Are we just spoiled?

[Smiley/OCD]

Social media has been a tremendous gain for Disney…especially with videos and bloggers.

Disney doesn’t even have to pay to advertise anymore…really. Their products are promoted every nanosecond and they just watch it play

“There’s no such thing as bad publicity” PT Barnum

“There’s only one thing in the world worse than being talked about is not being talked about” Oscar Wilde

Unfortunately as Disney Uber fans, as much as it may pain us to say it, it’s true..

 

[BuddyThomas]

Anyone who watched my real-time meltdown in the D23 thread knows what I think about that turd of a presentation. That said, I'm trying to look on the bright side and talk myself off the ledge. Sure, it looks like we're in for a bit of a dry spell in terms of new attractions, but I think we might be under-appreciating the things we've gotten in the last few years.

Let's compare two decades.

2003 to 2012:

Major Attractions
- Soarin'
- Expedition Everest

Minor Attractions
- Under the Sea
- Enchanted Tales with Belle

2013 to 2022:

Major Attractions
- Seven Dwarfs Mine Train
- Flight of Passage
- Slinky Dog Dash
- Rise of the Resistance
- Cosmic Rewind

Minor Attractions
- Na'vi River Journey
- Alien Swirling Saucers
- Smuggler's Run
- Ratatouille

On paper, we should be looking back and saying "wow, what a great Disney Decade this has been at Walt Disney World," yet it feels like everything sucks. Why?

Because a majority of people on this very board want everything to stay exactly the same with no changes whatsoever. They must make sure that their childhood memories live on forever, not just in their minds or on YouTube, but in reality. Obviously, this is ridiculous. The world changes. Society changes. Disney changes. Most of the arguments on this board are when Disney changes something. Mermaids, mountains, maelstroms, etc etc.

 

[King Panda 77]

Because a majority of people on this very board want everything to stay exactly the same with no changes whatsoever. They must make sure that their childhood memories live on forever, not just in their minds or on YouTube, but in reality. Obviously, this is ridiculous. The world changes. Society changes. Disney changes. Most of the arguments on this board are when Disney changes something. Mermaids, mountains, maelstroms, etc etc.

I was with you until Maelstrom

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Because a majority of people on this very board want everything to stay exactly the same with no changes whatsoever. They must make sure that their childhood memories live on forever, not just in their minds or on YouTube, but in reality. Obviously, this is ridiculous. The world changes. Society changes. Disney changes. Most of the arguments on this board are when Disney changes something. Mermaids, mountains, maelstroms, etc etc.

There are also a lot of people on this board that are looking at WDW through the eyes of someone who goes every year, or even multiple times per year. To someone who is going to the park every 3-4 years, they ARE seeing new rides/actions every time they go. To read this board, many people seem to want continuous expansion, year over year something new every year, every time they go. They want something NEW added basically every year, constant expansion.

 

[Jrb1979]

Because a majority of people on this very board want everything to stay exactly the same with no changes whatsoever. They must make sure that their childhood memories live on forever, not just in their minds or on YouTube, but in reality. Obviously, this is ridiculous. The world changes. Society changes. Disney changes. Most of the arguments on this board are when Disney changes something. Mermaids, mountains, maelstroms, etc etc.

I don't think that's true. For me what I don't like is there is no originality in any new attractions now. Everything has an IP attached to it.

The one other thing I hate is how basically all 4 parks are becoming more of an extension of MK instead each being different. Epcot being the worst. When it first opened it had a much different vibe to it then MK. All the rides were original with no IP and it felt like a different park. Now they have slowly been adding IP everywhere. I have said before I would have loved to see them finish World Showcase like it was originally planned.

 

[Raidermatt]

There are also a lot of people on this board that are looking at WDW through the eyes of someone who goes every year, or even multiple times per year. To someone who is going to the park every 3-4 years, they ARE seeing new rides/actions every time they go. To read this board, many people seem to want continuous expansion, year over year something new every year, every time they go. They want something NEW added basically every year, constant expansion.

Attendance, revenue and profit are continuously expanding, why is it unrealistic to expect the same from the parks? Especially with 4 parks, expecting something new each year is not unrealistic at all. And during most of Disney's history, that was not unrealistic either.

 

[Magenta Panther]

I think it's the suits at the "Disney" company who are spoiled, if anyone. They've cut corners and raised prices for years, yet the tourists keep coming and throwing money at them. So, apparently, they think that they don't have to try very hard anymore. That's why I'm hoping Universal's Epic Universe lives up to its potential and takes real market share from "Disney". Maybe the company will step up. Yeah, I know, dream on, silly dreamer...

 

[J4546]

I dotn think epic Universe is gonna be a bad park at all but it doesnt come across like an amazing one either imo. At least not at the start. And disney has been adding big things every year for the last decade havent they? People who go to the parks for their vacation are getting new stuff and seeming to like it, but people with annual passes who go every week seem to complain more.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Just don’t defend them when they produce crap. They had a rough weekend…proceeded by a rough couple of weeks…proceeded by a rough year…proceeded by a rough decade or two with parks…

Now that I think about it…I probably SHOULDNT think about it

…but anyway…relax

It’s a product, not a way of life. There’s no “oath of allegiance”

How did they have a rough weekend?

For the most part, since D23 I have been seeing many spots on mainstream media (and some of that is Disney owned to be sure) about exciting new announcements and new potential lands coming to Disney. You have had tons of blog posts and Instagram/tik tok features publicizing them. Along with specials about the coming of Tron, on the heels of opening of GothG, which came on the heels of Rat. If you're just following the news from ABC or general media outlets, it looks like Disney has been building and opening new rides at an Epic pace (get it....epic pace...lol.)

To the hard core Disney fanatic who was there, sure you might have had some who were disappointed with the weekend, which sure made for some entertainment in the basement of fan forum pages. But in the broad market, those people don't really count. D23 got Disney a bunch of publicity, tons of trending topics on line, and a groundswell of new things are coming in the mainstream media. What else would they have wanted to get out of the weekend? And will anything that comes to fruition in the next 2-4 years be exactly what was described at D23.... odds are no. But none of the main stream general park guests are going to remember what exactly happened/was announced at D23 anyway (and that's assuming you can find a hard fact/promise that was given during the weekend in the first place.)

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

I think it's the suits at the "Disney" company who are spoiled, if anyone. They've cut corners and raised prices for years, yet the tourists keep coming and throwing money at them. So, apparently, they are giving the customers what they want at a price customers think is reasonable. That's why I'm hoping Universal's Epic Universe lives up to its potential and takes real market share from "Disney". Maybe the company will step up. Yeah, I know, dream on, silly dreamer...

I fixed your post for you.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

Attendance, revenue and profit are continuously expanding, why is it unrealistic to expect the same from the parks? Especially with 4 parks, expecting something new each year is not unrealistic at all. And during most of Disney's history, that was not unrealistic either.

Because you don't invest capex to constantly keep expanding your business, constantly increasing your overhead costs if you don't have to?

As you said, revenue and profit are expanding. Why would you take on debt and increase overhead, when you are generating increased revenue and profit?

Except for very few days per year, park reservations are available for all 4 parks. That means that from Disney's perspective, the parks are NOT selling out. They are NOT hitting the maximum number of visitors that they think the parks can hold. So there is no need right now to expand further, and certainly no reason to expand based upon something new every year.

And as a caveat, what I am saying is that there is no reason to expect something new, every year, at every park. Your looking at building through the prism of just WDW Florida. The parks division is much more than that. There has been additions made across all the parks over the past several years.

 

[J4546]

for real, when you take into account all the parks, 12 in total. there has been major upgrades and additions every year. Even if you just focus on US parks, there has been major additions constantly. As for FL specifically, on aother thread someone made a cool excel spreadsheet with all the parks and announcements from 2015-2022 and its color coded by location, really gives a sense of the money cycle in the parks. 2015 and 2017 was big in FL, 2019 was big internationaly and 2022 was big in CA. I bet next D23 is a big one for FL again

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

There’s a significant difference between numerical park capacity limits and functional/operational capacity to maintain satisfaction among those that are within the park.

This concept still seems to be “elusive” to a few. But it is a component of the success of the Disney parks model.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

for real, when you take into account all the parks, 12 in total. there has been major upgrades and additions every year. Even if you just focus on US parks, there has been major additions constantly. As for FL specifically, on aother thread someone made a cool excel spreadsheet with all the parks and announcements from 2015-2022 and its color coded by location, really gives a sense of the money cycle in the parks. 2015 and 2017 was big in FL, 2019 was big internationaly and 2022 was big in CA. I bet next D23 is a big one for FL again

The investment is “time weighed average”…if you don’t expand the chart over the period of time…it’s pointless.

A list is not accurate…it has to be plotted out on 2 axis.

Amusement parks are a demanding business, ain’t they?

 

[BuddyThomas]

Patently false.

Totally true. Have you read the bazillions of complaint threads on this board? All people do on here is complain that nothing is like it was. When they change a ride, people flip out. When they change a character in a movie, people flip out. When an adult is allowed to have a glass of wine in a restaurant in the Magic Kingdom, people flip out. When rainbow merchandise is sold in the parks for one month out of the year, people flip out. These are only a few of MANY examples.

 

[Raidermatt]

Because you don't invest capex to constantly keep expanding your business, constantly increasing your overhead costs if you don't have to?

As you said, revenue and profit are expanding. Why would you take on debt and increase overhead, when you are generating increased revenue and profit?

Except for very few days per year, park reservations are available for all 4 parks. That means that from Disney's perspective, the parks are NOT selling out. They are NOT hitting the maximum number of visitors that they think the parks can hold. So there is no need right now to expand further, and certainly no reason to expand based upon something new every year.

And as a caveat, what I am saying is that there is no reason to expect something new, every year, at every park. Your looking at building through the prism of just WDW Florida. The parks division is much more than that. There has been additions made across all the parks over the past several years.

The question was why would customers expect something new from a company making more and more $'s. Your answer is from the company's perspective, not the customer. That said, why would a company invest capex with revenue and profit expanding? Because capex is for the future, revenues and profits are the present. The point of capex is to generate returns in the future. If you limit capex because the $'s are rolling in today, you risk losing those $'s in the future. Or are you seriously suggesting that any company growing its revenue and profit should forgo capex? Really?

You also seem to be misunderstanding how Disney uses park reservations. They are not used to cap attendance at a park. They are used to allow Disney to dictate the %'s of guests in each park. You state "Except for very few days per year, park reservations are available for all 4 parks". Not true. Looking at the next 4 weeks, there are 13 days currently showing no availability in at least one park, and on some days 2. This is not because those parks are selling out. Its because Disney simply wants to shift more people to the other parks to make staffing easier for them. It has nothing to do with actual capacity or selling out.

That said, nobody is disputing Disney parks are doing very well financially. But the fact is the reason they are doing so well, and have done so well for almost 70 years, is due to past capex.

So even if you want to only focus on the company perspective, it makes a LOT of sense to invest significant capex on an ongoing basis. In fact it is financial suicide not too. Hence whenever they think they can stop (or slow significantly), they eventually start pouring the $'s back into it. Unless you think they have been wasting their money over the decades.

 

[drizgirl]

The question was why would customers expect something new from a company making more and more $'s. Your answer is from the company's perspective, not the customer. That said, why would a company invest capex with revenue and profit expanding? Because capex is for the future, revenues and profits are the present. The point of capex is to generate returns in the future. If you limit capex because the $'s are rolling in today, you risk losing those $'s in the future. Or are you seriously suggesting that any company growing its revenue and profit should forgo capex? Really?

You also seem to be misunderstanding how Disney uses park reservations. They are not used to cap attendance at a park. They are used to allow Disney to dictate the %'s of guests in each park. You state "Except for very few days per year, park reservations are available for all 4 parks". Not true. Looking at the next 4 weeks, there are 13 days currently showing no availability in at least one park, and on some days 2. This is not because those parks are selling out. Its because Disney simply wants to shift more people to the other parks to make staffing easier for them. It has nothing to do with actual capacity or selling out.

That said, nobody is disputing Disney parks are doing very well financially. But the fact is the reason they are doing so well, and have done so well for almost 70 years, is due to past capex.

So even if you want to only focus on the company perspective, it makes a LOT of sense to invest significant capex on an ongoing basis. In fact it is financial suicide not too. Hence whenever they think they can stop (or slow significantly), they eventually start pouring the $'s back into it. Unless you think they have been wasting their money over the decades.

Because It’s certainly a lot easier and cheaper than building those parks out enough to actually get people to choose them.

 

[drizgirl]

Interesting times that now if you want value for what you spend, for ever increasing prices, you’re spoiled. I guess we can call that theme park privilege?

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

The question was why would customers expect something new from a company making more and more $'s. Your answer is from the company's perspective, not the customer. That said, why would a company invest capex with revenue and profit expanding? Because capex is for the future, revenues and profits are the present. The point of capex is to generate returns in the future. If you limit capex because the $'s are rolling in today, you risk losing those $'s in the future. Or are you seriously suggesting that any company growing its revenue and profit should forgo capex? Really?

You also seem to be misunderstanding how Disney uses park reservations. They are not used to cap attendance at a park. They are used to allow Disney to dictate the %'s of guests in each park. You state "Except for very few days per year, park reservations are available for all 4 parks". Not true. Looking at the next 4 weeks, there are 13 days currently showing no availability in at least one park, and on some days 2. This is not because those parks are selling out. Its because Disney simply wants to shift more people to the other parks to make staffing easier for them. It has nothing to do with actual capacity or selling out.

That said, nobody is disputing Disney parks are doing very well financially. But the fact is the reason they are doing so well, and have done so well for almost 70 years, is due to past capex.

So even if you want to only focus on the company perspective, it makes a LOT of sense to invest significant capex on an ongoing basis. In fact it is financial suicide not too. Hence whenever they think they can stop (or slow significantly), they eventually start pouring the $'s back into it. Unless you think they have been wasting their money over the decades.

Of course my response is from the Company perspective. A company is only going to do something if it makes sense to them. As such it would silly or illogical for a customer expect a company to do something that was NOT in their best interest, from their perspective.

CAPEX spending is not (soley or directly) related to future profit/revenue. It is spending to maintain physical assets, to update existing assets/, or acquire new ones. It is not just about expansion. Disney could put all of its Capex spending into maintenance, or updating infrastructure without looking to acquire new assets (either land or new rides/equipment).

Disney has not refused to spend Capex in recent years on new acquisitions, nor have I ever said they shouldn't. In 5 years they have built (to just name a few) Toy Story Land, Galaxies Edge, Rattattouie, Guardians of the Galaxy, Space restaurant, the skyliner, MMRR, Tron, the Star Cruiser Hotel. And that is just spending in WDW Resorts, not including spending in DL or the non-domestic parks.

What is absurd is to think that a business is going to keep spending and to get bigger and bigger, adding new things and new overhead every single year. Especially in a market that is pretty saturated to begin with. Especially when there does not appear to be any data supporting that customers find the offerings at WDW stale and are not returning to them. At this time, and in the recent past, it makes much more sense if you are going to be spending CAPEX on acquisitions and expansions, to do so in parks/markets where there is more opportunities for increasing overall attendance, as opposed to easing crowding in your busiest park.

 

[Raidermatt]

Of course my response is from the Company perspective. A company is only going to do something if it makes sense to them. As such it would silly or illogical for a customer expect a company to do something that was NOT in their best interest, from their perspective.

CAPEX spending is not (soley or directly) related to future profit/revenue. It is spending to maintain physical assets, to update existing assets/, or acquire new ones. It is not just about expansion. Disney could put all of its Capex spending into maintenance, or updating infrastructure without looking to acquire new assets (either land or new rides/equipment).

Disney has not refused to spend Capex in recent years on new acquisitions, nor have I ever said they shouldn't. In 5 years they have built (to just name a few) Toy Story Land, Galaxies Edge, Rattattouie, Guardians of the Galaxy, Space restaurant, the skyliner, MMRR, Tron, the Star Cruiser Hotel. And that is just spending in WDW Resorts, not including spending in DL or the non-domestic parks.

What is absurd is to think that a business is going to keep spending and to get bigger and bigger, adding new things and new overhead every single year. Especially in a market that is pretty saturated to begin with. Especially when there does not appear to be any data supporting that customers find the offerings at WDW stale and are not returning to them. At this time, and in the recent past, it makes much more sense if you are going to be spending CAPEX on acquisitions and expansions, to do so in parks/markets where there is more opportunities for increasing overall attendance, as opposed to easing crowding in your busiest park.

Yes, its absurd to think a company would add new things and increase overhead. Even if those new things result in revenues that significantly outpace the overhead. Which is what that company has done for 70 years to unprecedented success (or over a 100 years really, since the same applies to the studio).