Are WDW tickets overpriced? An analysis.

[scpergj]

Just updated the original post to be clearer my intentions. I'm not suggesting that Disney lower the ticket prices, for example. I just think the difference in prices from then to now is large enough to warrant discussion. I mean, it kinda blew me away when I ran the numbers! But if Disney lowered the price of a 4-day hopper to under $100, man, I have to assume the parks would just be flooded.

This is the most thoughtful post I've seen on this topic. No bashing Disney to lower prices, just a (fair) analysis of the prices between now and then.

My two cents...the increase if fair for a few reasons...

1. Basic economics. Prices will come to equilibrium when the attendance numbers begin to drop. Until people no longer visit, Disney is going to keep increasing prices...it's normal economics.

2. As someone else stated, they offer twice as many parks as back then. Now, it can be argued that the other two parks (AK and MGM...or is it DHS?) are half-day parks, but they offer two distinct flavors of fun. So, 1983 - 2 parks, 2007 - 4 parks.

3. Competition. As long as Disney is priced at about the same as the other Orlando (or even regional to the visitor) parks, people can justify the expense - I can spend X to go to Universal (or Six Flags, or Bush Gardens...whatever), or I can spend X+Y (Y being a smallish value - say $10) to go to Disney, and have a Disney experience.

This has been a great discussion!

Kevin

 

[Slowjack]

"per unit of enjoyment" - I like that, nice ring to it.
You raise a valid point not based in opinion. The cost of Disney, opinions withheld, is not the same value as it was in 1983 in many cases.

For example, if you purchased the 1-day ticket as you described and decided to spend a day at MK in both 1983 and 2007, I would argure there is more than 1 day's worth of entertainment at the park in both years. IE, there are more things to do than you could do in 1 day in both time periods. Since park hours are relatively unchanged (seasons aside) you can likely hit similar numbers of attractions today as you could in 1983.

You certainly are paying a significantly higher price for your entertainment if that example holds true. The question then becomes, is the "value" of that entertianment or the "enjoyment" you get out of the entertainment twice as good as it was in 1983? Do you enjoy SM or CoP twice as much now as you did back then?

I'm all for paying, I just got back from a July trip and we're already planning a 2010 trip. I'm not aruging it isn't worth it or that pricing is out of control (if that were the case attendance would cease).

But "opinion" of the value of your vacation set aside, the OP's argument is true. (Again, this is not a complaint about prices).

I guess that's ultimately what I am asking. Obviously (I think) the perceived value of WDW tickets for people on these boards is the same in 2007 as it was in 1983 (or however far back any particular WDW fan goes). But why? I think it's curious. I don't think I'm having 2x or 4x the fun per hour in WDW as I did in 1983; I think I'm having about the same amount of fun. Certainly I have more total fun, but that's because I am staying longer. In the 80s we would go for three days, now it's five or six. So why I am willing to pay 4x the real dollar outlay?

Of course now that I think about it, I wasn't paying in 1983--my folks were. So perhaps the question is, why am I willing to shell out so much more than my parents were?

 

[EvilQueen81]

It is expensive but it is worth every penny.:sohappy:

 

[JWG]

I guess that's ultimately what I am asking. Obviously (I think) the perceived value of WDW tickets for people on these boards is the same in 2007 as it was in 1983 (or however far back any particular WDW fan goes). But why? I think it's curious. I don't think I'm having 2x or 4x the fun per hour in WDW as I did in 1983; I think I'm having about the same amount of fun. Certainly I have more total fun, but that's because I am staying longer. In the 80s we would go for three days, now it's five or six. So why I am willing to pay 4x the real dollar outlay?

Of course now that I think about it, I wasn't paying in 1983--my folks were. So perhaps the question is, why am I willing to shell out so much more than my parents were?

Why Disney? And why continue to pay so much? Well, either 1) Disney's pricing was undervalued in 1971 2) Incomes have risen faster than the rate of inflation 3) We as 21st centurians don't save money like our parents and grandparents did - we're willing to go into debt for things they wouldn't. 4) The average family who attended in 1971 is no longer the average family who attends in 2007 (meaning median income would be higher for today's attendees).

Maybe I'm missing an option, but really one of those options have to be included right? Income has matched price increases, people are spending more and saving less or a different "subset" of the population is attending?

I just doubt it's "undervalued" pricing in 1971 as Disney has always been a premium.

 

[sbkline]

My wife and I went to see a play last month, and tickets for this play were about 26 bucks per person. The play was just short of 2 hours. So, let's say 26 bucks for two hours, so 52 bucks for 4 hours, 78 bucks for 6 hours, etc.

Now most of us spend several days at Disney and the the more days you get on your ticket, the less you pay per day. So it is quite conceivable that a person would only spend 3 hours in a theme park for a particular day, since they are spending a good 7 days or so at the resort. And when you take the price of that 7 day ticket and divide it by 7, it's alot less than 71 bucks.

But for the one day visitor who drives down, gets a ticket and spends the day at the Magic Kingdom, for example, do you think he spends three hours and then goes home? I doubt it. At the very least, he'll be there from 9-5, and if he is like me, he'll be there until dark.

So, it may be a very un-scientific way to look at it, and certainly lacking in the amount of research that the OP put into it, but my point is this: if you can pay 26 bucks to get into a play that doesn't even last two hours, then from that way of looking at it, 71 bucks for 8 or more hours in a WDW park doesn't seem that unreasonable at all.

 

[JimboJones123]

I think somebody is doing some very bad math.

My tickets are $27 a day when I go for park hoppers.

So acording to "your" scale OP, I'm actually getting a savings of over 20% for tickets over what I would pay in 198x.

Disney wants you to STAY LONGER and buy the 10 day hopper. That's why it is still an AWESOME deal. I paid $58 per ticket just 4 years ago in 2003. So, I'm getting 2x the ammount of days for the same price. Can't argue a problem with that.

I think people should realize that it is YOUR problem if you are paying $71 a ticket. WDW DOES NOT WANT TO CHARGE YOU THAT MUCH! They would much rather have you for much longer so you can spend more money elsewhere. I actually remember between 5 and 10 years ago that you really couldn't find any options for tickets that were under $45 a day.

I've said it before and will say it again. A 10 night WDW tip cost you about the same as a 7 night trip 5 years ago. I don't see what the problem is with charging a premium if you aren't a dedicated guest. Why dedicate a discount to a guest when they won't dedicate another 15-20 meals in your parks?

I would be perfectly fine if they jacked that daily ticket price right up to $100 dollars and not start kicking in the bigger discounts until day 3 like they already do.

2 years ago, we bought 2 day hoppers for $185ish each. Our fault. If we would have stayed longer, we could have gotten a great break over our daily ticket rate. We couldn't stay for more than 3 days, so we sucked it up.

 

[sbkline]

I So why I am willing to pay 4x the real dollar outlay?

How much have incomes risen since 1983? What was the minimum wage then and what is it now? (yes, I'm serious...I honestly don't know for sure what the minimum wage is right now, LOL)

Of course, most of us aren't at minimum wage jobs, but whatever job you work at, it's gonna be paying alot more than it did in 1983. The question is, in REAL dollars (accounting for inflation) are we making four times as much in 2007 as we did in 1983?

 

[Hakunamatata]

So, what about them parking rates. :lookaroun

 

[sleepybear]

My wife and I went to see a play last month, and tickets for this play were about 26 bucks per person. The play was just short of 2 hours. So, let's say 26 bucks for two hours, so 52 bucks for 4 hours, 78 bucks for 6 hours, etc.

I think you're right on the money there. In July, we went to see Mary Poppins on Broadway. For two people, it cost $230. For two and a half hours of a show that was okay at best. So, yeah, the price of park tickets is acceptable to me.

Now, as far as the resorts go, can you say price gouging? Disney certainly can. (Yet I can't stay anywhere but on property at a deluxe, so maybe I deserve to be gouged.)

 

[SteveUK]

I suppose I can see all the arguments, and am pleased to see a thread that hasn't descended into offensiveness just yet. Some really good, well considered points have been made.

I can see all the arguments, but I also can't help thinking why it can't be much simpler than that. As a seller of certain items and services myself, I wonder if there is just an argument for saying 'that is the price i have made up - do you want it or not?' - people are asking if Disney can justify the price. I wonder, do they have to? That is the number they have chosen, if you don't like it, you don't have to go. I know that sounds quite harsh, but it is the reality of the situation. We are essentially talking about a leisure activity which we all have a choice about. I'm not sure I need to question the price and understand why Disney have arrived at that price. All the thought about price increases and costs and gas proces and land prices etc, really isn't my business. I don't want to worry about all those things. So I turn up at the gate, pay whatever the person in the box asks me for and enjoy myself. I have very limited interest in how they arrived at that figure.

 

[dizzney]

We love the magic so we would go regardless, but we do try to economize and I found a nubmer of years back the best way is the the Annual Pass. If you made two trips within a 365 day period you saved a bundle, this year the first trip was 10 days/9 nights BWV and we are going again the end of December and again in February, and being DVC members we get the $100 off the AP and free parking so it seems so cheap.

Bottom line is that they give great entertainment, great service and that DIsney Only Magic, no one else comes close!:sohappy:

 

[Lucky]

Nice analysis, Slowjack. A couple of things to note:

1. Inflation was slightly more than 100% from 1983 to 2007. The $17 one-day price would be the equivalent of $35.55 today, and the $45 pass would be the same as $94 today, not $90. (The Bureau of Labor Statistics web site has a very convenient inflation calculator.)

2. Real (inflation-adjusted) income per capita has increased by roughly 60% since 1983. This of course adds to demand, especially for non-necessities like tickets to upscale theme parks. For a 1-day WDW ticket to represent the same fraction of per capita income today as in 1983, the price would be about $56.

 

[cabihler]

which ticket to buy????

have been a AP holder for many, many years. another thread talked about the lack of AP discounts. over the recent few years WDW has been offering the AP holder less and less in discounts i.e. now you can get dining discounts only during the day at select places in the parks whereas years before you were able to get them at night also; the numbers of rooms and amount of discounts are less than they once were.

someone pointed out Supply & Demand and they are correct... there is greater demand for the rooms so there is less supply of rooms available for the AP discount.

this brings me to the point. this past June we went and there was no AP discount available for our rooms, still we went. if that happens twice in a year where a discount is not available or if there are no rooms left at the AP discount then it is almost becoming an issue that perhaps it could be a better deal to purchase 10day MYW tickets when you go. if you go twice a year then the cost of purchasing 10day MYW tickets twice is about the same as the AP. i happen to think that WDW did a SMART thing when they changed their ticketing policy to the MYW format because for a family of four who goes maybe every 3 or 4 years the 10day ticket is a great cost benefit over the old 5day Park Hoppers. Disney wants to make it cheaper for you to enter the parks KNOWING they will get your money by staying on property at the hotels (there is where i think the real money/cost increase has been) as well as eating and purchases.

i wrote this here because the thread is about the value or not of the tickets and i think over the years WDW has made some of the tickets better values then before while others can be questionable i.e. the AP. it really all depends on the individuals usage and flexibility. anyway that is my opinion/observation.

 

[Slowjack]

I think somebody is doing some very bad math.

My tickets are $27 a day when I go for park hoppers.

So acording to "your" scale OP, I'm actually getting a savings of over 20% for tickets over what I would pay in 198x.

Disney wants you to STAY LONGER and buy the 10 day hopper. That's why it is still an AWESOME deal. I paid $58 per ticket just 4 years ago in 2003. So, I'm getting 2x the ammount of days for the same price. Can't argue a problem with that.

I think people should realize that it is YOUR problem if you are paying $71 a ticket. WDW DOES NOT WANT TO CHARGE YOU THAT MUCH! They would much rather have you for much longer so you can spend more money elsewhere. I actually remember between 5 and 10 years ago that you really couldn't find any options for tickets that were under $45 a day.

I've said it before and will say it again. A 10 night WDW tip cost you about the same as a 7 night trip 5 years ago. I don't see what the problem is with charging a premium if you aren't a dedicated guest. Why dedicate a discount to a guest when they won't dedicate another 15-20 meals in your parks?

I would be perfectly fine if they jacked that daily ticket price right up to $100 dollars and not start kicking in the bigger discounts until day 3 like they already do.

2 years ago, we bought 2 day hoppers for $185ish each. Our fault. If we would have stayed longer, we could have gotten a great break over our daily ticket rate. We couldn't stay for more than 3 days, so we sucked it up.

If you are paying $27 a day, you are getting a 10-day ticket. As I said before, there's really no fair way to compare very long passes from the two eras. There just wasn't as much to do in WDW in 1983 as there is now. For short trips I don't think that's a factor in perceived value, but clearly a 10-day experience would be very different now.

And you are right that the 10-day ticket is a heckuva deal for those who can take advantage of it. That's certainly a value option that wasn't available in 1983. However, I don't think most people make this kind of trip, or can, so I'm not sure it's the most relevant point in this discussion. It's like if a restaurant has $20 entrees, but offers $25 "all you can eat" menus, the latter may be a great deal, but if most people can't even finish the $20 entree, it doesn't really change the overall value of the restaurant.

EDIT: for the record, it appears the longest pass available in 1983 was a 6-day. It was $60 for an adult, roughly like $120 now, which would make it $20 day. Still cheaper than today's 10-day pass, and of course you don't have to commit to ten days.

 

[Slowjack]

have been a AP holder for many, many years. another thread talked about the lack of AP discounts. over the recent few years WDW has been offering the AP holder less and less in discounts i.e. now you can get dining discounts only during the day at select places in the parks whereas years before you were able to get them at night also; the numbers of rooms and amount of discounts are less than they once were.

someone pointed out Supply & Demand and they are correct... there is greater demand for the rooms so there is less supply of rooms available for the AP discount.

this brings me to the point. this past June we went and there was no AP discount available for our rooms, still we went. if that happens twice in a year where a discount is not available or if there are no rooms left at the AP discount then it is almost becoming an issue that perhaps it could be a better deal to purchase 10day MYW tickets when you go. if you go twice a year then the cost of purchasing 10day MYW tickets twice is about the same as the AP. i happen to think that WDW did a SMART thing when they changed their ticketing policy to the MYW format because for a family of four who goes maybe every 3 or 4 years the 10day ticket is a great cost benefit over the old 5day Park Hoppers. Disney wants to make it cheaper for you to enter the parks KNOWING they will get your money by staying on property at the hotels (there is where i think the real money/cost increase has been) as well as eating and purchases.

i wrote this here because the thread is about the value or not of the tickets and i think over the years WDW has made some of the tickets better values then before while others can be questionable i.e. the AP. it really all depends on the individuals usage and flexibility. anyway that is my opinion/observation.

Okay, just keep in mind that the $27/day price for the 10-day pass is without the "no expiration" option. if you want to use the days on multiple trips, the price jumps to $45/day.

You can see that Disney has been very clever with the pricing. The longer tickets, as Jimbo points out, charge you less per day the more days you get, dramatically so. But the "no expiration" option actually charges you more per day the more days you get. That is, on a 4-day ticket, non-expiration is $11.25 per day. On a 10-day, it's $18 day. I'm sure it's to thwart the very thing you are thinking of, getting a 10-day ticket to make two five-day trips or something like that.

 

[Slowjack]

Nice analysis, Slowjack. A couple of things to note:

1. Inflation was slightly more than 100% from 1983 to 2007. The $17 one-day price would be the equivalent of $35.55 today, and the $45 pass would be the same as $94 today, not $90. (The Bureau of Labor Statistics web site has a very convenient inflation calculator.)

2. Real (inflation-adjusted) income per capita has increased by roughly 60% since 1983. This of course adds to demand, especially for non-necessities like tickets to upscale theme parks. For a 1-day WDW ticket to represent the same fraction of per capita income today as in 1983, the price would be about $56.

On #1, yes, I was using a different calculator that wasn't updated for 2007 yet. It's close enough that the main point doesn't change, plus...it makes the math easy!

You are correct about point #2, and I think that's probably the key to the whole thing. But we have to be careful not to get into a loop. If we were willing to pay the same percentage of our income for the same things in 1983 and 2007, then by definition real income levels would be the same. It's only because we pay less, as a percentage, that our incomes, our purchasing power, increase. But it appears we are willing to pay more for some things. If the increase in real income is only 60%, though, we are still paying a considerable premium versus 1983.

I wonder, though, about the increase in real household income. More two-income families, and so on.

EDIT: Actually, the 60% figure is the household income increase. Inflation-adjusted income has been flat for men since 1983, but increasing significantly for women.

 

[lumpydj]

Six Flags New England Ticket = $50.00 (can you really spend 4 days in this park and see different things or not get bored seeing the same things? )

Disney Ticket = $71.00 (being totally occupied with DIFFERENT things for the whole 4 day visit )

Getting that Disney "excited" feeling or seeing the excitement on your child's face = Priceless. :sohappy:

IMHO - You can't just compare ticket prices with the rate of inflation. You need to compare prices with competition prices (not that I think Six Flags is competition for Disney :animwink: ) as well as the value of your visit...

 

[Dragonrider1227]

Considering everything Disney gives you, I say no. The prices are justifiable

 

[Lucky]

But we have to be careful not to get into a loop. If we were willing to pay the same percentage of our income for the same things in 1983 and 2007, then by definition real income levels would be the same. It's only because we pay less, as a percentage, that our incomes, our purchasing power, increase. But it appears we are willing to pay more for some things. If the increase in real income is only 60%, though, we are still paying a considerable premium versus 1983.

You're exactly right on this.

As discussed in earlier posts, to some extent the comparisons are apples and oranges because people like me only buy passes for 7 or more days that were unavailabe in 1983. The cost of a one-day pass seems ridiculously high, but most people probably don't pay it.

As to why costs have gone up, if they really have gone up on average...

1. As real incomes rise, people buy Starbucks instead of Maxwell House. Similarly, they buy tickets to Disney instead of to Six Flags or to the county fair with its cheaper but inferior rides and shows. So it's demand driven.

2. Labor costs probably don't have much to do with it. The federal minimum wage in 1983, which applied in Florida, was about equal to $7 in today's dollars. The Florida state minimum wage now is slightly lower, at $6.67. (Today's $5.85 federal minimum doesn't apply in Florida.) Most WDW employees earn more than the minimum, but there's no reason to think that is true only in 2007 and not in 1983.

 

[cooleo]

I don't have a problem with the prices. When you break it down, it is a good value for the amount of time you have.