Actually, the article mentions how AP will work to redesign the courses:
It's intentionally vague. I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for major changes. This is like 'under new management' - not 'we're going to build new courses'
1. But when your operation gets too big, you need to find ways to cut your costs. Thats exactly whats going on here
You don't look to cut cost due to size.. you cut costs when your return isn't worth your investment. You outsource like this to reduce overhead and liabilities. You outsource when something isn't within your economies of scale and/or to jettison the overhead associated with operating it. When Disney already had built up the means to operate the courses over the last decades... and they have economies of scale with all the other landscaping abilities within the organization... this has to be about reducing risks and overhead. They aren't going to get someone else to do the work cheaper then they can do it. They are simply jettisoning the liability of the people and operating costs. They are accepting less revenue in return for reducing risk.
Maybe Disney looked at these and said it's time for a overhaul and wasn't willing to do the outlay to make it happen. Maybe they looked at it and said it's too low of margin to operate. Maybe they were looking to rebrand the product and get some major name associated with it.. and the only way others would play is by taking them over...
My guess is it's a bit of the last one, combined with an opportunity for Disney to gracefully get out an area they care less and less about.
Disney STILL owns the courses. They are simply taking a small chunk of profit because of the profit split with Arnold Palmer Group. Now TDO will probably take this money saved every year to cover other operating expenses at WDW like transportation or even energy use.
But we don't know the terms of the arrangement. We don't know if Disney is paying AP to operate the facilities, or if AP agreed to take them over outright in exchange for a lease fee and/or percentage.
It seems in contention if the courses were even profitable for Disney or not..
To me this seems to be more about finding a way of marketing the product (notice all the emphasis in the PR about the ways AP will help promote the courses) and Disney gets to jettison more overhead.. which seems to be a very desirable strategy of TDO in the last 5+ years. Outsource valets, transportation, etc.
2. Of course no one is jumping up and down. How much time do you think he's really spent working on changes hed like to make? Probably none
It's not about the details of how they'd do it... but if they were to make a massive capital investment for improvements as part of the deal.. that would very much be decided up front. It would be a factor in negotiating what the operating agreement would be like. If AP were to agree to invest a large amount of capital, that would be a reason to negotiate a lower leasing fee or profit share, etc. If Disney were to negotiate a large investment like that, they'd be boasting about it to the investors on why this is a great business move.. and to the fan base to wet their whistle on future improvements. But there is none of that.
Remember.. a PR is supposed to BOAST about how something is great and good for the reader. Yet this PR basically leaves you with 'disney is handing over operations, we get the AP brand, and their promotion'.
This doesn't scream 'investment', 'reboot' or change. It sounds like this is 90% based on the promotion ability of getting the courses into AP's partner network.
Disney of old would outsource stuff that they didn't know how to do.. then learned it.. and then kicked the vendors out as Disney would do it BETTER then the outsider and do it with 'the disney way'. From shops, to construction, to hotels, to technology, etc... Disney of today instead looks to get rid of Disney operations to outsource to someone else after they've done it for decades. That's not a good trend.
