Absimilliard
Well-Known Member
I forgot about those ones! I stand corrected.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
A Spirited Valentine ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
I forgot about those ones! I stand corrected.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
Mike S
Well-Known Member
An overlayed clone? No. An entirely new ride that just also happens to be trackless with its own new effects and story? Yes.
Absimilliard
Well-Known Member
After my brain cramp regarding modern omnimovers like Buzz Lightyear and Little Mermaid, it got me thinking more about those.
The original omnimovers were like I said and in the Arrow Development book, they mention how hard it was to manufacture the track to the high standards needed. Now, the third rail has been replaced by electric motors giving the flexibility others have mentioned on this thread. The issue though is cost: Omnimovers are a very expensive ride system and currently, only two companies make them: Mack and Sansei. Sansei has been the supplier of choice for Disney for those since the TDL Buzz Lightyear installation.
The trackless cars ETF make have different challenges: a perfectly flat running surface is necessary and they need to be recharged after 10-12 hours of use. Its not so bad at park with "banker's hours" in Europe where they are open from 9am to 6pm, but at Disney where the park is open 15-16 hours? WDI solution is different from ETF: they use induction charging when the trackless rides are unloading and loading. This was also done at Autopia at HKDL when it was open.
The "flat running surface" was a challenge for Six Flags when they built the first two Justice League dark rides. They recycled old buildings and that caused so many issues on the Oceaneering ride systems they were able to convince Six Flags it would be worth it to go with brand new buildings. The next 5 installations all went in brand new buildings where they were able to get the floor right and those have been a lot more reliable.
P.S: Did you know Intamin built two rides similar to the famed Disney EMV? "Sultan's Adventure" at Leofoo Village in Taiwan opened in 2000 and Pharaoh's Fury opened around 2005 at Lotte World in South Korea. The movement is not as smooth as the Disney version and they use a large hot bar, but they are still very impressive rides. Intamin stopped selling them for two reasons: cost and the fact that the cars were converted Swiss Army military trucks. Those trucks are discontinued and its not worth it at this point to convert another truck.
The original omnimovers were like I said and in the Arrow Development book, they mention how hard it was to manufacture the track to the high standards needed. Now, the third rail has been replaced by electric motors giving the flexibility others have mentioned on this thread. The issue though is cost: Omnimovers are a very expensive ride system and currently, only two companies make them: Mack and Sansei. Sansei has been the supplier of choice for Disney for those since the TDL Buzz Lightyear installation.
The trackless cars ETF make have different challenges: a perfectly flat running surface is necessary and they need to be recharged after 10-12 hours of use. Its not so bad at park with "banker's hours" in Europe where they are open from 9am to 6pm, but at Disney where the park is open 15-16 hours? WDI solution is different from ETF: they use induction charging when the trackless rides are unloading and loading. This was also done at Autopia at HKDL when it was open.
The "flat running surface" was a challenge for Six Flags when they built the first two Justice League dark rides. They recycled old buildings and that caused so many issues on the Oceaneering ride systems they were able to convince Six Flags it would be worth it to go with brand new buildings. The next 5 installations all went in brand new buildings where they were able to get the floor right and those have been a lot more reliable.
P.S: Did you know Intamin built two rides similar to the famed Disney EMV? "Sultan's Adventure" at Leofoo Village in Taiwan opened in 2000 and Pharaoh's Fury opened around 2005 at Lotte World in South Korea. The movement is not as smooth as the Disney version and they use a large hot bar, but they are still very impressive rides. Intamin stopped selling them for two reasons: cost and the fact that the cars were converted Swiss Army military trucks. Those trucks are discontinued and its not worth it at this point to convert another truck.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
Show's been going a few years now, but this is from the new season.
Problem is that it's on Boomerang, so it gets little promotion and I think what hadn't been aired on TV is just being relegated as fodder for the Boomerang streaming app.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
While I agree people take blog posts and ranking lists too seriously, nothing wrong with discussing it and opining on it. We can all choose to breeze past things we don't care about reading on here.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
brb1006
Well-Known Member
Yeah it currently airs on Boomerang.
brb1006
Well-Known Member
Now that's a better idea than a clone.
TabulaRasa
Well-Known Member
I'm trying to keep my expectations of Disney in check haha. This seemed like a nice compromise.
BlindChow
Well-Known Member
*long sigh* I was being sarcastic...
I made the same argument as you when this conversation started, and in response, someone posted a completely irrelevant chart and made that argument about park spending. The idea that if it weren't for buybacks we'd have a 5th park is ridiculous. Disney was scrimping on the parks long before Iger was even in charge to buy back stocks.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
*long sigh* I was being sarcastic...
I made the same argument as you when this conversation started, and in response, someone posted a completely irrelevant chart and made that argument about park spending. The idea that if it weren't for buybacks we'd have a 5th park is ridiculous. Disney was scrimping on the parks long before Iger was even in charge to buy back stocks.
The 'Chart Guy' is @ParentsOf4 if you look at them while Disney had indeed been scrimping since Frank Wells died. The level of overall reinvestment and maintenance in the parks remained high. While price increases were slightly outpacing inflation rate.
once Iger took over huge price increases occurred along with cuts to quality and service.
In the entire HISTORY of TWDC before Iger 5 billion had been repurchased.
In the ten years of Iger's reign. 55 billion in stock has been repurchased the price increases at the parks did not fund necessary maintenance and expansion it went to fund stock purchases
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
I actually knew you were, which is why I said "people" have linear thinking on the subject. Sorry it wasn't clear I was just agreeing and adding to it.*long sigh* I was being sarcastic...
I made the same argument as you when this conversation started, and in response, someone posted a completely irrelevant chart and made that argument about park spending. The idea that if it weren't for buybacks we'd have a 5th park is ridiculous. Disney was scrimping on the parks long before Iger was even in charge to buy back stocks.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Stock buybacks are not inherently evil. There's a time and a place for them. If a company has excess cash and the stock is underpriced it's usually not a bad plan assuming there is no better investment that can be made that offers a higher rate of return. If the stock is over priced or even fairly priced it's not typically the best investment. Sometimes even then it could be justified.
For a mature business like TWDC it is expected that there would be a level of cash returned to shareholders via either share buybacks or dividends. Nobody is arguing that they should reinvest all of their free cash flow in their business. Remember that even while they were using $55B to buy back shares under Iger they were still building a new theme park in Shanghai, redoing DCA, adding FLE and Avatar to WDW and investing in cruise ships and that's just one division. The whole point of the discussion is not to say they shouldn't buy any stock back, but could/should they have allocated more cash to reinvestment in their business and less to stock buybacks. The 5th gate comment was just a quantification of what they could have done if they reduced the buyback program by as little as 10%.
The general problem with corporation's addiction to stock buybacks is if they stop investing enough in their core businesses in the long term those businesses will suffer. We've seen some examples those kind of issues creeping up at WDW due to a lack of adequate investment in the recent past. It looks like there's an upturn in spending more recently and big things are planned in the next 5 years. Let's hope that trend continues.
For a mature business like TWDC it is expected that there would be a level of cash returned to shareholders via either share buybacks or dividends. Nobody is arguing that they should reinvest all of their free cash flow in their business. Remember that even while they were using $55B to buy back shares under Iger they were still building a new theme park in Shanghai, redoing DCA, adding FLE and Avatar to WDW and investing in cruise ships and that's just one division. The whole point of the discussion is not to say they shouldn't buy any stock back, but could/should they have allocated more cash to reinvestment in their business and less to stock buybacks. The 5th gate comment was just a quantification of what they could have done if they reduced the buyback program by as little as 10%.
The general problem with corporation's addiction to stock buybacks is if they stop investing enough in their core businesses in the long term those businesses will suffer. We've seen some examples those kind of issues creeping up at WDW due to a lack of adequate investment in the recent past. It looks like there's an upturn in spending more recently and big things are planned in the next 5 years. Let's hope that trend continues.
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
All good points. I'll just add that a huge pitfall of buybacks is that companies stop considering the price of the stock. You have to use some kind of disciplined logic and tight price controls or you start buying back stock regardless of the price. Price matters.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Disney buys irrespective of price, So they are already breaking your rule. As to @GoofGoof 's point buybacks only return cash to those willing to sell.
If Disney was concerned about returning cash to investors they could declare a special dividend over and above the standard dividend.
But since DIS mgt seems more interested in inflating EPS so executives make their bonus 'targets' DIS uses buybacks instead
Chef Mickey
Well-Known Member
DIS hasn't had the best timing, but the stock is still cheap relative to the S&P 500 and the business overall is growing. Even at today's prices, the long term health of the company seems very stable.
The issue I referenced in terms of buying regardless of price is more for companies whose growth prospects are dwindling or even shrinking. IBM buys back a lot of stock and the long term outlook for their company is questionable. Disney is still a clear market leader...IBM is not. I'd be more comfortable with DIS buying stock at all time highs than IBM continuing to buy shares as their price falters.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
With all the craziness going on lately with air travel that's not a minor accomplishmentMade it safely to California
Have fun and of course keep us updated
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I think it's a combination of timing and alternative use of funds. As theme park fans we all tend to think there are numerous ways the company could allocate those funds in P&R that would be better for the long run than a stock buyback. Disney is a market leader but in order to stay there they need to reinvest in their business. IMHO they were not investing enough in domestic theme parks over a period of about a decade beginning right around 2001. It seems like there is a new renaissance of spending at WDW that will continue through the 50th. I'm happy to see it, but they have a lot of lean years to make up for so I hope the plans aren't pushed back or cut to free up additional cash for more share buybacks.