News Disney plans to accelerate Parks investment to $60 billion over 10 years

MagicRat

Well-Known Member
12 pages in, and this group is decidedly…skeptical.

Not even cautiously optimistic, just skeptical - maybe 85% to 15%.

That’s why this is The Most Negative Fan Site On Earth.
The board could give this site the full $60 Billion to design the parks and 85 percent of the members would still complain about it. This place truly is one sad and angry bunch!

IMG_1226.gif
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
If you think skepticism on an anonymous message board is reality, I’m sending tots and pears.

I like tots.

The skepticism is warranted, whether people choose to believe it or not. They did absolutely nothing after the last MAJOR announcement of $17 billion. They haven't put a shovel in the ground on anything except Tiana's Salt Mine in over a year, but yet them throwing out an even bigger number means they are going to MAGICALLY!!! build all kinds of stuff in Florida? Yeah, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, are you interested in buying it?
 

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
Well, this pretty much is it. In ten years the parks will be unrecognizable. It's all over. 60 Billion dollars is a lot of money to spend on the Parks and Resorts. Even if a few billion of that is diverted to Disney Cruise Line, it's still going to be massive for the parks. This gives them the scope to continue the entropy. There will be more Pixar Piers, San Fransokyos, and Toy Story Playlands. This is pretty much the end of coherent design at the parks. Never had I wanted them to just stop investing in the parks. Now that's what I dream of. This is the equivalent of handing a toddler a jar of paint. You know what's about to happen. It's going to be messy.

On the bright side, if you have enjoyed the things Disney has built recently, then you're in for more of the same. And the fact some group of people is happy about this perhaps is some consolation. I'm defeated. I'm not the mainstream. And it's time for me to accept that things have changed and there's no u-turn forthcoming.

Oh well.
 

networkpro

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
I'm concerned for the Disney Company if they target a substantial amount of the investment into the two parks they are minority owners in, especially as that particular economy is becoming more closed and other companies are leqving.
 

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
I like tots.

The skepticism is warranted, whether people choose to believe it or not. They did absolutely nothing after the last MAJOR announcement of $17 billion. They haven't put a shovel in the ground on anything except Tiana's Salt Mine in over a year, but yet them throwing out an even bigger number means they are going to MAGICALLY!!! build all kinds of stuff in Florida? Yeah, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, are you interested in buying it?
While I'm sympathetic to retaining a dose of skepticism, Disney NEEDS a growth a story. One that has strong margins and shareholder returns. It also needs a replacement for the crumbling linear channels. Disney's feet are to the fire. Short of a recession/depression, Disney is moving forward with this. Parks and Resorts is Iger's one bright spot to Wall Street. It needs to keep growing. And that takes investment.
 

TheIceBaron

Well-Known Member
Company priorities can and do change. There was nothing done today that forces Disney to follow through on anything. Disney likely will be a totally different entity in 2 years.

With regards to the “billions” headed to WDW, you vastly underestimate the cost and bloat associated with Disney projects. Everything is over budget and gets scaled back. Galaxies Edge and the SW hotel cost almost $2B to build….and it was scaled back. Pandora cost $1B and it was scaled back. Epcot was a multibillion project and it was scaled back. In each case it was the operational cost that was the reason. There is simply not enough money available not only to build a new park but to operate it profitably.

Commitment? There is zero commitment on Disney's part to spend a single dime, particularly in Florida. They don't file SEC documents on where they are going to be spending money.

I have no idea where you are getting your delusions, but they are whoppers.

I'm sure the labor market in Orlando will be flooded with workers who Disney can pick up. Yep. I'm winning the Powerball jackpot this year, too!

They have made this commitment in prior earnings calls as well, these are statements to investors and are not Josh level blue sky announcements. I suggest you both research the consequences for making false statements to investors. While the dollar amount may change, and macro economic factors may impact the true number, the investment is more likely than not in the ballpark of what they have said to investors.

And that was my point of the cost of even a scaled back galaxy's edge is still rather small compared to the enormous amount of what will be invested.

I really don't understand the pessimism.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
While I'm sympathetic to retaining a dose of skepticism, Disney NEEDS a growth a story. One that has strong margins and shareholder returns. It also needs a replacement for the crumbling linear channels. Disney's feet are to the fire. Short of a recession/depression, Disney is moving forward with this. Parks and Resorts is Iger's one bright spot to Wall Street. It needs to keep growing. And that takes investment.
Despite his best efforts to destroy them. He should have been dumped on his cardigan-wearing butt and told never to return, but the BoD won't do that because they are all loyal to him.
 

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
I'm concerned for the Disney Company if they target a substantial amount of the investment into the two parks they are minority owners in, especially as that particular economy is becoming more closed and other companies are leqving.
This is tricky NGL. This obviously is not the forum for geopolitical discussions, so I'll just say that Disney is taking a calculated gamble. Not investing there means potentially missing out on a great avenue for growth and expansion. Investing there does increase their exposure to geopolitical tensions. I'm hopeful that their decision to invest indicates an increasing openness with China. Shortly after Iger returned, movie releases began to happen again in China. So that was instant boon. But Disney has lots of work to do to repair their presence in China. It's tricky tricky business. One of a multitude of challenges Disney faces.
Despite his best efforts to destroy them. He should have been dumped on his cardigan-wearing butt and told never to return, but the BoD won't do that because they are all loyal to him.
You won't get any argument from me there. The man is torching one of the things I love. I find him odious as both an executive and a human being. The fact that he considered selling the parks years ago is the icing on the cake in this cruel irony.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
They have made this commitment in prior earnings calls as well, these are statements to investors and are not Josh level blue sky announcements. I suggest you both research the consequences for making false statements to investors. While the dollar amount may change, and macro economic factors may impact the true number, the investment is more likely than not in the ballpark of what they have said to investors.

And that was my point of the cost of even a scaled back galaxy's edge is still rather small compared to the enormous amount of what will be invested.

I really don't understand the pessimism.
Show us the SEC documents filed that lock them into spending this alleged $60 billion.

I know some people are dense when Bob and Josh speak but...

Bryan Cranston Reaction GIF
 

SplashJacket

Well-Known Member
Back of napkin math for you.

Take a new ride like Guardians. Assume a capacity of 2000 an hour. Assume half of distribution goes to $20 individual Lightning lane. Assume 14 hours. Of operation. Simple math.

1000(14)(20)(365)=$102,200,000.

That’s a hundred million dollars in free revenue (you have 98% or similar margins).

If you can sustain those prices or similar for 4 years, you generate $400,000,000 in free revenue, which likely pays for the entire ride construction. The ILL revenue cycle will force them to build new rides frequently (and at every park) to ensure they’re keeping up up demand, and the revenue generated will ensure those rides are paid for.

The new attraction will bring other guests which will increase tickets and pay for labor elsewhere and generate additional revenue. Prevents the works from getting stale, etc.

Both major players in the theme park industry realized the goldmine they’ve been sitting on, and we’re officially in the arms race. It’s exciting for fans, and everyone in the industry.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
MK 1971
EP 1982
HS 1989
AK 1998

I'd say we're overdue!

Do they have the land? Yes.
Would people go? Yes.
Would it make money? Yes.

What's the problem again?

That depends - are you willing to pay more for a separate gate?

Other issues:

Cannibalization of yourself
Higher fixed operating costs
People aren't getting more money and more vacation time
Overbuilding and being stuck with it is a real issue (See DLP History)

More parks competing with your own product isn't necessarily a good thing especially if guests don't think they need to pay separately for the new thing
 

neo999955

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I like tots.

The skepticism is warranted, whether people choose to believe it or not. They did absolutely nothing after the last MAJOR announcement of $17 billion. They haven't put a shovel in the ground on anything except Tiana's Salt Mine in over a year, but yet them throwing out an even bigger number means they are going to MAGICALLY!!! build all kinds of stuff in Florida? Yeah, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale, are you interested in buying it?
I get being a skeptic or pointing out issues, but you're being rather unreasonable.

They only announced that 17 billion a few months ago. We all know we're unlikely to see any actual construction kick off until next fall after D23. I agree with the thought that they know they can't compete with the opening of Epic U, so they might as well go hard starting late 2025 into 2026.

You can't say they're clearly going to do nothing when in the past decade they've built three new lands, a bunch of rides (including some truly great e tickets) and tons of other notable changes. Someone else here said it might not be the right choices (or at the least ones you may want) - but a lot has happened. Are we in a multi-year drought right now? For sure and it's a bummer, but it's clear serious money is going to be spent and we'll be getting new lands and rides over the next decade.
 

SplashJacket

Well-Known Member
40 years ago a musical act would go on a tour to promote their album and generate sales for that album. Today, traditional album sales do not exist outside of some diehards chasing the novelty of the medium, and music releases on streaming where artists hope to get enough buzz to justify a money-making tour.

Is this going to hold true for visual media? Is Disney effectively going to end up creating movies and TV shows as advertisement for higher return areas of consumer products and vacations?
This is literally what’s happening, and as someone who’s loyalty lies with the parks (and not necessarily Disney), I’m all for it.
 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
I get being a skeptic or pointing out issues, but you're being rather unreasonable.

They only announced that 17 billion a few months ago. We all know we're unlikely to see any actual construction kick off until next fall after D23. I agree with the thought that they know they can't compete with the opening of Epic U, so they might as well go hard starting late 2025 into 2026.

You can't say they're clearly going to do nothing when in the past decade they've built three new lands, a bunch of rides (including some truly great e tickets) and tons of other notable changes. Someone else here said it might not be the right choices (or at the least ones you may want) - but a lot has happened. Are we in a multi-year drought right now? For sure and it's a bummer, but it's clear serious money is going to be spent and we'll be getting new lands and rides over the next decade.
So ripping and replacing, along with under-building and over-spending on what they did do, after a decade of not building a damn thing somehow warrants celebration? How much net-new has happened under Iger?

You can't expect that the same person who created the problem is going to fix it.
 

drnilescrane

Well-Known Member
Cannibalization of yourself
....
More parks competing with your own product isn't necessarily a good thing especially if guests don't think they need to pay separately for the new thing
That lesson was learned back in 1998 when DAK didn't materially extend the average length of a trip to WDW.

Most on property guests either plan a 4 night trip, a 3 night long weekend or a 7 night trip. The later are coming anyway and the former literally don't have more time.

It's the same reason we haven't seen a material growth in non-DVC hotel keys at WDW. Adding more rooms is just going to cannibalize the low end of the market, push rates down (see Caribbean Beach) and become a liability during the next recessionary event.

These things go in cycles - maybe in the future WDW will get to the point DLR is now at where capacity isn't servicing demand. But I don't think we're there yet. WDW needs more optimization, along with some targeted growth (i.e. MK).

I'd also make the argument that DCL out of Canaveral is WDW's pseudo 5th gate. They're adding the FLL port to capture pure play cruisers so they can free up Port Canaveral capacity for WDW land+sea travelers.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom