working to phase it out.. wouldn't suprise me at all.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Nickel and dimeing the "guests" again, eh, Mickey?

Why do I feel like I need a shower every time I go to WDW?