• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News Dismal Q3 Earnings

smile

Well-Known Member
Think of all the people who became Disney theme parks fans around 2005 or later and never heard of Al Lutz or Paul Pressler etc.

Crazy to think that was over 15 years ago now.

Besides the Disneyland in India sentence, there's not a lot of new info in the article, but there's a certain symbolism and significance to having Al's name attached to it that's going to be lost on a lot of people (even those gamer YouTubers calling SWGE a failure who never cared about Disney theme parks before 2019).
now, anyone who truly cares should know and remember pp for his vital lessons 🤢
but, as one who's been a fan far longer than that yet has largely avoided the fandom, i can only assume you reference mr. lutz's relevancy as an influencer

care to elucidate?
 

Animaniac93-98

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
now, anyone who truly cares should know and remember pp for his vital lessons 🤢
but, as one who's been a fan far longer than that yet has largely avoided the fandom, i can only assume you reference mr. lutz's relevancy as an influencer

care to elucidate?
He was the main voice of dissent over the handling of Disneyland in the late 90s/early 2000s and was known by the mainstream press and TDA, even if he was only considered an annoyance by some. He was the face of MiceAge / MiceChat before the site changed its tone to be more positive about Disney in order to compete and remain relevant with the growing number of blogging sites / YouTube channels.

It's sort of like when @marni1971 or @Lee or one of the better known/trusted insiders posts something here, people tend to take it more seriously, although his tone is probably more comparable to @WDW1974 in terms of causing divisiveness.

His name showing up now after years of absence is probably going to irk some people at TDA who thought they were done with him and now he's piling on to the reporting of "Star Wars is under-performing" which Disney is actively trying to counter. Whether or not people take it seriously under his name I don't know, he's been out of the fan community so long I'm not sure if he has the same relevance. For many people MiceAge is not the first place to go to get Disney rumours.
 

smile

Well-Known Member
He was the main voice of dissent over the handling of Disneyland in the late 90s/early 2000s and was known by the mainstream press and TDA, even if he was only considered an annoyance by some. He was the face of MiceAge / MiceChat before the site changed its tone to be more positive about Disney in order to compete and remain relevant with the growing number of blogging sites / YouTube channels.

It's sort of like when @marni1971 or @Lee or one of the better known/trusted insiders posts something here, people tend to take it more seriously, although his tone is probably more comparable to @WDW1974 in terms of causing divisiveness.

His name showing up now after years of absence is probably going to irk some people at TDA who thought they were done with him and now he's piling on to the reporting of "Star Wars is under-performing" which Disney is actively trying to counter.
🤔

thank you very much
 

rudyjr13

Premium Member
I’m sure it’s been linked to and read multiple times by now. A sobering read. And quite factual too.

Seems like Chapek could be on his way out
 

britain

Well-Known Member
Think of all the people who became Disney theme parks fans around 2005 or later and never heard of Al Lutz or Paul Pressler etc.

Crazy to think that was over 15 years ago now.

Besides the Disneyland in India sentence, there's not a lot of new info in the article, but there's a certain symbolism and significance to having Al's name attached to it that's going to be lost on a lot of people (even those gamer YouTubers calling SWGE a failure who never cared about Disney theme parks before 2019).
I remember using a candy colored iMac in college and discovering Al Lutz’ photographs of the in-progress DCA in 2000, with Soarin labeled as “IMAX theater”. Ah, memories!
 

larryz

Can't 'Member Anything
Premium Member
"Instagram photos of their high priced cocktails and thus be entertained just as much "

this on so many levels makes me the saddest. If it was just down to me id be selling our Boardwalk DVC contract and moving over to Universal.
Does Universal offer a 45-year timeshare contract, too?
 

Ravenclaw78

Well-Known Member
It makes me flat-out angry...it's insulting and insinuates that they think we're all a pack of idiots.
That particular line sounded more like hyperbole than most of the article to me, but nonetheless, it's clear from Disney's success in marketing a literal wall as an attraction that there is a segment of the park-going population for whom Instagramming is entertainment.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
That particular line sounded more like hyperbole than most of the article to me, but nonetheless, it's clear from Disney's success in marketing a literal wall as an attraction that there is a segment of the park-going population for whom Instagramming is entertainment.
Oh, I'm well aware of that, and that it's hyperbole...but even if that's not what was said, if the sentiment is there...
 

Brad Bishop

Well-Known Member
Just checking in with this thread to see if Star Wars is still going to lead Disney into financial ruin. ;)
It actually could. Not Star Wars single handedly, but with the purchase of all of these studios/properties under Iger and not a great turn around, it could actually put Disney in a really bad bind. Their debt has gone up significantly over the last few years and they have to service that debt and if big investments like Star Wars movies and SWGE aren't paying off it really could do some damage.

Add to that with Pixar not really producing great movies like they did before the acquisition and everything a retread/sequel plus all of their cash spent to bring the parks out of the 1990s, it starts adding up. It's going to have to pay off for it all to work and there are limitations involved that Disney doesn't seem prepared for:

1) It's not whether a family CAN afford to go to Disney but rather if they see it being worth it. I could easily afford to go to Disney. I don't. It's no longer worth it.
2) They keep raising their prices in the parks to help cover their losses elsewhere. This adds to the problem.
3) The next 4-5 Avatar movies seem like big budget failures just looming on the horizon. Outside of WOW-3D!, there was nothing else to carry those movies.
4) What are they going to do with Fox? It seems like a random purchase that they're now tasked with, "Well.. How do we make money out of this??"

My guess: About 5 years down the line you're going to see Disney selling off these properties at a loss, perhaps shuttering Pixar or "rolling it into" their own animation studios (shuttering, essentially - just sounds better), and trimming the fat everywhere they can while raising prices (cutting hours and $200/head/day for entry into their parks). This will likely keep more people away (cue the guy: "Oh, that just means more room for me - This is exactly what Disney wants") and Iger's successor will have to clean up the mess.

Realistically, I think that anything that isn't under construction now, isn't going to start after the 50th. I suspect there'll be 20 years of stagnation after the 50th. I don't see Tomorrowland getting any more than Tron (weirdly shoe-horned into that corner) and the pain job. Epcot?? They may tear down a building a plant some trees but it's cheaper to leave the buildings in place. I can't imagine new monorails at this point as all of the current ones have been upgraded to "good enough".

You can look and say, "...but Iger is a brilliant CEO!" Maybe. Maybe not. Other companies have been brought down by similar huge purchases with some great vision of the future that never panned out and then became too expensive to operate.
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
It actually could. Not Star Wars single handedly, but with the purchase of all of these studios/properties under Iger and not a great turn around, it could actually put Disney in a really bad bind. Their debt has gone up significantly over the last few years and they have to service that debt and if big investments like Star Wars movies and SWGE aren't paying off it really could do some damage.

Add to that with Pixar not really producing great movies like they did before the acquisition and everything a retread/sequel plus all of their cash spent to bring the parks out of the 1990s, it starts adding up. It's going to have to pay off for it all to work and there are limitations involved that Disney doesn't seem prepared for:

1) It's not whether a family CAN afford to go to Disney but rather if they see it being worth it. I could easily afford to go to Disney. I don't. It's no longer worth it.
2) They keep raising their prices in the parks to help cover their losses elsewhere. This adds to the problem.
3) The next 4-5 Avatar movies seem like big budget failures just looming on the horizon. Outside of WOW-3D!, there was nothing else to carry those movies.
4) What are they going to do with Fox? It seems like a random purchase that they're now tasked with, "Well.. How do we make money out of this??"

My guess: About 5 years down the line you're going to see Disney selling off these properties at a loss, perhaps shuttering Pixar or "rolling it into" their own animation studios (shuttering, essentially - just sounds better), and trimming the fat everywhere they can while raising prices (cutting hours and $200/head/day for entry into their parks). This will likely keep more people away (cue the guy: "Oh, that just means more room for me - This is exactly what Disney wants") and Iger's successor will have to clean up the mess.

Realistically, I think that anything that isn't under construction now, isn't going to start after the 50th. I suspect there'll be 20 years of stagnation after the 50th. I don't see Tomorrowland getting any more than Tron (weirdly shoe-horned into that corner) and the pain job. Epcot?? They may tear down a building a plant some trees but it's cheaper to leave the buildings in place. I can't imagine new monorails at this point as all of the current ones have been upgraded to "good enough".

You can look and say, "...but Iger is a brilliant CEO!" Maybe. Maybe not. Other companies have been brought down by similar huge purchases with some great vision of the future that never panned out and then became too expensive to operate.
Wow... The sky is really falling.....
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
It actually could. Not Star Wars single handedly, but with the purchase of all of these studios/properties under Iger and not a great turn around, it could actually put Disney in a really bad bind. Their debt has gone up significantly over the last few years and they have to service that debt and if big investments like Star Wars movies and SWGE aren't paying off it really could do some damage.
I'm no expert but is that true at all? Most of the purchases that have been made have been using stocks, not cold hard cash. I don't think Disney's debt low is high at all relative to revenues and for a company their size. Even if it were an issue, they could sell out components of their conglomerate they don't need/want (e.g. excess studios or networks acquired from Fox) if they wanted to pay off debt.

Add to that with Pixar not really producing great movies like they did before the acquisition and everything a retread/sequel
Coco? Inside Out?

And those sequels/retreads are largely making bank. you can talk about how they may be creatively bankrupt, but financially I think Disney is just fine with how Toy Story 4, Incredibles 2, etc. (or on the live action side, The Lion King, Aladdin, etc.) have done.

plus all of their cash spent to bring the parks out of the 1990s, it starts adding up.
The parks needs and are getting significant investment, but it's nothing crazy compared to how much they bring in with revenues. They could up the investment a lot of still be totally fine.

It's going to have to pay off for it all to work and there are limitations involved that Disney doesn't seem prepared for:

1) It's not whether a family CAN afford to go to Disney but rather if they see it being worth it. I could easily afford to go to Disney. I don't. It's no longer worth it.
2) They keep raising their prices in the parks to help cover their losses elsewhere. This adds to the problem.
3) The next 4-5 Avatar movies seem like big budget failures just looming on the horizon. Outside of WOW-3D!, there was nothing else to carry those movies.
4) What are they going to do with Fox? It seems like a random purchase that they're now tasked with, "Well.. How do we make money out of this??"
1) they can always offer more discounts or even *gasp* lower prices if this were a problem. It's not like they couldn't be widely profitable at a lower price point if needed. But the parks (this summer at DL notwithstanding) are often packed so I doubt they are worried right now.
2) no, they are raising prices at the parks because they feel that can increase profits/revenues from their existing customers. Where exactly are these "losses elsewhere" they would even need to be concerned about? Movies are doing great in their own right and consumer products is basically just pure profit.
3) So? And how much is Disney paying versus Cameron's production company? Do you think Disney doesn't know how to run a movie business. Have you not seen their returns in recent years?
4) they are going to roll out a direct to consumer streaming product with a crapload of contact. and buff up Hulu too.

My guess: About 5 years down the line you're going to see Disney selling off these properties at a loss, perhaps shuttering Pixar or "rolling it into" their own animation studios (shuttering, essentially - just sounds better), and trimming the fat everywhere they can while raising prices (cutting hours and $200/head/day for entry into their parks). This will likely keep more people away (cue the guy: "Oh, that just means more room for me - This is exactly what Disney wants") and Iger's successor will have to clean up the mess.

Realistically, I think that anything that isn't under construction now, isn't going to start after the 50th. I suspect there'll be 20 years of stagnation after the 50th. I don't see Tomorrowland getting any more than Tron (weirdly shoe-horned into that corner) and the pain job. Epcot?? They may tear down a building a plant some trees but it's cheaper to leave the buildings in place. I can't imagine new monorails at this point as all of the current ones have been upgraded to "good enough".

You can look and say, "...but Iger is a brilliant CEO!" Maybe. Maybe not. Other companies have been brought down by similar huge purchases with some great vision of the future that never panned out and then became too expensive to operate.
Um, wow. I don't think your assessment has anything to do with reality.
 

ParkPeeker

Well-Known Member
1) It's not whether a family CAN afford to go to Disney but rather if they see it being worth it. I could easily afford to go to Disney. I don't. It's no longer worth it.
Yea I think they know this is a problem. There are cast members who ask entering guests to get emailed a survey after their visits, and the research team has survey questions related to this.
 

rudyjr13

Premium Member
Disney is fine despite all this Star Wars drama. Killing it in the box office and Disney+ will be a hit.

I happened to luck into a last minute trip to California last week through my wife's work and took my kids to California Adventure, Disneyland and Legoland. Galaxy's Edge was neat to see but it is far from what it could and should be yet. I'm a big Star Wars nerd and I felt underwhelmed and disappointed. At the time I couldn't put my finger on it but upon reflection it's shops, a couple small food places and one ride that had a 45 minute wait. Carsland felt more complete and exciting to me and my girls.

There should be more exhibits or things to do especially for kids. I was impressed with the Redwood Creek Challenge Trail at California Adventure. My kids loved that and something similar would be a great addition to DHS either in Galaxy's Edge or Toy Story Land.

Everyone remember they opened the land early without one ride open to in my opinion help with the crowds. They clearly didn't want the Harry Potter opening day crowd pictures. I can't blame them, that's miserable. It felt like New Fantasyland...looks great but low on substance. The 2 Stormtroopers who interacted with us were a neat touch but after reading that Lutz article, the land could be so much more and maybe will be in 3-6 months once the other ride is open. With all this said, you should all check it out on your next trip to WDW but I wouldn't make any special trips down there for it. I don't blame all those AP'ers for not paying extra money to go see this yet.

Some pictures showing crowds that day (Friday 8/9 around 6pm) for those interested

398237

398238

398239
 

WDW Pro

Well-Known Member
I'm no expert but is that true at all? Most of the purchases that have been made have been using stocks, not cold hard cash. I don't think Disney's debt low is high at all relative to revenues and for a company their size. Even if it were an issue, they could sell out components of their conglomerate they don't need/want (e.g. excess studios or networks acquired from Fox) if they wanted to pay off debt.



Coco? Inside Out?

And those sequels/retreads are largely making bank. you can talk about how they may be creatively bankrupt, but financially I think Disney is just fine with how Toy Story 4, Incredibles 2, etc. (or on the live action side, The Lion King, Aladdin, etc.) have done.



The parks needs and are getting significant investment, but it's nothing crazy compared to how much they bring in with revenues. They could up the investment a lot of still be totally fine.



1) they can always offer more discounts or even *gasp* lower prices if this were a problem. It's not like they couldn't be widely profitable at a lower price point if needed. But the parks (this summer at DL notwithstanding) are often packed so I doubt they are worried right now.
2) no, they are raising prices at the parks because they feel that can increase profits/revenues from their existing customers. Where exactly are these "losses elsewhere" they would even need to be concerned about? Movies are doing great in their own right and consumer products is basically just pure profit.
3) So? And how much is Disney paying versus Cameron's production company? Do you think Disney doesn't know how to run a movie business. Have you not seen their returns in recent years?
4) they are going to roll out a direct to consumer streaming product with a crapload of contact. and buff up Hulu too.



Um, wow. I don't think your assessment has anything to do with reality.
Star Wars won't sink Disney and neither will the Fox acquisition. However, with ticket prices far too high, and the dependence on Parks to absorb the cost of Disney+, the chance of a recession could create a situation in which Disney has to cut expenditures significantly and offer multi-layered promotions to drive up attendance. Let's just hope the indicators aren't correct for an upcoming recession; we really don't need a significant downturn given the amount of national debt racked up in the past two decades.
 

bartholomr4

Well-Known Member
Yea I think they know this is a problem. There are cast members who ask entering guests to get emailed a survey after their visits, and the research team has survey questions related to this.
I literally answered this survey last week (We just came back from an early August visit to WDW)..... Nothing in the questionnaire was about perception of cost. It was about experience, ability to express your opinion to a "roving manager wearing a blue shirt" and if we received an email upon arrival from A VP of the parks telling us about the people with the Blue Shirts.

The parks were packed to the gills while we were there (4 days) and it was Florida Hot with afternoon showers all four days. It was a great time and while I wished GE was open, that the Gondolas were running, and that we didn't miss one of our fast passes because a ride was down, good times were had by all.....
 
Top Bottom