Disney plans hiring freeze, some jobs cut......

[drizgirl]

What I dont understand is this…

AP vs Fla resident AP. To me an out of town AP has to spend money imo either by making multiple trips and paying for rooms or being DVC etc those people should be generating revenue and the revenue Bob wants… a local AP with their discounted rate to me is absolutely dirt cheap and worth every penny and to me thats who they no longer want bc lets face it for most part those people are not buying souvenirs and barely spending any real money in the parks. Would it be that crazy to eliminate any discount for locals and imo even if they did paying under 1500 for an entire year max is still cheap for the amount of times people can easily go along with discounted perks… & please dont start comparing prices to other theme parks etc bc we all know whether we want to admit it there really is no comparison at the moment. No matter how much this place has diminished.

At the very least they should eliminate the monthly payment plans. Until they do that, they aren't serious about trying to thin the local AP ranks.

 

[BobPar]

At the very least they should eliminate the monthly payment plans. Until they do that, they aren't serious about trying to thin the local AP ranks.

does that really help? people just charge it and deal with their credit cards instead lol... its the American way

 

[larryz]

Whatever they're paying to build Lake Nona, they'd be able to sell property in LA for a lot more.

See also:

New Facilities Insider | Disney’s Digital Center 3 Centralizes Hardware, Allows Control From Anywhere - TV News Check

A first look at Disney’s new Digital Center 3 (DC3) in The Woodlands, Texas, a massive, 187,000-square-foot plant consolidating playout, transmission and media operations. (Sam Exley photo)

tvnewscheck.com

Looks like they can't decide which hurricane-prone site they like better: Central Florida or Southeastern Texas.

 

[larryz]

I can vouch that there were serious talks of taking at least Epcot down to partial week operations back in 2002 after the 2000 crash and 2001 events. There were many days where attendance was barely at or below daily operating costs. Obviously, that's a different time and attendance level. But, Disney was taking it on the chin back then.

There is also the DVC issue to deal with. If there were a legitimate recession, vacation ownership is often the first to go. And, that could leave Disney in a lurch if you had even a moderate DVC firesale where Disney wants to keep the value of the product (new members/direct add ons) high. They have already stripped out so many benefits from resale they don't have a lot of meat to cut there before you hit bone. Not saying we're there by any means. Rather, it is a highly susceptible area if people suddenly need to cut costs or sell assets for any price to cover other costs.

Bonus time for those DVC who want to plus up their points...

 

[BobPar]

If I had to guess it's likely due to the uproar it would cause in the surrounding community (citizens, elected officials, what not) if that benefit was taken away. I live in a large metro area that covers two states, and our local football team's tickets (regular season and playoffs) give priority to residents of the county where the team is located. Not sure if the combativeness over the RCID has affected the company in this regard, but I imagine if they took away the FL resident discount it would cause a massive outcry and blowback

sometimes big companies have to make decisions that will not make everyone happy & deal with any potential drawback... this may be one of those.... not to bring up a separate thread but did they really think the rushed Splash decision was going to go over with no drawback?

 

[marni1971]

Than why do they give essential free days away to people from the uk with 14 day tickets?

Because they scrapped the 21 day option? But I know what you mean.

 

[MisterPenguin]

You mean they have to pay for that sweet, sweet D+ content no one is watching somehow.

So why don't the 164 Million subscribers stop subscribing?

 

[Br0ckford]

So why don't the 164 Million subscribers stop subscribing?

I just like knowing the content is there if I want to watch it.

 

[RobWDW1971]

So why don't the 164 Million subscribers stop subscribing?

Uh, because I get it free with my Verizon plan?

 

[MisterPenguin]

Uh, because I get it free with my Verizon plan?

And how many people are getting D+ 'free' like that?

 

[thomas998]

If I had to guess it's likely due to the uproar it would cause in the surrounding community (citizens, elected officials, what not) if that benefit was taken away. I live in a large metro area that covers two states, and our local football team's tickets (regular season and playoffs) give priority to residents of the county where the team is located. Not sure if the combativeness over the RCID has affected the company in this regard, but I imagine if they took away the FL resident discount it would cause a massive outcry and blowback

It is also possible that in the past the discount was provide as part of some package to get something from the state. I know were I live there is an attraction in a neighboring city that received some special funding and tax breaks, and in exchange the people that live within that same school district's property tax area get highly discounted tickets or can even get special annual passes that are not even available to anyone else, only the people that were impacted by the tax break the place received. I'm not familiar with the entire history of Disney and Florida but the discount may very well be something that was negotiated way back when.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

And how many people are getting D+ 'free' like that?

Is it me, or the same people that touted “cutting the cord” with cable are now subscribing to D+, Netflix, Paramount +, Peacock, ESPN, etc. by the time you’re done, you’re spending as much, if not more, than cable…I’ve seen this before with, of all things, sport cards…back in the day it was Topps. Then Fleer, Donruss, etc. Then limited sub sets, foil cards, LOTS of extras. The market imploded and constricted with bankruptcies and a much smaller footprint. The market has made somewhat of a comeback, but NOTHING like what it once was…sometimes I swear I see history repeating itself…

 

[flynnibus]

Is it me, or the same people that touted “cutting the cord” with cable are now subscribing to

This is not a shock and has been said forever. A la carte is always more expensive when you start adding in all the options. Bundling is a way of bringing economies of scale and higher attach rates.. so inheriently allowed more for less $ and allowed lesser content to ride on the coat tails of the higher demand content. Customers would never get the same amount of channel content for less money than they did vs bundling.

The part that was attractive was people thinking they didn't need as much and only needed a few things.. and early providers who were not content providers themselves had attractive enough range of content. So people could get by with only needing 1-2 services...

But that mainly worked when the content providers were not in the streaming game themselves.. and never was going to last as soon as the content providers wanted to get into the direct game themselves.

We will see more consolidation and bundling in the future as providers try to get some upsells and lock-in for customers... which is exactly what they did with cable before.

A la carte will still be around.. but it won't be as attractive as it was when it was just Netflix and Hulu...

 

[Captain Neo]

Jim Cramer called for Chapeks resignation today on CNBC

 

[MisterPenguin]

Jim Cramer called for Chapeks resignation today on CNBC

He did it last week, too. No one care what Jim Cramer thinks.

 

[_caleb]

This is not a shock and has been said forever. A la carte is always more expensive when you start adding in all the options. Bundling is a way of bringing economies of scale and higher attach rates.. so inheriently allowed more for less $ and allowed lesser content to ride on the coat tails of the higher demand content. Customers would never get the same amount of channel content for less money than they did vs bundling.

The part that was attractive was people thinking they didn't need as much and only needed a few things.. and early providers who were not content providers themselves had attractive enough range of content. So people could get by with only needing 1-2 services...

But that mainly worked when the content providers were not in the streaming game themselves.. and never was going to last as soon as the content providers wanted to get into the direct game themselves.

We will see more consolidation and bundling in the future as providers try to get some upsells and lock-in for customers... which is exactly what they did with cable before.

A la carte will still be around.. but it won't be as attractive as it was when it was just Netflix and Hulu...

Yeah. It wasn’t a case of cord cutters being naive—it actually was better and cheaper. For a while. And then every network, studio, and distributor got into the streaming game (I just learned in another thread that “MGM+” is now a thing), and of course it sucks and is more expensive if you subscribe to everything.

The main thing we have going for us now is that pretty much every option is monthly. So the savvy will do one at a time: a month or two of Disney+, jump to Hulu for a couple months, and then Netflix when you’re desperate. (Waiting for someone to yeahbut about news and live sports.)

 

[flynnibus]

The main thing we have going for us now is that pretty much every option is monthly. So the savvy will do one at a time: a month or two of Disney+, jump to Hulu for a couple months, and then Netflix when you’re desperate. (Waiting for someone to yeahbut about news and live sports.)

As long as the major networks keep playing nice with providers like Youtube and Fubu... it's fine. I can live without Paramont+ or whatever as I keep Fubu for sports, locals, etc.

 

[Jrb1979]

Yeah. It wasn’t a case of cord cutters being naive—it actually was better and cheaper. For a while. And then every network, studio, and distributor got into the streaming game (I just learned in another thread that “MGM+” is now a thing), and of course it sucks and is more expensive if you subscribe to everything.

The main thing we have going for us now is that pretty much every option is monthly. So the savvy will do one at a time: a month or two of Disney+, jump to Hulu for a couple months, and then Netflix when you’re desperate. (Waiting for someone to yeahbut about news and live sports.)

For my family we have Netflix for a few series my wife likes and we have Sportsnet which is like ESPN+ for hockey. Any other streaming we have are the free ones like Roku.

 

[_caleb]

For my family we have Netflix for a few series my wife likes and we have Sportsnet which is like ESPN+ for hockey. Any other streaming we have are the free ones like Roku.

Wow. Sorry you get stuck with hockey.

 

[TP2000]

The main thing we have going for us now is that pretty much every option is monthly. So the savvy will do one at a time: a month or two of Disney+, jump to Hulu for a couple months, and then Netflix when you’re desperate. (Waiting for someone to yeahbut about news and live sports.)

I don't consider myself savvy when it comes to the 21st century, but I did that. I cancelled Netflix last year until this current season of The Crown came out. I'm watching them now. I plan to cancel Netflix again next month until Season 6 comes out. I'm happy to wait.

And I'm not even watching my pennies. I just don't like paying for stuff I don't use. Like Cable TV (when over 99% of it I never watched). Or airline travel insurance (when there's over a 99% chance the plane will land safely). Or gym memberships (when 99 years ago I stopped caring).

I'm not tech-savvy, nor am I concerned about minor cash outflows. So I certainly can't be the only one cancelling and then re-subscribing for short bursts.