News 2018 ticket price increases

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think once per year increases can be expected and are probably needed.
But do realize that there are people online who like to compare everything to a decade ago.,

You didn't bother doing anything beyond defending disney...but at least you know your role.

Name a few consumer products that go up 150% or so in that amount of time.

I'm not even being combative...but when you don't put any thought into your excuse making...you end up bringing out the heavy.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Or.maybe, just maybe, the product was undervalued 10 years ago. In my area we have a local amusement park with mostly midway type rides with an admission of $45 per person. Now, with a one-day Disney ticket being $119 - is the value I get from a day at any of the Disney parks comparable to the midway park seem to line up with the price difference? In my case, absolutely. The types of attractions, themeing, and dining Disney does is worth quite a bit more to me than the basic midway amusement park. To call anyone who goes to Disney and decides that the money is worth it a lobster or not understanding the value they get is rather insulting and divorced from reality. If that were the case people wouldn't come back. But they do. Again and again. The value is worth the price for many even if it isn't for you.

Undervalued, huh?

...been hanging out on Dis, ehhh?

They made huge profits off that "undervalued" product...so that kinda blows the theory that it could be so.

And part of the reason they made profit was the value. But it was never just about that gate...it was also building recognition and business for other units outside the park.

I'm not gonna scream or fight that it's overpriced...there is a range of opinion on that. But dismissing the argument as a somekind of a frosh year Microeconomics class is also flatly wrong. It is a valid argument.

 

[mikejs78]

Undervalued, huh?

...been hanging out on Dis, ehhh?

They made huge profits off that "undervalued" product...so that kinda blows the theory that it could be so.

And part of the reason they made profit was the value. But it was never just about that gate...it was also building recognition and business for other units outside the park.

I'm not gonna scream or fight that it's overpriced...there is a range of opinion on that. But dismissing the argument as a somekind of a frosh year Microeconomics class is also flatly wrong. It is a valid argument.

Oh please. This has nothing to do with 'hanging out on the Dis', it's just the reality of economics.
Whether something is undervalued, priced to value, or overvalued has absolutely nothing to do with profit. It has to do with what the market perceives the value of the product to be worth and what people are willing to pay for that value. And to me and many others, the current price is not that ceiling. To many, it is. All I'm saying is that, to me, the current pricing is still worth it. That is, of course, subjective. But objectively speaking, the market still supports the current pricing - people are still going in droves.

Now Disney is at risk of hitting that ceiling, or devaluing their product by slacking on maintenance, having lines that are too long, poor guest experiences, not building out and investing back in the product enough etc., and those are valid arguments, some of which I agree with. But if that's the case, then people will stop going because the price Disney is asking won't be worth the value of the product that they offer to most people.

And your dismissive comment about 'frosh economics class' is funny, because this is really nothing more than basic economics.

 

[21stamps]

You didn't bother doing anything beyond defending disney...but at least you know your role.

Name a few consumer products that go up 150% or so in that amount of time.

I'm not even being combative...but when you don't put any thought into your excuse making...you end up bringing out the heavy.

It’s not an excuse. It’s a reason.

You, and all of the other people who wish to complain about the price increases over the past several years- take a look at reality.

What would the reality of a $50 per day Walt Disney World look like?

Why on Earth would Disney World charge LESS than a Cedar Fair or Six Flags Park?

Why wouldn’t they charge what the market will pay?


If you can’t answer those questions without attributing the answers to “pixie duster”, then there isn’t much hope of ever having a reality based conversation.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And your dismissive comment about 'frosh economics class' is funny, because this is really nothing more than basic economics.

There's a reason why theory is walled up on campuses and those that teach them rarely cross the street..:because it's never that simple on the other side.

I don't actually care much about these increases...didn't blink. I think locked in days is yet another bad longterm move...but time will tell.

But what is odd is the defense of increases. There's nothing GOOD about this for the consumer. They're not "limiting crowds"...the only way that would ever happen is if they sold hard caps...and at capacity. That is spin nonsense.

We can not fight about it...fine. But let's at least observe common sense?

 

[mikejs78]

There's a reason why theory is walled up on campuses and those that teach them rarely cross the street..:because it's never that simple on the other side.

I don't actually care much about these increases...didn't blink. I think locked in days is yet another bad longterm move...but time will tell.

But what is odd is the defense of increases. There's notion GOOD about this for the consumer. They're not "limiting crowds"...the only way that would ever happen is if they sold hard caps...and at capacity. That is spin nonsense.

We can not fight about it...fine. But let's at least observe common sense?

There's a reason the theory exists, because it's been proven again and again to explain the behavior.

No one is saying it's necessarily consumer friendly. I'm saying it makes sense.

Disney could very well limit crowds if they increased the purchase price from $119 to $500 per day. That would definitely limit crowds. No one wants that of course and that wouldn't be good for Disney's bottom line either, but there is something to the fact that Disney has too much demand for it's supply and there are many levers to tune to try to rectify that problem. One is raising prices. Another is building out and adding capacity. I personally think they are doing too much of the former and not enough of the latter (although at least they are doing more now than they have been doing over the last decade), but both levers will have effects.

 

[Po'Rich]

Every time the price increases (especially when it increases faster than the rate of inflation) consumers have to reassess if the product is still a good value. Not just whether this is a good value in terms of vacation, but an affordable option in the context of other financial commitments, desires and needs. For those who state that Disney needs to raise rates to decrease attendance or that Disney company should determine "what the market will bear" have to realize that such concepts only work if there are those who lose out. That means there are those who enjoyed WDW who have to come to a realization that this vacation is no longer for them. It means that people who enjoyed going to Disney as a child have to realize that they will not be able to make those memories with their own families. Keep in mind that we're not just looking at a simple 5% increase. As one poster pointed out, prices have more than doubled in the past 12 years. Have salaries doubled during that time? So, when people express concern over the rate of increase, let's not bully them for not understanding basic economics. Instead, let's respond with empathy for people who are realizing that American society is more and more becoming divided between that haves and the have-nots.

 

[matt9112]

It’s not an excuse. It’s a reason.

You, and all of the other people who wish to complain about the price increases over the past several years- take a look at reality.

What would the reality of a $50 per day Walt Disney World look like?

Why on Earth would Disney World charge LESS than a Cedar Fair or Six Flags Park?

Why wouldn’t they charge what the market will pay?


If you can’t answer those questions without attributing the answers to “pixie duster”, then there isn’t much hope of ever having a reality based conversation.

fair points but maybe the entire amusement industry is insanely cost prohibitive....six flags prices are comical for what the product is....it's like McDonald's of them parks (we sell more!) so.... cedar property's do a much better job at that product. keep in mind most theme parks in the entire country close for some period a year and that has to be compensated for in price....if I'm open for 8 months a year that leaves 4 months of loss. not just revenue loss but actually cost. (some level of maintaince and new attractions if any are slotted in this down time) so my 8 months of billable time needs to compensate for 4 months of no generation. so if we look at a 60 dollar ticket for generic amusement park would be more like 40ish if you look at it from that angle. Granted alot of amusement park pricing is just what the market will support...how many people care about the service or other details at say a six flags park? nobody your paying to enjoy an amusement park period. Disney sits on the top with the "once in lifetime" social moniker. everybody that's a normal America wants a Disney vacation. how much are you willing to pay? prices have more than doubled since Iger and attendance is through the roof. look if they can legally get away with it they want us packed in there like a Chinese swimming pool for the maximum amount of money we will pay.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Disney can almost certainly raise prices even more and let service and maintenance deteriorate farther and still see attendance climb. This is because of the fundamental appeal of the parks (a product of the Disney and Eisner regimes), Iger's skillful management of the film division, and, most of all, Disney's completely unique place in both American and world culture. In that sense, yes, WDW may be technically undervalued.

But...

Even those who hate naysaying and dire predictions can admit that there is a scenario, however distant and unlikely, where all that accumulated good will can't convince a single person that WDW is a reasonable value. Say, a theoretical future, when one-day tickets cost $500 and guests routinely fall out of the open doors of monorails. And somewhere between today and that fictional park future is a breaking point, a spot at which enough guests will choose not to go to WDW that revenue begins to decline.

And once Disney hits that point, there's no easy way back. The good will collected over nearly a century, the product of a combination of artistic and business genius and an un-reproducible confluence of historic and cultural developments, will be gone. Lowering prices, frantically building, nothing will ever put WDW back in the unique cultural position it once enjoyed.

Iger can keep slashing spending and raising prices and revenue will continue to go up - in the short term. And maybe that's his only job. But at some point, it will irreparably hurt the future of the company. Does Iger have any responsibility for the fate of the company after 2021, or whenever he retires? That's the question that needs to be asked.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney can almost certainly raise prices even more and let service and maintenance deteriorate farther and still see attendance climb. This is because of the fundamental appeal of the parks (a product of the Disney and Eisner regimes), Iger's skillful management of the film division, and, most of all, Disney's completely unique place in both American and world culture. In that sense, yes, WDW may be technically undervalued.

But...

Even those who hate naysaying and dire predictions can admit that there is a scenario, however distant and unlikely, where all that accumulated good will can't convince a single person that WDW is a reasonable value. Say, a theoretical future, when one-day tickets cost $500 and guests routinely fall out of the open doors of monorails. And somewhere between today and that fictional park future is a breaking point, a spot at which enough guests will choose not to go to WDW that revenue begins to decline.

And once Disney hits that point, there's no easy way back. The good will collected over nearly a century, the product of a combination of artistic and business genius and an un-reproducible confluence of historic and cultural developments, will be gone. Lowering prices, frantically building, nothing will ever put WDW back in the unique cultural position it once enjoyed.

Iger can keep slashing spending and raising prices and revenue will continue to go up - in the short term. And maybe that's his only job. But at some point, it will irreparably hurt the future of the company. Does Iger have any responsibility for the fate of the company after 2021, or whenever he retires? That's the question that needs to be asked.

Excellent...and you hit the real point: the danger is longterm.

Once a product is known as being trash...there is no going back.

And having Worked under one and watched the other closely...I can say that Eisner - however burnout he was - did care about legacy and associated that with his name attached to disney.

Iger gives no appearance of that at all...

The other difference is in the board...they went from a group of stewards to really low rent mercenaries today.

None have any concern for the future...and that is the real "loss" of the disney way.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Excellent...and you hit the real point: the danger is longterm.

Once a product is known as being trash...there is no going back.

And having Worked under one and watched the other closely...I can say that Eisner - however burnout he was - did care about legacy and associated that with his name attached to disney.

Iger gives no appearance of that at all...

The other difference is in the board...they went from a group of stewards to really low rent mercenaries today.

None have any concern for the future...and that is the real "loss" of the disney way.

They care about one thing and one thing only - The next quarterly financials. "Long term planning" is a foreign concept to Iger and Co. Hell, they can't even put together a cogent succession plan.

 

[Horizonsfan]

Or they could try adding supply to meet demand...

We both know current planned additions won’t solve the problem, and that they could add double, triple the amount without batting an eyelid.

We also know better finance management would help.

Has a third US resort been seriously explored inside WDC at all in the last 20 years? It sure seems like there's enough demand between the coasts to start another resort complex in the middle of the country without destroying attendance at DL or WDW.

 

[21stamps]

fair points but maybe the entire amusement industry is insanely cost prohibitive....six flags prices are comical for what the product is....it's like McDonald's of them parks (we sell more!) so.... cedar property's do a much better job at that product. keep in mind most theme parks in the entire country close for some period a year and that has to be compensated for in price....if I'm open for 8 months a year that leaves 4 months of loss. not just revenue loss but actually cost. (some level of maintaince and new attractions if any are slotted in this down time) so my 8 months of billable time needs to compensate for 4 months of no generation. so if we look at a 60 dollar ticket for generic amusement park would be more like 40ish if you look at it from that angle. Granted alot of amusement park pricing is just what the market will support...how many people care about the service or other details at say a six flags park? nobody your paying to enjoy an amusement park period. Disney sits on the top with the "once in lifetime" social moniker. everybody that's a normal America wants a Disney vacation. how much are you willing to pay? prices have more than doubled since Iger and attendance is through the roof. look if they can legally get away with it they want us packed in there like a Chinese swimming pool for the maximum amount of money we will pay.

Those amusement parks have games, which is one of their biggest money makers..along with fast lane passes that bring nothing but profit. But anyway.. $25-$30 for one person will get you something like 90 minutes at a trampoline park, 1 movie ticket and a popcorn, entrance into a museum (special exhibit not included in the price), or entrance into a zoo. Then options go up from there.
The entire entertainment industry is not ‘budget friendly’. That’s exactly my point.

You don’t have to snort Pixie Dust to see it.

If someone doesn’t see it, then they either don’t get out much, or they just don’t want to admit that maybe Disney is priced accordingly. Annoyingly, but accordingly.

 

[michmousefan]

Sadly, these price increases feel like planned steps designed to help make the concept of $50/day/person for three additional FastPasses seem somehow legitimate and palatable, not to mention spending $700+ per night for an immersive hotel experience. I'm personally not sure how much more the market can bear, but apparently the Mouse feels there is room.

I do have friends who argue with me that — especially after the $100/day barrier was broken — "it's just not worth it," and even though I present all the reasons why I think it is, it is getting harder to argue with them.

 

[21stamps]

Sadly, these price increases feel like planned steps designed to help make the concept of $50/day/person for three additional FastPasses seem somehow legitimate and palatable, not to mention spending $700+ per night for an immersive hotel experience. I'm personally not sure how much more the market can bear, but apparently the Mouse feels there is room.

I do have friends who argue with me that — especially after the $100/day barrier was broken — "it's just not worth it," and even though I present all the reasons why I think it is, it is getting harder to argue with them.

I’m just scared to see the SW hotel prices. I keep hoping that they’re not going to be astronomical. Tickets I can handle, room prices are still ok bc discounts are typically available for at least most of the nights..but when SW comes, who knows.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

After seeing all the tour groups last week and ads on the Contempoary's concierge desk for corporate tickets, I'd be very curious to know what % of guests are actually paying full price for tickets. And what about those UK 14-day passes? Or the current 20% off offer for Canadians?

I think it's like the hotel and restaurant prices. They charge a high rack rate so that when they do all these discounts it looks like a deal to consumers, but keeps a healthy margin for Disney.

 

[The_Jobu]

Or the current 20% off offer for Canadians?

That's over now. They put a 2018 limit on them and ran it until the prices went up.

 

[matt9112]

That's over now. They put a 2018 limit on them and ran it until the prices went up.

good good

 

[ford91exploder]

Disney can almost certainly raise prices even more and let service and maintenance deteriorate farther and still see attendance climb. This is because of the fundamental appeal of the parks (a product of the Disney and Eisner regimes), Iger's skillful management of the film division, and, most of all, Disney's completely unique place in both American and world culture. In that sense, yes, WDW may be technically undervalued.

But...

Even those who hate naysaying and dire predictions can admit that there is a scenario, however distant and unlikely, where all that accumulated good will can't convince a single person that WDW is a reasonable value. Say, a theoretical future, when one-day tickets cost $500 and guests routinely fall out of the open doors of monorails. And somewhere between today and that fictional park future is a breaking point, a spot at which enough guests will choose not to go to WDW that revenue begins to decline.

And once Disney hits that point, there's no easy way back. The good will collected over nearly a century, the product of a combination of artistic and business genius and an un-reproducible confluence of historic and cultural developments, will be gone. Lowering prices, frantically building, nothing will ever put WDW back in the unique cultural position it once enjoyed.

Iger can keep slashing spending and raising prices and revenue will continue to go up - in the short term. And maybe that's his only job. But at some point, it will irreparably hurt the future of the company. Does Iger have any responsibility for the fate of the company after 2021, or whenever he retires? That's the question that needs to be asked.

Under Iger and company who use the value extraction model to run Disney, that day is coming closer and closer to when the inflection point is hit.

Disney today is being run like Home Depot under Bob Nardelli, core values being discarded, constant quality cuts, replacement of competent full time employees with low cost part time employees. Bloated compensation packages for senior leadership. Idiotic acquisitions which destroyed value

But HD at the time did have a Roy Disney to rouse the board and remove nardelli and his cronies and it took HD a LONG time to recover a bit longer under Nardelli and HD would have gone the way of Grossmans.

Interestingly enough just getting rid of Nardelli's pay package was enough to move HD from a operating loss to a tiny operating profit.

 

[GhostHost1000]

DVC was a very smart move by Disney... it is pretty much guaranteed guests whether by the owners or people they rent their points out to. This has increased attendance as well as all the events they have now in the "slow" periods (which are no longer slow).

Some of Disney has gone down... prices go up... and attendance and spending per guest continues to go up. It's painful for all of us. Crowds and beginning to be too much and pricing is out of hand in many cases.

If Disney would expand more of their parks and reduce some of their hotel costs they would host more guests - but it's not about getting more guests.. it's all about squeezing the utters of those that do still come and then they don't have to be as concerned about an increase of the # of guests... just the spending of the guests that are there

welcome to the new Di$ney