Disney forcing us to $pend even more at their re$ort$

[eliza61nyc]

I really do wonder what the parks will be like say in 30 more years when most of the folks who even remember Walt are gone??

 

[Lilofan]

View attachment 596639



I really do wonder what the parks will be like say in 30 more years when most of the folks who even remember Walt are gone??

When Comcast attempted a hostile takeover bid to buy TWDC in 2004 for $54B and assume the $11B debt , the Disney Board of Directors rejected the offer deeming the offer price to buy the company was too low. Who knows if a company out there will attempt this again and break up and sell the company in parts then the mission statement may look different.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Can we just go back to the 90's where even for Florida residents it was inexpensive..

 

[Goofyernmost]

Disney Parks in WDW hasnt raised its prices yet to the point where they are experiencing diminishing returns. Remember that they had only 30% of the guests they have had on average previous years, and yes they reduced offerings as well as headcount to have a positive balance sheet.

It seems to me that your first sentence contradict the rest of it. Balance sheets can have a positive outcome even if it is only $10 in the profit column.

 

[Goofyernmost]

If the execs who run a company don't deliver the returns, profits, increasing share price to impress Wall Street and the company shareholders then their employment will be a short one . But Roy Disney engineered a shareholder revolt that helped oust Eisner about 15 years ago.

My point was that it doesn't happen overnight and they have set themselves up to do quite well. I read somewhere, so take it with a grain of salt, that Iger sells his Disney holdings that he gets as part of his salary and invests in other places. All the while set up to have a nice retirement package that would probably average per week what the rest of society makes in 5 years. They are running it in a highly dangerous manner. They are charging for every possible angle they can hit to temporarily boost revenue, increase their own salaries and if something goes wrong and they get ousted, they are set for life.

 

[Goofyernmost]

So now Disney isn't being honest.

It depends on how you define honest. If you define it as wanting to give an excellent product at a reasonable affordable price then yes. If you do it by increasing cost then try to tell us that what they are presently giving us is better then it once was then, no they aren't honest and they are symbolically picking your pocket and you are holding said pocket open for them.

 

[Lilofan]

It depends on how you define honest. If you define it as wanting to give an excellent product at a reasonable affordable price then yes. If you do it by increasing cost then try to tell us that what they are presently giving us is better then it once was then, no they aren't honest and they are symbolically picking your pocket and you are holding said pocket open for them.

You basically described Wal Mart where millions of people shop, - product / price etc but Wal Mart pay / working conditions is another story.

 

[Lilofan]

My point was that it doesn't happen overnight and they have set themselves up to do quite well. I read somewhere, so take it with a grain of salt, that Iger sells his Disney holdings that he gets as part of his salary and invests in other places. All the while set up to have a nice retirement package that would probably average per week what the rest of society makes in 5 years. They are running it in a highly dangerous manner. They are charging for every possible angle they can hit to temporarily boost revenue, increase their own salaries and if something goes wrong and they get ousted, they are set for life.

Work contracts for execs to include bonus targets etc are set up and approved by the Board of Directors. There are many fingers pointed at the top guy but let us look big picture how this was set up.

 

[Goofyernmost]

You basically described Wal Mart where millions of people shop, - product / price etc but Wal Mart pay / working conditions is another story.

From what I have heard from Walmart employee's their pay is commensurate with what the standard rate is for every retail establishment. Traditionally retail works an a very small margin profit wise. Walmart also has employed many people that others don't because of their handicap situations and personal life styles that others reject out of hand. They don't need semi retired older people as greeters, for example, but they have them and they pay them. They sometimes get a stupid manager that demands more from them then they were hired to do and because they are not glued there they leave angerly, however, the idea that they are unfair to employees is greatly exaggerated.

 

[Lilofan]

From what I have heard from Walmart employee's their pay is commensurate with what the standard rate is for every retail establishment. Traditionally retail works an a very small margin profit wise. Walmart also has employed many people that others don't because of their handicap situations and personal life styles that others reject out of hand. They don't need semi retired older people as greeters, for example, but they have them and they pay them. They sometimes get a stupid manager that demands more from them then they were hired to do and because they are not glued there they leave angerly, however, the idea that they are unfair to employees is greatly exaggerated.

Unfair to employees is debatable including in the tourism industry. Cast at WDW who have 10,15,20 years or longer working wouldn't be there if they did not like it.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Work contracts for execs to include bonus targets etc are set up and approved by the Board of Directors. There are many fingers pointed at the top guy but let us look big picture how this was set up.

It doesn't matter who set up what. What matters is that it exists and really cannot be called incentive except to be willing to work for Disney. They are given a contract to sign that states what the goal and expectations are in both direction. And when negotiating that contract the employee sets up his/her requirements that legally must be follow. That is the world of high executive placement. Nothing that happens to them is financially negative, like fired for example, will not leave them needing unemployment.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Unfair to employees is debatable including in the tourism industry. Cast at WDW who have 10,15,20 years or longer working wouldn't be there if they did not like it.

Yea, that's what I said. We were talking about Walmart, but there is no difference. If you cannot accept what is given by any employer then, even though it may be difficult you look for some other place to work. If one doesn't and instead prefers to just complain about it, then I'm who is actually at fault for that? If the glove don't fit, then one must quit and find something else to do.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Can we just go back to the 90's where even for Florida residents it was inexpensive..

Can we go back to the 1990s and I could buy a crap load of Disney stock at 15 bucks a share, along with some Apple stock. Then i wouldn't blink at Genie+

 

[networkpro]

It seems to me that your first sentence contradict the rest of it. Balance sheets can have a positive outcome even if it is only $10 in the profit column.

Nope, it's not contradictory. It means that consumers are still buying the product offered at the pricepoint in sufficient quantities that it is profitable. This is inclusive of all costs required to supply said reduced in scale product.

Specifying what someone does with whatever remuneration they receive in exchange for their work is silly. Once they have passed the legal requirements for non-cash compensation (SEC Rule 10b-5 which covers insider trading) it's theirs to do with as they please. As of 2020, Iger was the largest individual Disney stockholder with a little over a million shares but that represents only 0.06% of the total stock, the majority of it is owned by institutional investors. Just this year Iger sold 49% of his Disney holdings.

Your Walmart employment argument works here as well, as Disney employees have negotiated compensation for work done. It's up to the board of directors to work out what dollar figure that would be for executives.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Nope, it's not contradictory. It means that consumers are still buying the product offered at the pricepoint in sufficient quantities that it is profitable. This is inclusive of all costs required to supply said reduced in scale product.

Specifying what someone does with whatever remuneration they receive in exchange for their work is silly. Once they have passed the legal requirements for non-cash compensation (SEC Rule 10b-5 which covers insider trading) it's theirs to do with as they please. As of 2020, Iger was the largest individual Disney stockholder with a little over a million shares but that represents only 0.06% of the total stock, the majority of it is owned by institutional investors. Just this year Iger sold 49% of his Disney holdings.

Your Walmart employment argument works here as well, as Disney employees have negotiated compensation for work done. It's up to the board of directors to work out what dollar figure that would be for executives.

spot on. The issue is most of the time, those using htat argument are doing so from an "emotional" response. usually brought on by money. they need a scape goat to get mad at. another example is usually when teachers negotiate new contracts. we usually here stuff like "Oh we'll pay athletes 50 gabillion dollars while I, the teacher can't afford to do xyz".

Now I think Chapek has been lousy for the parks, absolutely lousy but this silliness that Disney is somehow morally obligated to make vacations affordable to anyone who wants to go is insane as, is the notion that getting rid of Chapek or Iger is going to somehow result in livable wages for the cm's. believe me you, I wish that was the case. I spent 35 years in the Chemical and pharmaceutical industries every last one with fortune 100 companies. I wish getting rid of our moronic board of trustees resulted in my getting a raise.

oh well unfortunately the bottom line is this, a person either finds value in the product and will buy it or the don't and product won't sell. I like things that way personally but I don't have the attitude that I should have to go to Disney whenever I want and I've seen the disaster that comes with trying to regulate businesses based on feelings.

lol speaking of feelings I gotta go hang out on the picture of the day board, it's depressing here

 

[John park hopper]

Wow we seem to be beating a dead horse. There are 2 camps here those that believe Disney should make their product available to all and those that believe Disney is a business and has a right to charge what they want. Each side is trying to convince the other they are correct and it ain't going to happen. Early on Disney gave the perception they wanted all to come by making it affordable. That has changed over the years ---Disney is a business and has a right to charge what they want, you may not like it but that's the way is. I would love to own a Lamborghini but it will never happen my complaining they need to make it available to all won't change their company. Bottom line if you find value in Disney go if you don't go elsewhere.

 

[networkpro]

I would love to own a Lamborghini but it will never happen my complaining they need to make it available to all won't change their company.

Speaking of value The Lamborghini will run you about $2000 for an oil change, $4000 for plugs, and the best part $12000 for an E-Gear Clutch which will only last you 500-2500 miles depending on how many times you do burnouts.

I dont value Lamborghinis that much...

 

[John park hopper]

Speaking of value The Lamborghini will run you about $2000 for an oil change, $4000 for plugs, and the best part $12000 for an E-Gear Clutch which will only last you 500-2500 miles depending on how many times you do burnouts.

I dont value Lamborghinis that much...

If I could afford 200,000-500,000 for it serving would not be problem one can dream.
For me I don't find value Disney any longer (been a guest the past 50 yrs)

 

[Lilofan]

Can we go back to the 1990s and I could buy a crap load of Disney stock at 15 bucks a share, along with some Apple stock. Then i wouldn't blink at Genie+

If I only wish I was more liquid before Y2K and bought more Disney shares and just held on long term.. That Y2K was something else, people panicking at that time.

 

[Lilofan]

Speaking of value The Lamborghini will run you about $2000 for an oil change, $4000 for plugs, and the best part $12000 for an E-Gear Clutch which will only last you 500-2500 miles depending on how many times you do burnouts.

I dont value Lamborghinis that much...

Avoid going in reverse , double tap to put the car in neutral at stop lights, stop and go traffic can shorten the trans life span of a single clutch Gallardo and Aventador, but the newer dual clutch Huracan is more reliable. Try finding a used Lambo at a good price. There isn't any, dealers are asking and getting top dollar for models. I was at DAK Lodge a few years ago, and I noticed at the far end of the parking lot a Lamborghini and Ferrari parked side by side far away from any other cars.