Cost of going to DW waaaay too high.

[Disneyhead'71]

We saw Little Big Town the other night, $107 per seat plus $18 per drink… 3 hours of fun was $300.

Knights games will run a couple hundred a ticket, add in a hot dog and a beer each and it’s a $500+ night. Entertainment has become very expensive.

I see this argument all the time when discussing WDW's prices, but they really aren't comparable. A 3-4 hour event is vastly different than a destination resort. It is east to skip that overpriced arena hot dog when you know you will be leaving in 3 hours. It's not so easy to skip eating when you know you you won't be leaving property for 5 more days.

 

[seascape]

They absolutely do.

1- It's cheaper to have repeat customers than it is to get new ones.
2- As millennials tend to have fewer kids than previous generations (and for zoomers it's likely to be the same, as the factors owing to millennials having fewer kids are still around), soon, Disney will reach a point that there just aren't as many families interested in a WDW vacation.

Disney's been smart by offering cheaper ways to "buy" into Disney (D23, Disney+), and buying IP to expand the company's appeal to new customers - but the parks are still the cash cow.

In response to your number 2 above. You need to rethink that because fewer children means a higher percentage of the population are adults and adults love shows and dark rides much more than rollercoasters and thrill rides. Epcot with it's festivals and Animal Kingdom with it's Safari and two animal paths are much more enjoyable for people 50 and up than anything offered at Universal. What Disney needs is for children to fall in love with Disney movies and shows as children, fall in love with Marvel and Star Wars as teenagers and young adults and finally when they are in their late 40's and 50's start going to WDW. The people who can afford these expensive vacations are older adults. As for the demographics and number of people who love and will pay for thrill rides Universal has a bigger problem than Disney does because fewer children will lead to fewer people in the age group that want thrill rides.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

People play together more amicably if you aren't labeling their choices as illogical or suggesting that they're gullible.

It’s just semantics…to be honest

I believe most are intelligent enough to know the difference between what is a wise way to be a consumer and what it’s not. So I don’t find it incredibly useful to point out how damaging to the price structure/value/quality it was to “experience boo bash” or the 7 dwarfs buffet again and again. There’s no need to hammer such choices…but the net effect is lasting for everyone and that’s not something that is less real if we spend all day reading trip reports.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I see this argument all the time when discussing WDW's prices, but they really aren't comparable. A 3-4 hour event is vastly different than a destination resort. It is east to skip that overpriced arena hot dog when you know you will be leaving in 3 hours. It's not so easy to skip eating when you know you you won't be leaving property for 5 more days.

Yes…you are correct

events are “pricey” because it’s focused into a short window with very finite capacity…

that is not magical express in Orlando (which is cancelled - by the way - price tbd)…where all food/lodging/entertainment recycles every day for an average of 6 days (minimum)…

you can’t make that comparison…but it’s a standard false equivalency from the palace guards

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

In response to your number 2 above. You need to rethink that because fewer children means a higher percentage of the population are adults and adults love shows and dark rides much more than rollercoasters and thrill rides. Epcot with it's festivals and Animal Kingdom with it's Safari and two animal paths are much more enjoyable for people 50 and up than anything offered at Universal. What Disney needs is for children to fall in love with Disney movies and shows as children, fall in love with Marvel and Star Wars as teenagers and young adults and finally when they are in their late 40's and 50's start going to WDW. The people who can afford these expensive vacations are older adults. As for the demographics and number of people who love and will pay for thrill rides Universal has a bigger problem than Disney does because fewer children will lead to fewer people in the age group that want thrill rides.

So now small world and country bears now only are specifically for adults born in the 1980’s and beyond…they will only be “experienced” by those with unlimited funds…cause Bobs say so?

because the fab 5 and Pixar aren’t designed for kids…and only a 7 year old without means and taste would want to go on the Velocicoaster?

the kicker is ready…he just has no idea where the goal posts are

 

[Jrb1979]

In response to your number 2 above. You need to rethink that because fewer children means a higher percentage of the population are adults and adults love shows and dark rides much more than rollercoasters and thrill rides. Epcot with it's festivals and Animal Kingdom with it's Safari and two animal paths are much more enjoyable for people 50 and up than anything offered at Universal. What Disney needs is for children to fall in love with Disney movies and shows as children, fall in love with Marvel and Star Wars as teenagers and young adults and finally when they are in their late 40's and 50's start going to WDW. The people who can afford these expensive vacations are older adults. As for the demographics and number of people who love and will pay for thrill rides Universal has a bigger problem than Disney does because fewer children will lead to fewer people in the age group that want thrill rides.

While that's partially true, there is a lot adults that enjoy the Cedar Point's of the world over Disney. The thing I'm seeing now is less and less kids loving Disney like their parents did.

 

[John park hopper]

As a child growing up in the 50's and 60's TV was new and the big thing was the original Mickey mouse club. I can remember rushing home to watch it daily. There were not that many kids shows on like now, Then there were the animated movies and Disney movies like Old yeller etc. Disney had the Sunday night Disney show hosted by Walt. That's where my love of Disney began. There are so many non Disney shows on geared for kids --in my own grandchildren I don't see the same Disney love/loyalty that I had. My granddaughters have been twice but I don't see them begging my son to go again.

 

[jloucks]

In 1973 the average home price in the United States was $29,900 ($186,000 in inflation adjusted dollars)

The average home price in the USA today is $374,900.

By home price standards (102% increase) WDWs 40% price increase during the same time is chump change.

Interesting!

So.... if you're salty about WDW prices, you are gonna be super salty about home prices. Which, understandably, first time home buyers are.

 

[Disstevefan1]

In 1973 the average home price in the United States was $29,900 ($186,000 in inflation adjusted dollars)

The average home price in the USA today is $374,900.

By home price standards (102% increase) WDWs 40% price increase during the same time is chump change.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but we know WDWs prices increased way more than 40% since 1973.

 

[jloucks]

I think when Disney parks like WDW raises prices, it allows (forces?) other similar venues to raise their prices.

Other venues that do not raise their prices could be perceived as not worth your time or generally lower quality. And let’s face it, raising prices makes more money, so it’s an easy decision for these other venues to raise their prices too.

Whatever the case , It seems the other venues follows WDW’s lead.

True to some extent, especially when the reputation is comparable.

I would never buy a BMW, Range Rover, or Mercedes. I would however buy a Porsche, Lexus, or high-end GM. (ha, I know wild opinions on GM, but I have had phenomenal cars from them over the last 30 year)

It always ends up about demand, which is driven by quality, which feeds reputation. Reputation is hard to put a price tag on, but it is a key factor with mid to (especially) high tier goods and services.

So WDW could jack their prices way up, and people would go. But, would that make it so Six Flags could also jack up their prices? Only if demand for Six Flags increases by the amount of people priced out of WDW. I don't know if Six Flags reputation would put it in line to fulfill that demand.

But, as is probably your point, there is likely some venue perfectly situated to do so.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

In 1973 the average home price in the United States was $29,900 ($186,000 in inflation adjusted dollars)

The average home price in the USA today is $374,900.

By home price standards (102% increase) WDWs 40% price increase during the same time is chump change.

Ehhh…can’t sleep outside.

I get your point…everything is up…but the real estate market is in a bubble again…and that will pop.

same with Disney prices…they never “pop” but at this rate of climb they could for the first time

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but we know WDWs prices increased way more than 40% since 1973.

They’re saying they’re only up 40% against inflation since 1971…but that’s a bit of a misdirection

a 1 day ticket was $52 (with tax) and APs Were $289/$389 (no blackouts…all access) in 2002…

so now redo the math and compare it to houses.

 

[eliza61nyc]

For the billionth time…it’s not Econ 001…because disney is a rare business that sells emotional attachment as much as it sells product.

coke sells drinks…apple sells overpriced phones…Exxon sells gas…

disney has a “trigger”…that they’re well aware of…that drives the sales. So a tactic that changes that attachment should be questioned by the consumer AND the market.

You might want to venture over to “kfcmagic” if we’re gong to act like the brand isn’t the biggest draw. It is…it has been since WW2.

So then whats the problem?? So if "emotional " attachment is all it takes to get folks to go then the price they charge becomes a non factor??

Sure the brand is a draw but I disagree coke, "budweiswr" , Mattel all have brands the evoke emotional responses. Wasn't that one of the reasons Barbie wasn't used in the initial toy story?? Mattel didn't want it to have an effect on the brand.

I apologize Sir I'm not understanding your point. Are you saying because Disney evokes emotional attachment they have some sort of obligation to operate differently??

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

So then whats the problem?? So if "emotional " attachment is all it takes to get folks to go then the price they charge becomes a non factor??

Sure the brand is a draw but I disagree coke, "budweiswr" , Mattel all have brands the evoke emotional responses. Wasn't that one of the reasons Barbie wasn't used in the initial toy story?? Mattel didn't want it to have an effect on the brand.

I apologize Sir I'm not understanding your point. Are you saying because Disney evokes emotional attachment they have some sort of obligation to operate differently??

The problem is there’s no “unlimited value” to emotional attachment. Disney has always been careful to not let the rubber meet the road.
The minute something is labeled with a “ripoff” stigma…it’s very hard to undo it. Especially in a nanosecond digital world.

 

[Jrb1979]

The problem is there’s no “unlimited value” to emotional attachment. Disney has always been careful to not let the rubber meet the road.
The minute something is labeled with a “ripoff” stigma…it’s very hard to undo it. Especially in a nanosecond digital world.

Personally I think you are starting to see that now. I've seen more and more posts from people that have been lately and say they don't want to go back.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Personally I think you are starting to see that now. I've seen more and more posts from people that have been lately and say they don't want to go back.

That’s anecdotal…but may suggest a trend

the problem sometimes with forums is it attracts a disproportionate amount of complainers and promoters

 

[Jrb1979]

That’s anecdotal…but may suggest a trend

the problem sometimes with forums is it attracts s disproportionate amount of complainers and promoters

It's not just here I see it. I have seen it many places. The fact that the owner of Dreams is seeing more people booking Universal over Disney says a lot. He's also telling people to go to Universal.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's not just here I see it. I have seen it many places. The fact that the owner of Dreams is seeing more people booking Universal over Disney says a lot. He's also telling people to go to Universal.

…there’s an angle there…rest assured.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I see this argument all the time when discussing WDW's prices, but they really aren't comparable. A 3-4 hour event is vastly different than a destination resort. It is east to skip that overpriced arena hot dog when you know you will be leaving in 3 hours. It's not so easy to skip eating when you know you you won't be leaving property for 5 more days.

Is it though?

The Hot Dog is part of the experience. A game without a hot dog and a beer isn’t really a game.

Even if you decide to skip the dog and the beer you’re still paying $200 per person for a 3 hour game, slightly cheaper but still expensive, worth it though.

My whole point is Disney is no worse than any of the other things competing for our leisure dollars. They are all 100% optional, no one needs them to survive, yet we’re willing to pay it because we enjoy it.

Food prices, gas prices, utility prices, home prices… those are worth getting upset over because they are necessities. Leisure prices… not so much.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but we know WDWs prices increased way more than 40% since 1973.

Adjusted for inflation…

See my post 2 above the one you quoted for the breakdown.