News Capital Expenditures at Disney's domestic theme parks to be cut by 700 million dollars

mikejs78

mikejs78

Well-Known Member
Cliff said:
All of the pain and suffering that Disney is about to go through is just the normal "cause and effect" equasion that is a rule of the universe. Disney makes choices and market forces react.

Make the right choices and get the right reaction. Make bad choices and get a bad reaction. What Disney is feeling today is just a natural market reaction to the many bad choices they have made.

If they continue to make bad choices, then yes, market forces will continue punish them....

I think that there is an errogant, poisonous thinking in Disney today and that is: "We are too big to fail and we can do whatever we want...."

I think this poison could kill them before they realize it's even happening.
Click to expand...
I think they did realize this was happening, and that's why Chapek got the boot and Iger is in, with a different mentality than he had before.
 
C

Cliff

Well-Known Member
mikejs78 said:
I think they did realize this was happening, and that's why Chapek got the boot and Iger is in, with a different mentality than he had before.
Click to expand...
I would argue that these bad choices started years before "Iger 1.0" was ousted. Yes, Chapek was bad but I doubt "Iger 2.0" will fix it because I think he doesn't understand that "his" decisions were the origin of this mess. This problem is now a big tree that was planted by some very bad seeds. The problem is in the "roots" of the tree...not the branches or the leaves.

Gigantic, massive CEO and board member egos are another killer of Disney's brand.
 
Epcot_Imagineer

Epcot_Imagineer

Well-Known Member
@lentesta a few weeks back you mentioned CapEx being quietly increased… Is this the ‘ol bait and switch to shareholders of “We definitely reduced spending, pay no attention to us initially increasing it by that exact amount a month ago!”
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Epcot_Imagineer said:
@lentesta a few weeks back you mentioned CapEx being quietly increased… Is this the ‘ol bait and switch to shareholders of “We definitely reduced spending, pay no attention to us initially increasing it by that exact amount a month ago!”
Click to expand...
They were only commenting on the current FY. From FY24-forward, CapEx in the parks/resorts/experiences segment is planned to increase. Delaying some projects out of FY23 is meant to assist in righting the ship and calming investors.
 
MagicHappens1971

MagicHappens1971

Well-Known Member
Maybe it’s just because I don’t keep up with Universal news/rumors/etc, but why don’t they have this issue? It seems as though Disney is always delaying / spreading costs throughout multiple Quarters/FYs
 
Jrb1979

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Universal did delay EU rather considerably.
Click to expand...
Outside of that they tend to be pretty quick in getting new attractions built cause they don't spread it out over multiple quarters.

My question is why does Disney execs view the parks the way they do? Universal is the opposite. They seem to understand that the parks a big part of their company. I have heard from a few here that Disney execs view the parks as a place for carnies? Why is that?
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
Outside of that they tend to be pretty quick in getting new attractions built cause they don't spread it out over multiple quarters.

My question is why does Disney execs view the parks the way they do? Universal is the opposite. They seem to understand that the parks a big part of their company. I have heard from a few here that Disney execs view the parks as a place for carnies? Why is that?
Click to expand...
Oh, there definitely is an issue with timelines. TRON is an unfair example but I’m sure Universal would’ve built SWGE faster than Disney. It does seem like Universal announces much later in development than Disney. We heard about EU much earlier and it will be 6 years from announcement to opening.
 
Jrb1979

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Oh, there definitely is an issue with timelines. TRON is an unfair example but I’m sure Universal would’ve built SWGE faster than Disney. It does seem like Universal announces much later in development than Disney. We heard about EU much earlier and it will be 6 years from announcement to opening.
Click to expand...
I get that. My question why is there such a contrast in how each company views their parks. Universal seems to care about their parks and understands they are a big part of their company.

With Disney, they look at them like ATMs and many top execs don't seem to understand them at all. Why do they have that view?
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
I get that. My question why is there such a contrast in how each company views their parks. Universal seems to care about their parks and understands they are a big part of their company.

With Disney, they look at them like ATMs and many top execs don't seem to understand them at all. Why do they have that view?
Click to expand...
Disney is a much larger company with many areas to focus on. In his defense, Iger has always valued the parks. He prefers to dump his own IPs into them but he’s never avoided lavish spending like Eisner did toward the end.
 
Jrb1979

Jrb1979

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Disney is a much larger company with many areas to focus on. In his defense, Iger has always valued the parks. He prefers to dump his own IPs into them but he’s never avoided lavish spending like Eisner did toward the end.
Click to expand...
He may value them but he doesn't seem to understand them or how each had its own theme. All he cares about is getting IP into the parks. Doesn't matter if it fits or not. At least with the early days of Eisner when they added new attractions they were great to amazing for the most part. The IP and theming was just as important as making an amazing ride. Now it feels like all that matters is IP and theming, the ride can be meh.
 
D

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Jrb1979 said:
He may value them but he doesn't seem to understand them or how each had its own theme. All he cares about is getting IP into the parks. Doesn't matter if it fits or not.
Click to expand...
I’m wondering how that’s any different than Uni? I mean, you have Revenge of the Mummy in a New York section, Transformers randomly plopped down, FatF is a San Francisco(?) area, Kong just there somewhere (is it part of Jurassic Park area). The Jurassic area combines Park and World concepts. Etc.

Uni certainty has quicker timeframes for building stuff, but I’m not sure how they are any better in “understanding” theme parks compared to Disney.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
CaptainAmerica said:
Little dramatic, mate.
Click to expand...
Not too far off though... Iger was at the wheel for most of the 'stretch out what we got' years. And with obvious external pressures to reduce outlay and get back to positive cash flow, 'hunkering down and milk what you got' is probably on the menu.

Get capacity going, ensure you can maximize utilization, add some discretionary revenue opportunities... and you can drive revenues without major capital spend. They did it for years, thinking he retreats back to that for awhile isn't far-fetched.
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
Oh, there definitely is an issue with timelines. TRON is an unfair example but I’m sure Universal would’ve built SWGE faster than Disney. It does seem like Universal announces much later in development than Disney. We heard about EU much earlier and it will be 6 years from announcement to opening.
Click to expand...
6 years, the same amount of time it has taken Disney to build a one-minute coaster.
 
Casper Gutman

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
doctornick said:
I’m wondering how that’s any different than Uni? I mean, you have Revenge of the Mummy in a New York section, Transformers randomly plopped down, FatF is a San Francisco(?) area, Kong just there somewhere (is it part of Jurassic Park area). The Jurassic area combines Park and World concepts. Etc.

Uni certainty has quicker timeframes for building stuff, but I’m not sure how they are any better in “understanding” theme parks compared to Disney.
Click to expand...
The FaF ride is set in San Francisco, Tranformers is set in a major city that could be New York - it’s not made explicit. Those are fine. Mummy is admittedly a Frankenstein’s monster of theming, mainly because of the remnants of the behind-the-scenes ethos of early Universal. The exterior is fine, of course.

If your finding fault with Park and World cohabiting, you’re engaged in the kind of tiresome canonical nitpickicking that afflicted SWL and is slowly being abandoned. It’s the same franchise. Kong is also a fine thematic fit for an area dedicated to Dino’s running amok in a jungle setting.

With the partial exception of Mummy, you’re reaching real hard here, but you’re not coming up with anything remotely like 1920s New Orleans in the 1880s southwest, clashing futuristic aesthetics in Tomorrowland, Muppets in between two Star Wars area, or Moana in EPCOT. Right now, Universal is quite a bit better then Disney at thematic consistency.

(Don’t touch Muppets or Star Tours just because you put SWL in the wrong place, Disney.)
 

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

Back
Top Bottom