Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[hopemax]

If you need a little chuckle...

I don't want to link the article, because I don't think it would pass community standards. But apparently, there is a potentially serious supply chain disruption... Factories in Asia are warning that since they are shut down, they have produced 0 of a much needed male birth prevention product.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Good to know. Even if it could be considered a loss when adjusted for inflation, at least more money came back into the treasury then initially went out, unlike the money handed out by the government for those clean energy solar projects that went bust and were a total loss.

TARP was separate from the auto bailouts.
The government lost money on the auto bailout. For instance, the government got GM stock, which they sold at a loss. They came up about 10 billion short there.

Conversely, in the TARP bailout we got back more than we gave out. Interestingly, think GMAC (now Ally, mentioned above) was one of the few - maybe only - that failed to pay back what they got.

 

[Lilofan]

Disney faces $3.4 billion coronavirus one-two punch at U.S. theme parks, analysts warn

A report from research firm MoffettNathanson paints a grim picture of the financial impact of shuttering Disney theme parks in Anaheim, Florida and around the world amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

www.ocregister.com

A one-month shutdown of Disney’s six U.S. theme parks due to the coronavirus outbreak could result in a $1.4 billion loss in revenue, the report said.
The one-two punch of the coronavirus closures and the projected recession could cost Disney’s U.S. theme parks $3.4B in lost revenue, the report concludes.

Potential significant losses

 

[drizgirl]

You will also find that hospitals and doctors will often charge more to someone with insurance than they will charge someone with no insurance. I experienced that when I had an scan of my upper GI... I had it at the same place as my aunt, within 1 month of hers and by the same doctor. The only difference was I had insurance and my aunt didn't so she told them up front she didn't have insurance. She ended up paying the full amount they charged her when she had it done and that amount was less than the deductible that I was charged and my insurance paid 80% leaving with with 20%... Clearly a case of the place has 2 different prices one for people with no insurance and one with.... and it annoyed me to no end to think that because I was paying insurance premiums every month that I was also getting completely hosed on the costs. If I could have done it all over again I would have just told them I had no insurance and saved money.

It doesn't matter what they charge someone with insurance. They typically have a negotiated rate in place. Unless you are out of network, then all bets are off.

These days if you have no insurance, or if you have a high deductible, they often ask for payment in full up front for non emergent services.

 

[Jwink]

Potential significant losses

That’s all theme parks though. Not just Disney. And if others can pay their employees so can they.
They also have a ton in profits... they should keep some on hand for global pandemics I would assume!

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

could you explain how that’s possible? I’ve given birth 3 times, and the bills were always enormous. The one that really got me, however, was my second. She was stillborn at full term. I birthed her without medication. She obviously needed none of the usual stuff newborns gets since she was dead. And I was in and out of the hospital in 11 hours - didn’t even stay overnight. Our bill was $25,000. Insurance covered all but $3,500, but how on earth does a hospital not profit from $25,000. I didn’t need surgery, I didn’t have an anesthesiologist....there’s no way they lost money there.

Same. My son was stillborn at full term. I saw a nurse maybe 5-6 times who just checked my comfort and the doctor twice - 5 minutes to discuss what was going to happen & then again for labor (30 minutes of pushing - no need helped from the doctor). I did have an epidural which was billed separately. The total cost after insurance was $65,000. There's no way they lost money - none at all.

Hospitals should be far more profitable & be better equipped to handle things like this but too many people with their hands in the pot & not enough government oversight. All we can do is hope for the best. My fiance works in hospital sterilization & his hospital has a few confirmed cases (in NJ). They've started telling some of the cleaning staff to "wait 30-60 minutes before entering isolation rooms" without mask because they no longer have enough to go around & have prioritize them for staff in direct contact with COVID-19 positive patients only.
If any of those cleaning staff get sick, it sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen even given the circumstances. I feel for anyone that works at a hospital, urgent care, or doctors office.

 

[Lilofan]

That’s all theme parks though. Not just Disney. And if others can pay their employees so can they.
They also have a ton in profits... they should keep some on hand for global pandemics I would assume!

Disney recently borrowed $6 billion. As of Dec 2019, they were carrying a $38 billion dollar debt load.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

You will also find that hospitals and doctors will often charge more to someone with insurance than they will charge someone with no insurance. I experienced that when I had an scan of my upper GI... I had it at the same place as my aunt, within 1 month of hers and by the same doctor. The only difference was I had insurance and my aunt didn't so she told them up front she didn't have insurance. She ended up paying the full amount they charged her when she had it done and that amount was less than the deductible that I was charged and my insurance paid 80% leaving with with 20%... Clearly a case of the place has 2 different prices one for people with no insurance and one with.... and it annoyed me to no end to think that because I was paying insurance premiums every month that I was also getting completely hosed on the costs. If I could have done it all over again I would have just told them I had no insurance and saved money.

I know people don't like big government or when the government is involved but I have to be honest, it shocks me that we don't have more oversight.

I work for a military defense contractor and we obliged to not only provide them with the lowest possible price but when requested, we have to prove how we came up with the price. We have to provide breakdowns in what the materials cost, who the suppliers are, and what % was labor & profit.
Imagine if the government required something similar whenever claims were paid by medicare & medicaid. It might do the entire healthcare system some good if we had more transparency. But thats probably a topic for another time & forum

 

[thomas998]

It doesn't matter what they charge someone with insurance. They typically have a negotiated rate in place. Unless you are out of network, then all bets are off.

These days if you have no insurance, or if you have a high deductible, they often ask for payment in full up front for non emergent services.

You missed my point, they charge one rate to an insured person and a much lower rate to the person with no insurance. My out of pocket expense would have been less if I had said I had no insurance. That is simply wrong that a person doing what they should do gets charge so much more than the person with no insurance.

 

[UNCgolf]

The total cost after insurance was $65,000. There's no way they lost money - none at all.

Part of the problem with this line of thought (that I mentioned earlier) is that a lot of those costs are inflated so that they don't go under from treating the uninsured. You are subsidizing the uninsured, which is one of the biggest issues with the US healthcare system.

So yes, they may have made money on that $65,000 charge, although it's unlikely they were actually paid $65,000 -- there's usually a difference between the billed amount and what insurance actually has to pay them and it's sometimes a huge difference. I had an X-ray roughly two years ago that was billed at $2000+ but they were actually paid $150 for it.

Regardless of that, you have to think about all the services they provide to uninsured patients. They often receive nothing at all for those services. So even if they actually did get the full $65,000 billing cost, they could have easily lost another $65,000 that day on uninsured patients coming to the ER and using it as a doctor's office.

 

[UNCgolf]

You missed my point, they charge one rate to an insured person and a much lower rate to the person with no insurance. My out of pocket expense would have been less if I had said I had no insurance. That is simply wrong that a person doing what they should do gets charge so much more than the person with no insurance.

They often don't ever get paid for the uninsured costs, so they amount they charge is often irrelevant. That's one of the main reason the insurances prices are so high -- it's to cover all the money they don't get paid from treating those uninsured patients.

Also, it's more likely that they have tons of different prices because they usually negotiate different payments with different insurance companies. The scenario you described it still weird, though -- I've never heard of something like that happening, where the out of pocket cost for an uninsured person is less than the deductible for an insured person. There may be additional factors you weren't aware of.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

Part of the problem with this line of thought (that I mentioned earlier) is that a lot of those costs are inflated so that they don't go under from treating the uninsured. You are subsidizing the uninsured, which is one of the biggest issues with the US healthcare system.

So yes, they may have made money on that $65,000 charge, although it's unlikely they were actually paid $65,000 -- there's usually a difference between the billed amount and what insurance actually has to pay them and it's sometimes a huge difference. I had an X-ray roughly two years ago that was billed at $2000+ but they were actually paid $150 for it.

Regardless of that, you have to think about all the services they provide to uninsured patients. They often receive nothing at all for those services. So even if they actually did get the full $65,000 billing cost, they could have easily lost another $65,000 that day on uninsured patients coming to the ER and using it as a doctor's office.

The $65,000 was the negotiated rate actually. They were billed just over $103,000. Seems wildly inappropriate to overcharge those with insurance as a means of covering losses for patients without insurance. Many of these hospitals will still write those debts off as losses while sending the uninsured to collections. Its double dipping to me. If they are going to do that, then don't send people to collections, don't ruin their credit because they got sick.

 

[DCBaker]

 

[GoofGoof]

Well there it is. Good news for CMs at least

 

[flynnibus]

The reason Ford didn't partake is right before the collapse, Ford mortgaged the whole company, even the Ford logo, so they were flush with money and didn't need it.

FWIW:
On December 19, 2014, the U.S. Treasury sold its remaining holdings of Ally Financial, essentially ending the program. TARP recovered funds totalling $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested, earning a $15.3 billion profit or an annualized rate of return of 0.6% and perhaps a loss when adjusted for inflation.

Yup.. basically Ford had already bit the bullet before the others and was already on their own recovery plan when the others needed to be bailed out.

 

[flynnibus]

Also read through this entire thread -

yeah.. yeah.. but soundbites rule all!!

 

[Jwink]

Well there it is. Good news for CMs at least

Closed til further notice? so I think April 18th is the end of the road for pay it sounds like.... hope he’s furloughed and not laid off after that

 

[UNCgolf]

The $65,000 was the negotiated rate actually. They were billed just over $103,000. Seems wildly inappropriate to overcharge those with insurance as a means of covering losses for patients without insurance. Many of these hospitals will still write those debts off as losses while sending the uninsured to collections. Its double dipping to me. If they are going to do that, then don't send people to collections, don't ruin their credit because they got sick.

Writing it off doesn't cover the costs of supplies used, time spent, etc. though, which is the problem.

It would be like if you ran a restaurant and fed anyone who came in regardless of whether they could pay. Eventually you'd have to raise your prices significantly for the paying customers to cover all the losses from those who didn't pay.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

View attachment 459060

I'm so very happy for the Cast members but what a non answer for guest still booked for April & May.

The phone lines are about to be overwhelmed with guest not know what to do.

 

[WDWTrojan]

Glad they finally made the statement but strange they made the distinction about only paying hourly cast members. There’s a good deal of TDO/Celebration salaried cast working from home but an even larger number of salaried low/mid level operations management in the parks who are now in limbo.