I prefer examining percentages over raw numbers because they adjust for changes within the business itself, including how inflation has affected that specific business.
I also shy away from inflation calculators. At best, inflation calculators are questionable for the types of numbers we're looking at. At worst, they are downright wrong.
Disney doesn't particularly care how much the price of a gallon of milk has increased across the country since 2000. Instead, they care about how much the cost of their labor has increased in central Florida.
$2 billion in profits in 2000 is not the same as $2 billion in 2014. Similarly, $2 billion might be a great number in 2014. In 2028, it probably would be considered a terrible number. Without some adjustment, it's an apples-to-oranges comparison.
In 2000, Disney's Parks & Resorts generated $1.62 billion in operating income. In 2014, that number was $2.66 billion. "Wow," you say, "that's $1 billion more." Yeah, but over 14 years, that's a compound growth of only
3.6%. Sorry, but 3.6% annual growth for a business like Disney sucks. Financially, P&R was healthier in 2000 than it is in 2014, and this is reflected in my earlier post.
With all my disclaimers in place (
), the following might sell Staggs' performance better:
View attachment 81783