CNN article on Disney parks

[ParentsOf4]

Nope, I don't think it is overpriced at all. If I did, I would stop going.

Increasingly, more Americans are finding WDW overpriced.

WDW's attendance has declined 2 out of the last 3 years while simultaneously exploding at Universal, which is up over an incredible 60% since the opening of WWOHP, showing people are will to go to theme parks if offered the right experiences. With Avatarland not scheduled to open until later this decade, it looks like WDW will go over a decade without an exciting new attraction. This from a resort that opened 3 entire theme parks in 16 years.

At the 2012 financial results conference call, Bob Iger readily acknowledged that WDW's attendance is being propped up by overseas guests, who appear to be taking advantage of a favorable exchange rate as well as great discounts that are not being offered to Americans. Leading the charge are guests from Brazil and Argentina. If you have been to WDW in the last 12 months, their presence is becoming increasingly apparent.

In 2005 (when Iger took over), a 10-day Magic Your Way ticket with park hopping, water parks, and "No Expiration" cost $377.00.
In 2012, the same ticket cost $672.00.
That's a compound price increase of 8.6% annually.
That's a price difference of $295.00

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, $377.00 in 2005 is equivalent to $444.41 in 2012.
That's a compound price increase of 2.4% annually.
That's a price difference of $67.41.

Even in the last 8 years, with no new theme parks and few park additions, WDW prices have skyrocketed out of control.

Similar price increases have affected the Disney Dining Plan (DDP).

Introduced in 2005, the DDP averaged an 8.0% annual increase from 2005 to 2012, with another 12.5% in 2013.

Again quoting from the article:

To those travelers, Disney is merely a commercial machine built to sell tickets, overpriced toys and a stereotype of girls as princesses.

This statement is completely reasonable and understandable.

 

[bubbles1812]

At the 2012 financial results conference call, Bob Iger readily acknowledged that WDW's attendance is being propped up by overseas guests, who appear to be taking advantage of a favorable exchange rate as well as great discounts that are not being offered to Americans. Leading the charge are guests from Brazil and Argentina. If you have been to WDW in the last 12 months, their presence is becoming increasingly apparent.

I seriously felt like I was in the minority as an American when I was there last month. So much Spanish/Portuguese. I don't honestly mind the individual Brazilian families but as has been discussed before, man can those tour groups be annoying, disruptive, and just rude all around.

 

[All Disney All The Time]

Please let me know when the day comes that ANYTHING is "priced" as people "think it should be".

 

[Walt Disney1955]

You know, I don't begrudge a person who loathes everything about Disney. That's fine, it's a free country. I personally can't comprehend it though. Calling Disney "overpriced" and a "corporate money making machine" is fair I guess but it is a business. The prices don't need to be where they are, but I do find that things like the hopper passes give you a lot more bang for your buck. Overall while pricey, Disney does give the guest a memorable experience that is worth the price of admission.

We all know what Walt thought of profit. Profit was simply something he had so he could make more movies and eventually a theme park. He wasn't interested in how much he could make the shareholders he was an innovator plain and simple. I think if people realize that this is the original intention of all that is Disney they may soften up a bit.

I also think a lot of the people who loathe Disney have simply never been to the parks. Once I am in the parks I am captivated and entertained and forget that I paid the money I did to get in. It still is a happy place and while expensive I don't think they rob the guest at all from the experience.

 

[wdisney9000]

No offense, but while WDW is sort of outside (guessing as a whole it is 50/50 for how much time is actually spent outside), it's certainly not "in nature." By its very definition, WDW is a carefully controlled environment. Everything about it right down to where trees are planted is by design. That isn't nature. Obviously you could go with extended family anywhere if you wanted to.

None taken, but I will take Disney's controlled environment over DEEP into nature (DEEP is how far you need to go to escape man kinds presence), and not end up on the 7:00 news as the guy who was mauled by a bear, mountain lion, or trapped in between rocks and had to chew his own leg off to escape. True nature is rough and most families, especially those with children, don't go that far off the beaten path to truly say they were in "nature". Most campground sites have electricity or people bring RV's on their vacations that have bathrooms, satellite t.v. and beds to sleep in. IMO, there isnt too much of a difference. Until i see a picture of Lindsay Potts and her family in the frozen tundra or the deep jungles of Africa I will assume my trips are just as much "in nature" as hers.

 

[bubbles1812]

None taken, but I will take Disney's controlled environment over DEEP into nature (DEEP is how far you need to go to escape man kinds presence), and not end up on the 7:00 news as the guy who was mauled by a bear, mountain lion, or trapped in between rocks and had to chew his own leg off to escape. True nature is rough and most families, especially those with children, don't go that far off the beaten path to truly say they were in "nature". Most campground sites have electricity or people bring RV's on their vacations that have bathrooms, satellite t.v. and beds to sleep in. IMO, there isnt too much of a difference. Until i see a picture of Lindsay Potts and her family in the frozen tundra or the deep jungles of Africa I will assume my trips are just as much "in nature" as hers.

Eh.. I'd say a visit to a National Park or the like is certainly in nature even if you don't wonder of the trail (which would be just plain stupid). I've been to many and I saw plenty of children on those. And WDW certainly is not "in nature" that way. That's what I thought of when I saw that "in nature" quote. No the car might not be that far off but I consider it way different from being in an absolutely controlled environment like WDW. It's wild in the national and state parks, and it's awesome. I get what you are trying to say but think I'm going to have to disagree.

 

[DVC4bestvacations]

Increasingly, more Americans are finding WDW overpriced.

WDW's attendance has declined 2 out of the last 3 years while simultaneously exploding at Universal, which is up over an incredible 60% since the opening of WWOHP, showing people are will to go to theme parks if offered the right experiences. With Avatarland not schedule to open until later this decade, it looks like WDW will go over a decade without an exciting new attraction. This from a resort that opened 3 entire theme parks in 16 years.

At the 2012 financial results conference call, Bob Iger readily acknowledged that WDW's attendance is being propped up by overseas guests, who appear to be taking advantage of a favorable exchange rate as well as great discounts that are not being offered to Americans. Leading the charge are guests from Brazil and Argentina. If you have been to WDW in the last 12 months, their presence is becoming increasingly apparent.

In 2005 (when Iger took over), a 10-day Magic Your Way ticket with park hopping, water parks, and "No Expiration" cost $377.00.
In 2012, the same ticket cost $672.00.
That's a compound price increase of 8.6% annually.
That's a price difference of $295.00

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, $377.00 in 2005 is equivalent to $444.41 in 2012.
That's a compound price increase of 2.4% annually.
That's a price difference of $67.41.

Even in the last 8 years, with no new theme parks and few park additions, WDW prices have skyrocketed out of control.

Similar price increases have affected the Disney Dining Plan (DDP).

Introduced in 2005, the DDP averaged an 8.0% annual increase from 2005 to 2012, with another 12.5% in 2013.

Again quoting from the article:

This statement is completely reasonable and understandable.

Great post!
If it wasnt for the great DVC discout on season passes in the fall we would not be visiting in December.
In addition to ticket prices the cost of dinning has gone throught he roof.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Great post!
If it wasnt for the great DVC discout on season passes in the fall we would not be visiting in December.
In addition to ticket prices the cost of dinning has gone throught he roof.

Even without the discounted AP, a DVC resale is a great way to counteract WDW's spiraling prices. Over the long run, it's possible to stay at WDW Deluxe Resorts for less than WDW's Moderate Resorts, gain some control over annual MF dues increases (which are under 3.0% since the inception of DVC 20 years ago), and avoid some of WDW's outrageous food prices by preparing meals in the room.

Too bad everyone doesn't have $10,000 lying around to spend on DVC but between DVC resorts, traveling using our own car, almost never eating onsite at WDW, and buying a stack of WDW tickets in 2005 because I knew, absolutely knew, which way prices were headed, I've done what I can to counteract WDW's ever increasing prices.

Of course, lately I've been spending all my time at Universal on a $199 AP. Their theme park table service restaurant prices seem to be no worse than typical chain table service restaurants. Sometimes I wonder how WDW gets away with charging what they do for food but then I read the pixie dust laced posts and realize why. It's sad to see Disney take such advantage of their most loyal fans.

All you have to do is read some of the quotes in the CNN article to realize that WDW is pushing on prices because their "fans" let them.

 

[googilycub]

In 2005 (when Iger took over), a 10-day Magic Your Way ticket with park hopping, water parks, and "No Expiration" cost $377.00.
In 2012, the same ticket cost $672.00.
That's a compound price increase of 8.6% annually.
That's a price difference of $295.00

In 2012 I paid $452.63 for an annual pass. I was able to take 3 trips to WDW, for a total of 28 days, and went to a park all but one of those days. That averages out to just over 16 dollars a day to enter the park. No, I don't find it overpriced at all.

 

[DVC4bestvacations]

Even without the discounted AP, a DVC resale is a great way to counteract WDW's spiraling prices. Over the long run, it's possible to stay at WDW Deluxe Resorts for less than WDW's Moderate Resorts, gain some control over annual MF dues increases (which are under 3.0% since the inception of DVC 20 years ago), and avoid some of WDW outrageous food prices by preparing meals in the room.

Too bad everyone doesn't have $10,000 lying around to spend on DVC but between DVC resorts, traveling using our own car, almost never eating onsite at WDW, and buying a stack of WDW tickets in 2005 because I knew, absolutely knew, which way prices were headed, I've done what I can to counteract WDW's ever increasing prices.

Of course, lately I've been spending all my time at Universal on a $199 AP. Their theme park table service restaurant prices seem to be no worse than typical chain table service restaurants. Sometimes I wonder how WDW gets away with charging what they do for food but then I read the pixie dust laced posts and realize why. It's sad to see Disney take such advantage of their most loyal fans.

Honestly I'm going to take the advice from other members here. If you feel the prices are too high don't go. After Our December trip I don't see a return trip for quite awhile I will use my points elsewhere.

 

[DVC4bestvacations]

In 2012 I paid $452.63 for an annual pass. I was able to take 3 trips to WDW, for a total of 28 days, and went to a park all but one of those days. That averages out to just over 16 dollars a day to enter the park. No, I don't find it overpriced at all.

And as a AP holder do you think 28 days in a year is average. Or do you feel everyone with an AP goes more or less than 28 days.

 

[ParentsOf4]

In 2012 I paid $452.63 for an annual pass. I was able to take 3 trips to WDW, for a total of 28 days, and went to a park all but one of those days. That averages out to just over 16 dollars a day to enter the park. No, I don't find it overpriced at all.

Currently I am a Universal AP holder (used to have a WDW AP) for $199 and have spent 21 days so far, with 6 more days planned in July. That averages to $7.37 per visit. It's all relative.

Unfortunately, most out-of-staters aren't like you and I and cannot afford to spend 4 weeks at WDW or Universal per year.

 

[googilycub]

Currently I am a Universal AP holder (used to have a WDW AP) for $199 and have spent 21 days so far, with 6 more days planned in July. That averages to $7.37 per visit. It's all relative.

Very true. However for myself, if I were to do Universal, I would have to rent a car, which no doubt would cost me more than $10 dollars a day once gas is included. It really is all relative.

Unfortunately, most out-of-staters aren't like you and I and cannot afford to spend 4 weeks at WDW or Universal per year.

True, but that goes for just about everything. Most people can not afford to buy a Porsche. Does that make it overpriced? Just because something costs more than one can afford does not mean it is overpriced.

 

[googilycub]

And as a AP holder do you think 28 days in a year is average. Or do you feel everyone with an AP goes more or less than 28 days.

I have no idea, nor does it really matter. My post was a response to this, "Is there anyone who seriously doesn't think WDW is overpriced?". My post shows that yes, there is at least one person who seriously doesn't thing WDW is overpriced. I think was able to show why I did not think so.

 

[wdisney9000]

Eh.. I'd say a visit to a National Park or the like is certainly in nature even if you don't wonder of the trail (which would be just plain stupid). I've been to many and I saw plenty of children on those. And WDW certainly is not "in nature" that way. That's what I thought of when I saw that "in nature" quote. No the car might not be that far off but I consider it way different from being in an absolutely controlled environment like WDW. It's wild in the national and state parks, and it's awesome. I get what you are trying to say but think I'm going to have to disagree.

I agree national parks are awesome and in nature. We live just a few miles from a large national park and never get tired of visiting. They have campgrounds there and have a few warning signs of animals (snakes, coyotes). I have also been to Fort Wilderness Campgrounds at WDW and it is very similar in its layout and there are snakes and crocodiles in Florida that could harm you, so I would have to say that it is just as much "in nature" as any other campground. Im just being technical, not argumentative. Not all aspects of WDW are TOTALLY controlled. I say "far off the beaten path" because the definition of nature is: the natural world as it exists without human beings or civilization. Or, the material world, especially as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities. (dictionaryreference.com). Fort Wilderness Campgrounds are just as much "in nature" as a national park.

 

[bubbles1812]

I agree national parks are awesome and in nature. We live just a few miles from a large national park and never get tired of visiting. They have campgrounds there and have a few warning signs of animals (snakes, coyotes). I have also been to Fort Wilderness Campgrounds at WDW and it is very similar in its layout and there are snakes and crocodiles in Florida that could harm you, so I would have to say that it is just as much "in nature" as any other campground. Im just being technical, not argumentative. Not all aspects of WDW are TOTALLY controlled. I say "far off the beaten path" because the definition of nature is: the natural world as it exists without human beings or civilization. Or, the material world, especially as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities. (dictionaryreference.com). Fort Wilderness Campgrounds are just as much "in nature" as a national park.

Still going to say no. Sorry. You can try to say the Fort Wilderness campgrounds are the same, but they are well maintained, well monitored, and not wild in any sense in my opinion. No maybe not everything is controlled but obviously anything at Disney is far far far more controlled than in national park. You are still on a huge corporation's property. And it isnt like you are even on the non-developed land. The national parks are not. They are wild in a way the campgrounds at FW could never be. It may be a similar lay out but then a lot of campgrounds have similar layouts. But it just isn't the same. *shrug*

And beyond that, it's not like you aren't going to the parks even if you are campgrounds. You cant just look at what you do in WDW in a bubble of "oh yes im at the campgrounds." Going into a theme park for most of your day doesn't exactly happen with a national park. So there is a huge difference from that perspective too. Quite a difference in experience going out to hike on a trail along a canyon for the day versus going to see a giant fake plastic castle even if you are the campgrounds, which most guests aren't at anyways. That isn't nature in any sense. I love WDW. Clearly I'm on here. I love it. But to call it "in nature" based on the full experience you get at WDW.. Nope. You are there to visit theme parks. Theme parks aren't nature.

But if you want to think it is nature in that way, ok I guess, but Im not going to agree. No one says I want to go on a nature type vacation and thinks of WDW. Sorry.

 

[ParentsOf4]

Very true. However for myself, if I were to do Universal, I would have to rent a car, which no doubt would cost me more than $10 dollars a day once gas is included. It really is all relative.

True, but that goes for just about everything. Most people can not afford to buy a Porsche. Does that make it overpriced? Just because something costs more than one can afford does not mean it is overpriced.

You mentioned paying $452.63 in 2012 for an AP. That seems to be the price of an in-state regular AP. In 2005, that same AP cost $314.18. Adjusted for inflation, $314.18 in 2005 is the same as $369.35 in 2012.

In 2012, if someone offered you a WDW AP for $369.35 and the exact same WDW AP for $452.63, you'd take the $369.35 AP, saying the $452.63 AP was overpriced.

Yes, it's all relative.

 

[DVC4bestvacations]

True, but that goes for just about everything. Most people can not afford to buy a Porsche. Does that make it overpriced? Just because something costs more than one can afford does not mean it is overpriced.

BUT the Porsche has always been out of reach for most people. WDW has not.

 

[wdisney9000]

Still going to say no. Sorry. You can try to say the Fort Wilderness campgrounds are the same, but they are well maintained, well monitored, and not wild in any sense in my opinion. No maybe not everything is controlled but obviously anything at Disney is far far far more controlled than in national park. You are still on a huge corporation's property. And it isnt like you are even on the non-developed land. The national parks are not. They are wild in a way the campgrounds could never be. *shrug* But if you want to think it is nature in that way, ok but using the technical definition of nature is certainly not going to get me to agree.

National parks are owned and MAINTAINED by the U.S. government. Thats the biggest corporation on this planet. My original statement was that what Lindsay Potts said sounded like a Disney vacation to me. If you go by the true definition of nature, then she is probably no more in nature on her vacation than anyone else. I think your just splitting hairs.

 

[googilycub]

In 2012, if someone offered you a WDW AP for $369.35 and the exact same WDW AP for $452.63, you'd take the $369.35 AP, saying the $452.63 AP was overpriced.

Nope, I would not say the $452 AP was overpriced, I would say the AP for $369 was a good deal. There is a difference.