Crowds are down? Curious about the claims . . .

[WondersOfLife]

Don't compare Universal need in the past ten years to Disney. If universal did not go nuts and build a ton they be closed.

Go nuts?? Adding a brand new E-Ticket every year is what you consider going nuts? On top of that, you said "IF"... Well. They did. Sooo... I mean.. What is your point?

 

[21stamps]

I'm not saying they're not good additions... I'm saying they're not big, or impressive additions.. They're not a new groundbreaking E-Ticket. Look at my updated quote to you for a comparison on Universal. All Disney has been doing are overlays, cheap way outs, and small stage shows/scavenger hunts.

Yes, but with a 3,4,5 year old I'm not comparing Disney to Universal. That's what people are forgetting.
Both are great parks. They are different parks though. Totally different themes.

 

[WondersOfLife]

Yes, but with a 3,4,5 year old I'm not comparing Disney to Universal. That's what people are forgetting.
Both are great parks. They are different parks though. Totally different themes.

The point, though, was that Disney hasn't added anything SIGNIFICANT except a COUPLE of attractions in the past DECADE. I'm not saying they have to be big thrill rides. I'm saying why did they stop at Little Mermaid and 7* Dwarves? Or.... Why did they take so incredibly long to finally decide to fix Hollywood Studios? (Which still won't be ready for another 3 years ish, right? And how long since they announced groundbreaking on avatarland?)

 

[SorcererMC]

Wall Street does not want attendance drops if revenue and profit drops. Wall street wants companies to grow and maintain there profit percent as if sales go up and profit percent stays same profit goes up. Shareholders make more. It bothers me that people think Wall Street wants to just cut cut cut to increase bottom line. They don't as long term companies like Disney you want to milk the cash cow not butcher it for a few good years of profit.

Now some of course want that but most don't operate that way.

Disney does not report attendance numbers for a reason - Wall St was using it as an indicator of revenue, creating a distortion. Disney can still increase revenue with higher prices while attendance drops, but their tool kit is limited (cuts, discounts, drawing new visitors w/ more marketing, etc.). Wall St doesn't care how the bottom line increases - only that it does, and stock price will fall on announced investments if Wall St doesn't think it is warranted.

 

[gmajew]

You are changing the context from natl tourism trends to local econ indicators. Fine. Disney has sufficient market share (~70%) of an oligopoly market (or duopoly if you prefer) and therefore they command the price points - it's their game. It's why Universal automatically raises their ticket prices right after Disney. If they keep playing the way that they have been, they are going to lose share one way or the other. They've been 'sitting pretty' for a long time....it's not sustainable.

No I am not changing context. I believe it is a national bubble and much bigger things then the price points hurting the tourism this year.

On your other point Disney is going to lose market share and should in Orlando. Look at one of the attendance charts @PhotoDave219 has done showing a ten or twenty year market share. universal will take days from Disney and share. Which is a long term good thing as competition is a good thing.

This down fall though is not because they are at universal. It is because the economy is not on solid ground as much as people say unemployment is so low it is not because so many just collect unemployment and don't look for jobs anymore.

 

[PhotoDave219]

No I am not changing context. I believe it is a national bubble and much bigger things then the price points hurting the tourism this year.

On your other point Disney is going to lose market share and should in Orlando. Look at one of the attendance charts @PhotoDave219 has done showing a ten or twenty year market share. universal will take days from Disney and share. Which is a long term good thing as competition is a good thing.

This down fall though is not because they are at universal. It is because the economy is not on solid ground as much as people say unemployment is so low it is not because so many just collect unemployment and don't look for jobs anymore.

Someone else had the market share charts....

 

[RMichael21]

Also, I don't know if it's always been this way (pretty sure it hasn't), but looking at the Disney app and the crowd calendars, it seems the weekends are MUCH less busy at the parks. Waits at MK were no longer than 60 minutes for a lot of the time over the past few weekends according to the app, whereas waits would soar well about that during weekdays.

 

[SorcererMC]

No I am not changing context. I believe it is a national bubble and much bigger things then the price points hurting the tourism this year.

On your other point Disney is going to lose market share and should in Orlando. Look at one of the attendance charts @PhotoDave219 has done showing a ten or twenty year market share. universal will take days from Disney and share. Which is a long term good thing as competition is a good thing.

This down fall though is not because they are at universal. It is because the economy is not on solid ground as much as people say unemployment is so low it is not because so many just collect unemployment and don't look for jobs anymore.

I stand by my previous posts that show that it is BOTH pricing strategy AND the domestic and intl tourism market that are contributing to the decrease in attendance.

 

[gmajew]

Someone else had the market share charts....

Sorry I thought it was you... As you were playing with attendance charts.

 

[SorcererMC]

In corporate circles group think is your worst enemy. Windows 8 is a good example. Microsoft was going to build a phone OS because everyone loved their IPhones so much, add a MS phone, game machine, everything based on the phone OS. Appy snappy. They all told each other how bright this idea was, high fives all around. In the end the phone doesn't sell well, just like the Zune. People hated Win 8 and businesses didn't want to touch it. Xbox had many things changed because the Play Station was beating them badly in sales. At one point MS was going to kill off used games on their platform, that would have been instant death for the X Box one so they backed off that plan. That type of group think is usually caused by a bunch of people who do nothing but kiss each others backsides and climb the corporate ladder. Their only skill is climbing the corporate ladder.

The used game thing was the best idea. Basically when you buy a game and put it on your machine that is. it can't be used anywhere else again. LOL> Used games have been around forever, play a game to the end, return it for a store credit to buy another game. Others with less cash get to buy that game cheaper then new and they did the same thing, solve it, sell it back to the store and buy another game. Microsoft thought they would just kill the used game market so they could make more money, they make nothing on a used game. Before the launch of the Xbox one they changed that because feed back was this, "Ya do that and the Sony Play Station will out sell the Xbox 100 to 1."

I think what matters re: Disney in this story is that Microsoft got feedback that accurately reflected the market - Disney is known to bias surveys so that negative responses will kick you out of it.

 

[21stamps]

The point, though, was that Disney hasn't added anything SIGNIFICANT except a COUPLE of attractions in the past DECADE. I'm not saying they have to be big thrill rides. I'm saying why did they stop at Little Mermaid and 7* Dwarves? Or.... Why did they take so incredibly long to finally decide to fix Hollywood Studios? (Which still won't be ready for another 3 years ish, right? And how long since they announced groundbreaking on avatarland?)

I understand. My point is, there are a lot of 1,2,3,4,5,6 year olds who don't know and don't care that these rides are not "new".
When I was a kid I was content and loved going to Disney every year and riding my favorites. That's probably the reason that space mountain and pirate's are still my faves.
I'm not saying that they should stay stagnant, but I don't think they need a huge new attraction every year- because of their target market. Families grow, kids grow, most can't do every ride/attraction on their first trip due to height restrictions. But I do think it's pretty cool that when they hit 48"- everything is available.

You as a parent, wouldn't deny taking your child to WDW for the first time just bc there aren't any "new to you" attractions.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Then Disney's stragey worked. That's what they wanted to do, raise price on peak to lower crowds. They have succeeded, why doesn't everyone give congrats to Disney for their flawless plan?

The idea of decreasing crowds was never Disney's strategy, just the fantasy of boisterous fans.

 

[monothingie]

Yes but do we have someone counting cars in the parking lots of the parks and hotels? I'll supply the clipboards, paper, and pencils. PM me for further details.

 

[Hakunamatata]

The misses and I honeymooned at WDW in November of 2002. WDW was still in the travel slump post 911. Everything was walk on for the most part. Phased openings of lands at MK. Early closures. Very relaxed from a guest perspective. Disney made it through that, they will make it through this. Take advantage while you can.

 

[SorcererMC]

No, officially they said that was the plan when they brought out demand pricing. I'm sure it wasn't the real plan but that's what they said was the plan with demand pricing.

I don't remember all of the details of tiered pricing, but I surmise that what they wanted to do was not to decrease overall WDW attendance, but decrease MK attendance and shift it to the other parks (ie existing assets), b/c MK attendance was so out of proportion/bursting at the seams. If they can increase their attendance at the other parks, it offsets the operating expenses for those parks, while still making a nice profit.

 

[ANJ]

Again, to think Disney wanted LESS customers is plain ludicrous. What company ever come up with a business plan and said "I have an idea, lets raise prices to go above a threshold and thin the crowds out?" Said none ever. Just name one other business that wanted less paying customers? Just one.

 

[lazyboy97o]

No, officially they said that was the plan when they brought out demand pricing. I'm sure it wasn't the real plan but that's what they said was the plan with demand pricing.

Demand pricing is built around the single day tickets and is going to most impact those who would appear more on a whim. It is targeting at redistributing the presence of one specific group. Lower occupancy at the hotels is never, ever going to be a desire on Disney's part.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I didn't say anything about hotels. The purpose of demand pricing is to lower the crowd numbers. Period. That is the corporate policy. You admit it yourself so what exactly are you arguing about?

Because it isn't all one and the same. Hotel occupancy makes up a far bigger portion of the crowds than those who might be redistributed by a different ticket scheme. Youre putting far too much weight into the PR spin of a price increase.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Hotels have nothing to do with park attendance, hotels were built to capitalize on the park guests. If they are coming here we should have hotels for them to stay in. The parks drive the hotels not the other way around. Disney over the years has added to the experience by become an over all resort but at their core they are still dependent on park attendance as their business driver. Why else would you stay in a hotel in Orlando if you weren't going to the parks? Orlando offers nothing except going to theme parks.

Huh? Do you really not understand the correlation between Disney's revenue, hotel occupancy and attendance? Disney wants full hotels and that is a far bigger concern than a specific segment of day-visitors. It's doubtful that hotel guests and one-day ticket purchases are significantly overlapping groups. If it was the ticket strategy as you claim then there would also not be lower numbers at the hotels.

 

[V_L_Raptor]

I'm at universal, was in line for Gringotts (posted at 30, actually about 20).

If I'm being really, really fancifully cynical, I'd take this to start imagining an algorithm whereby reported wait times in a park with <= X turnstile clicks on that day will be inflated by Y%. Keeping up appearances, and all that.