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

[lewisc]

Careful opening of certain gates allow some of the animals to feed themselves. And, as a bonus, less overall mouths to feed.

Film for Disney +. Survival of the fittest.

 

[tirian]

Regarding theme park attendance, it's important to remember that, historically, attendance often drops prior to the opening of major attractions. For example:

• Universal's attendance dropped 12% the year before Wizzarding World of Harry Potter opened.
• The Magic Kingdom's attendance dropped a cumulative total of 11% in the years leading up to the opening of Epcot.

Once vacationers hear about new attractions, many delay their next trips until those new attractions are open.

Disney has (had) announced plans to open major attractions over the course of several years. There will be those who wait for most or all to open before their next visit.

When I look at the numbers being reported in Disney's SEC fillings, I see a company that has done better than most at keeping Guests coming despite these publicly announced new attractions.

Since my last financial analysis at the end of fiscal year 2016, when I reported a massive increase in domestic capital expenditures:

Walt Disney World’s Biggest Investment since 1998

Domestic theme park attendance has changed by:

• 2% in fiscal 2017,
• 4% in fiscal 2018,
• 0% in fiscal 2019,
• 2% in the first quarter of fiscal 2020.

If it were not for COVID-19, Disney would be well on its way to another year of record attendance. Disney's theme park attendance had been unusually resilient prior to the onset of COVID-19.

You’re absolutely right, but I’m talking long-term influence on reputation. We’re looking at it two different ways, and I suspect it’s because of our jobs IRL.

 

[tirian]

Careful opening of certain gates allow some of the animals to feed themselves. And, as a bonus, less overall mouths to feed.

They could rename it Jurassic Park, but that would require purchasing a new IP. Maybe Blue Aliens vs. Predators?

 

[tirian]

I find it interesting to muse on honestly, because I feel like they're kind of losing me as a customer precisely because of that sensation of it all being "overwhelming" and "overpriced". As I've said elsewhere, I don't like feeling quite so nickel and dimed and the level of planning involved makes it feel like work more than a vacation.

Still, in the current circumstances, I wonder whether it perversely works in their favour. They're going to struggle to get anyone down to WDW when it's located in a hotspot of a global pandemic. The big selling point now, though, is that the crowds are manageable and, while you have to reserve your park, the overall planning is far more manageable. People are also now used to astronomical prices, so in the short term they can still squeeze as much out of each guest as they want. In the meantime, the company is also diversified enough that they can afford for the parks and resorts to lose money for the time being.

In the longer term, they'll have to adapt to whatever comes after the pandemic. Still, for the moment, I wonder whether the things I don't like are actually still working just fine for them.

Considering that they’re cutting park hours, the tactic isn’t working — not to mention the pandemic’s effect.

 

[tirian]

Absolutely, the experience has been watered down as we discuss all too often on these pages. Where I would question is whether that's really been "bad for business" as the parks seem to have been thriving financially and with attendance despite all the changes we bemoan on here. I'm not saying that I agree with those decisions, only that the reckoning that many on here seem to suggest is right around the corner has yet to happen.

Could this erode the fan base over time? Maybe. I agree that it's possible that the way the parks have been handled may result in future generations not being as enamored as past ones. And maybe that "rite of passage" of going to Disney might disappear into yesterday. Or maybe not.

Granted the pandemic has shot it all to bits, but that would have happened no matter what they had done with the parks in the last quarter century. It's not like revenues are down because they shoved Frozen into the Norway pavilion and people are annoyed.



Agree that we've seen that business philosophy occur. But my hot take would be that they started at a certain baseline. They upped prices and cut experiences so that profit margins are that much higher. If the current pandemic and the lower crowds means that people aren't buying "respite from crowds" that that's just less revenue coming in. But the same basic revenue as before (your more basic tickets, whatever hotel rooms they sell, food/merch) is still in place. I don't see how that makes them "worse" off than before, just returning back to lower revenue per guest numbers - something Wall St won't like, I guess, but not exactly meaning that the parks will shutter.



I'm very skeptical. I think that tons of middle class people still go to Disney, from all over the country and world. The attendance isn't what it is on the backs of people coming multiple times a year from out of town. Everyone I know still does the at least one in a lifetime visit with their kids, many go every few years at least. Sometimes that means saving, sometimes that means credit card debt. But they still come if they can; I don't think the board's perception of "not worth the cost" is really that of the general public.

I agree about the pandemic and state of the economy affecting credit and finances and the parks are going to be taking a hit for a while - even if the virus is gone. But that's just a broad economy/vacation based issue, not specific to Disney or how they've run the parks. If they need to, they run promotions and discounts and make the parks seem like a "bargain" compared to previous costs in order to bring people back. Some execs and Wall St may not like that idea and culd view it as "devaluing" but the reality is in a post-COVID world, business will do what they need to and the sharp pencil guys will understand.

Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that I like how Disney has run the park in the Iger years (and late Eisner years). But the doom and gloomers on here keep suggesting that the day of reconing is coming soon and the parks will collapse and... I just don't see any evidence of it. My prospective is that people on these boards want that to happen so the parks can go back to how thing used to be (I want it too!) but I don't see it happening.

Some of us simply want to return to the value of having one ticket price that included rides, maintenance, shows, a day parade, fireworks, and a night parade—the way Disney built its reputation. That’s also the way the parks operated for years, even under Eisner and the first few years of Iger.

But you’re right, the parks aren’t going out of business. No way. Some people should rein that in a little bit.

 

[tirian]

So how long exactly are we going to be stuck with Iger?

Haha, the current policies came from Chapek. “He ain’t called Cheap-ek for nothing!”

 

[Animaniac93-98]

The baseline has shifted. They’ve finally somewhat realized that the parks do need new offerings to keep people happy and coming but return on investment has become significantly worse during Iger’s years. They need even more people to come in order to justify increasingly more expensive attractions. Smaller visitation can’t justify attractions costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

These Tweets by two people who seem to know about this kind of stuff (one a former forum member) seem relevant:

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Disney: Is there anybody who knows stuff about these kiddie ride places?

Legit Industry Experts and Former Top Employees: Yes, we actually have a few suggestions...

Disney: Do you have a background in social media marketing? Have you managed a Mall?

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Treating a hospitality business like a hospitality business is not rocket science.

Unless you're Disney. For them it's like trying to understand quantum physics.

 

[discos]

Cedar Point isn’t a carnie park, I’m getting tired of the subset of Disney Fans who feel that there is no viable option outside of Disney, heck, the way both parks are operating I would argue currently Universal is a better experience.

You're right, Cedar Point is most definitely not a "Carnie Park" but it's not a Theme Park either. It's a great option for an Amusement Park and those looking for more thrill but an Amusement Park and Theme Park serve totally different functions.

 

[Touchdown]

You're right, Cedar Point is most definitely not a "Carnie Park" but it's not a Theme Park either. It's a great option for an Amusement Park and those looking for more thrill but an Amusement Park and Theme Park serve totally different functions.

They serve the same function, wholesome entertainment for the whole family. What’s interesting is that we are quibbling about the slight difference in approaches (amusement parks are mostly about the attractions, which are mostly rides, and don’t have an underlying story where as theme parks use their attractions which are far more varied and complex to transport you to a fantasy world) at a time when Disney World has been reduced to an elaborately themed amusement park (it’s currently all about the rides, there is no entertainment, no culminating night shows, just themed rides and shops.)

 

[MisterPenguin]

These Tweets by two people who seem to know about this kind of stuff (one a former forum member) seem relevant:

Ya build Cs and Ds like for Toy Story Land and you get dinged for them not being E-Level attractions.

Mary Poppins was going to be a C, and the cries of disappointment rose from the peanut gallery that it wasn't an elaborate dark ride.

People on this forum turn up their noses at Ratatouille for not being a real E-Ride.

And yet, when someone says the parks need more C and D, everyone nods their heads.

Until it happens.

 

[JUFL2019]

Ya build Cs and Ds like for Toy Story Land and you get dinged for them not being E-Level attractions.

Mary Poppins was going to be a C, and the cries of disappointment rose from the peanut gallery that it wasn't an elaborate dark ride.

People on this forum turn up their noses at Ratatouille for not being a real E-Ride.

And yet, when someone says the parks need more C and D, everyone nods their heads.

Until it happens.

This 100%. Any time Disney announces a c or d, most people here gripe and complain about it not being an E. Even the E that get built get griped and complained about for not being eeee enough. Disney could announce a new fully non-acquired IP land with two E, 1 D, 1, C and an A and y’all would complain about the color of the trash cans or that the beer doesn’t match the theme.

 

[CJR]

Ya build Cs and Ds like for Toy Story Land and you get dinged for them not being E-Level attractions.

Mary Poppins was going to be a C, and the cries of disappointment rose from the peanut gallery that it wasn't an elaborate dark ride.

People on this forum turn up their noses at Ratatouille for not being a real E-Ride.

And yet, when someone says the parks need more C and D, everyone nods their heads.

Until it happens.

I think it's more about execution. The Fun Wheel/Pal Around doesn't try to hide what it is. In FL, they have been taking these things and dressing them up (and marketing them) like E's with an excessively high budget for what they are. All, IMO, of course.

 

[Brer Panther]

Haha, the current policies came from Chapek. “He ain’t called Cheap-ek for nothing!”

But wasn't it Chapek who was against re-opening when the pandemic was going on? AND the guy who doesn't agree with Iger that Splash Mountain should be rethemed?

 

[UNCgolf]

WDW’s closest attempt at a regional park kind of ride is the Slinky Dog Coaster. One of the most popular rides in the park.

Which is incredibly unfortunate. Not that the ride itself is bad, but the whole exposed track and theming is a major failure and part of the reason Toy Story Land is so terrible. If Disney pivoted to building a lot of rides like Slinky Dog I'd probably stop going.

 

[UNCgolf]

Yes, Disney Parks are the pinnacle of theme park greatness; none of them have any cheap carnival rides at all in them. Oh wait

The list of mediocre attractions goes on and on. I promise once you realize many regional parks in the states are better than Disney, life will be better for ya!

You seem incapable of understanding that people want different things from parks. I've been to several regional parks and none of them are even remotely close to being as good as WDW for me, despite the fact that Disney is much worse than it was 25 years ago.

But that's because I don't care about roller coasters; I don't even enjoy the vast majority of them. I care about interesting themed environments and rides.

You need to realize that what you want out of a park isn't what Disney is offering. For you, the regional parks are better because you want huge coasters. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make it objectively true. Disney is catering to a different crowd.

 

[michmousefan]

You missed the part about “limits”.

The human body is prone to side effects from unnatural GeForces.

I once did 116 inversions at a park and loved it.

More than 6 don’t feel good now. Father Time is undefeated

As a fellow "experienced" rider, I really appreciate how RMC engineers their rides. Steel Vengeance is so well done... four inversions and I can easily do it multiple times (that's only a FastLane phenomenon, though). But other coaster inversions — I'm rather limited to a few a day. RMC makes inversions re-rideable, if that makes sense.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

WDW’s closest attempt at a regional park kind of ride is the Slinky Dog Coaster. One of the most popular rides in the park.

DHS only has 9 rides total.

Getting in the top 5 isn't that hard.

 

[Lilofan]

Treating a hospitality business like a hospitality business is not rocket science.

Unless you're Disney. For them it's like trying to understand quantum physics.

And some may try to justify these " important " jobs