On layoffs, very bad attendance, and Iger's legacy being one of disgrace

mkt

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
Jrb1979 said:
Not a huge percentage. About a 1/4 of your pay goes to taxes. The majority of Canadians get money back from income tax. It evens out in the end. The U.S. Costco top wage is $26. Its not that much less then ours.
Click to expand...

Last year in Sweden, I compared paystubs with a colleague there.

His take home - as a percent of his salary - was within a few dollars of mine.

Meanwhile he doesn't have to worry about health copays, deductibles, etc.
 
M

Mrtko

Member
pheneix said:
Shanghai is losing money on its operations too.
Click to expand...
What does "Net Positive" mean? Didn't they say variable revenue exceeded variable cost, so the admissions pay the salaries, but the fixed costs still keep it in the negative? I think I got that right so how is it a net positive?
 
hopemax

hopemax

Well-Known Member
pheneix said:
Btw.... where's Bob Iger?
Click to expand...
Sir not appearing in this conference call.

1596575607747.png
 
drew81

drew81

Well-Known Member
Question of the day from Chase:

“So WDW demand isn’t as strong as you thought it would be?”

@realBobChapek:

“Yes, we’ve royally screwed over Annual Passholders by blocking them from parks with the reservation system, all the while letting resort/day ticket guests have full access. We’re still figuring out the AP refund algorithm too. Day ticket guests aren’t actually knocking down the door. Even so, we can’t honor or give Annual Passholders what they actually paid for. We’re hoping that extra month will shut them up.”
 
gwhb75

gwhb75

Well-Known Member
Mrtko said:
What does "Net Positive" mean? Didn't they say variable revenue exceeded variable cost, so the admissions pay the salaries, but the fixed costs still keep it in the negative? I think I got that right so how is it a net positive?
Click to expand...

That's what Net Positive means as per the definition they are using. If they can cover at least the variable costs then they are better off staying open than being closed. EG. If fixed costs are $100, and I can sell a ticket for $120, with variable costs of $110, I am covering my variable costs and contributing $10 towards fixed cost. Not a way to run a business long term obviously, but in the short term, given the current world situation, it's the best of the possible worst-case scenarios.

PS - sorry if I'm insulting your intelligence with the simple example. Not my intention at all, but I don't know your level of financial literacy
 
tirian

tirian

Well-Known Member
el_super said:
But that doesn't really address the question of how they could have protected their park business from this. If they had said they were just going to take the cash and sit on it, would that have been an acceptable answer? Even amidst the complaints that they don't invest enough in their parks?

I don't think the fan community is ready to adopt a position that money spent on the parks is a waste.
Click to expand...
Then please share your expert opinion here.
 
tirian

tirian

Well-Known Member
Disstevefan1 said:
Its so easy to criticize TWDC after the fact. Before the virus, TWDC was making money hand over fist. I was at EPCOT F&W in November (who knows the virus was already in the US) and it was so MOBBED I could not get near a food booth to buy my $7 sample.

In the past I was critical about WDW raising prices on everything, but folks (including me) still showed up and spent our cash.

If before the virus, if Iger went into a stockholders meeting and announced, “We are not going to grow our business, instead we are going to stock pile all our cash in case we are hit by a 100 year event like, I don’t know, the Spanish flu.”

He would have been laughed out of the place.....
Click to expand...
I agree with you 100%. That’s why nobody expected anything like this despite wondering why he overpaid for Fox. Anyone who claims they foresaw this situation “in unprecedented times” is full of poop. :D

For the fan community, it’s the hindsight that stings.
 
el_super

el_super

Well-Known Member
tirian said:
Then please share your expert opinion here.
Click to expand...

The burden is on you to provide what you think an adequate backup plan would have been, since you are leveling the charge against Iger that he failed to have one.

My "expert" opinion is that they are handling this crisis about as well as would be expected.
 
P

pheneix

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
No talk of layoffs today.

Disney's furlough action taken earlier in the year was cited as a cost savings maneuver that saved their quarter. Per conference call "most cast members furloughed" will return eventually.

Yeah. That same company that totally killed spending on the theme parks. Totally hiring everyone back.

Still, I guess I am happy to say that this time the scary thread title above hasn't played out yet?

The long term challenges at Disney are present and they will be present tomorrow.

They're not talking about the China parks at all today. There is a reason.
 
M

mwf5555

Active Member
tirian said:
I agree with you 100%. That’s why nobody expected anything like this despite wondering why he overpaid for Fox. Anyone who claims they foresaw this situation “in unprecedented times” is full of poop. :D

For the fan community, it’s the hindsight that stings.
Click to expand...
pheneix said:
Chapek preaching truth rn, as we have discussed.

WDW's demand is quite muted. But they'll be in good shape when consumer confidence returns.

Also uh, um, and eh.....
Click to expand...
So...does all this mean no layoffs for awhile since the bottom line is favorable?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom