Disney Prices, Are They High Enough?

[Sirwalterraleigh]

They know it can’t become a beating to visit the parks or you won’t stay as long, spend as much or even worse, come back.

I can tell you from actual experience that under Eisner the culture was to limit increases - while still looking to increase revenue and profits - in the hopes of building a larger, guaranteed, repeat clientele...

DVC was designed for that...as was the annual pass programs.
It was a tightrope. But that era was designed around revenues from merchandise. That was so much better...as in people don’t complain nearly as much about the OPTION of paying way more on their trip for stuff.

Can we honestly believe that is the intent now? Everything is now involuntary.

 

[Po'Rich]

Can we honestly believe that is the intent now? Everything is now involuntary.

One of the things that has bothered me about recent Disney practices isn't necessarily the continual rise in prices. I expect Disney to be expensive and to raise prices on an annual basis. What concerns me most is that Disney has started seeking out new ways to add charges: extra charges for parking, extra charges for packages, extra charges for attending at certain times of the year. Once I was able to say, "Disney is expensive but it is mostly all-inclusive." Now, I have to be a bit more concerned about extra charges for which I may not have planned.

Disney has also worked to limit my ability to take advantage of lower prices or deals by putting expiration dates on tickets. I go every other year. At one time, I could purchase tickets well in advance or take advantage of a ticket deal to help limit the costs. It was a win-win situation: Disney knew I would be returning, and I was able to benefit from a lower ticket price. Now, for every trip I have to decide if it is in this year's budget for me to go. The A/C goes out? Well, maybe this time I'll just rent out my DVC points and skip the trip. In years past, I would have already have purchased the park tickets, so I would have been already committed.

 

[NelsonRD]

But that kinda makes sense the way society has been constructed. It doesn’t change anything to scoff at privileges. Money tends to negate the “they have feelings too” argument. They wouldn’t honestly care what’s said.

It would be like you and I debating what side of the sky the sun is gonna set on tonight...it’s irrelevant.

Ok...back to non sociology

But most people do care what is said, and how they are treated though. I have told this story on this forum before, but a friend of mine who is considered wealthy, but not rich, bought his daughter a used beetle bug convertible when she turned 16 to drive to school. She was ridiculed beyond belief, with the “look with rich daddy bought” her, to the point of her not wanting the car anymore. The shame was ruthless, it broke his heart.

A hard working honest family couldn’t even gift a used car to to their daughter for her 16th birthday because of how socially acceptable it has become to belittle people of wealth. Its wrong.

It seems almost linear, the more money somebody makes than somebody else, the more hate people have towards them, for no reason at all.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

It's a fine line. I guess it comes down to what the market will bear. I don't mind the additional options. Partaking in them is my choice. I'm not terribly fond of the idea of triple selling a park - to me I think that crosses a line. However, if Disney feels there is a market for for some type of service or experience then they will explore it. If the market proves them right - it will continue. If the market proves them wrong it will be discontinued.

I think Disney can be both affordable and overpriced at the same time. There are options that range from low end to high end. Participation is voluntary. You create your own experience. You can stay at a value or an off property hotel and bring sandwiches to the park - Then hit Wendy's or McDonald's after you leave. Alternately, you can stay at a Deluxe and do ADR's for each meal. There are also a lot of options that fall somewhere in between. But each of those options creates its own experience.

This may be unpopular...but I really I don't care. There are those that have busted their humps to be in the position they are now. If Disney wants to create offers for individuals/families who can afford a Club 33 membership, seasonal hard ticket events, signature dinning, special access to events....then I have no problem with that. If someone feels there is value (which is purely subjective) they will gladly spend.

I'm sure this board ranges from all types, ages, income levels, and expectations. When you're a 25 year old making 40k a year your going to have a certain kind of outlook. And sure things may not seem fair. But the beautiful thing about that is - you control your own destiny. If when you reach the half century mark and have a considerable amount more.....and want to invest some of that in an experience for your family.....why should anyone critique that? I'm glad I have that option. I fully plan to rent a pontoon boat to see Illuminations one last time before it ends. And I really couldn't give a rats behind what anyone thought about that. I'm glad that Disney has that option for me.

 

[Shouldigo12]

Every time Disney raises prices, we have these discussions about how prices should go even higher to control crowds. There are claims that the parks are too crowded and will be better (even at greatly increased prices) when less people go. Then there are other who claim that Disney risks becoming just a playground for the rich (I, myself, have written on this side of the issue). Yet, I've come to a realization recently. We have a thread discussing how attendance is down from projections. The result is that there are cuts and prices increase. Disney isn't raising prices to control crowds nor does it want to control crowds. There are only so many dole whips and Mickey waffles that an individual can eat. Instead, Disney simply wants to maximize profits. (Not a great revelation, I admit). It wants the parks crowded, and it wants to see how high prices can go while keeping the parks crowded.

This, exactly. No company will ever make decisions with the purpose of getting less customers.

 

[Shouldigo12]

I agree that maximization or profit is an initiative and perhaps has gone to far, but I disagree that they pack the parks without some moderation.

It’s a balance and I think they know that. I know Disney at least thinks about and studies crowd levels because they ask me in surveys, in great detail.

They know it can’t become a beating to visit the parks or you won’t stay as long, spend as much or even worse, come back.

I would think Disney's goal would be better managed crowds, not smaller crowds. Of course they don't want people to have a terrible time and not return, but if their method of preventing that is driving people out of the parks with high prices...well, isn't that kind of like going back to square one? You're still getting people who are unhappy and don't want to come back. The reason just changes.

 

[Chef Mickey]

I would think Disney's goal would be better managed crowds, not smaller crowds. Of course they don't want people to have a terrible time and not return, but if their method of preventing that is driving people out of the parks with high prices...well, isn't that kind of like going back to square one? You're still getting people who are unhappy and don't want to come back. The reason just changes.

It’s kind of chicken and egg.

If you wow people and they have a great time, prices become somewhat meaningless. If you’re already charging a pretty high price and don’t deliver an amazing experience, you have a problem.

Amazing attractions, shows, and manageable crowds are big components in having a great time.

 

[graphite1326]

All I know is it cost just as much for my DW and myself to go now as it did taking our family of 4 when we first went in 1996.

Also, we went recently and didn't think it was anymore crowded at the parks. We pretty much did everything we wanted. But that may be experience and know where to go when.

 

[Chef Mickey]

All I know is it cost just as much for my DW and myself to go now as it did taking our family of 4 when we first went in 1996.

Also, we went recently and didn't think it was anymore crowded at the parks. We pretty much did everything we wanted. But that may be experience and know where to go when.

1996 was 22 years ago. What’s cheaper now than in 1996?

 

[The Mighty Tim]

1996 was 22 years ago.

I feel old now.

 

[Chef Mickey]

I feel old now.

Same.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

But most people do care what is said, and how they are treated though. I have told this story on this forum before, but a friend of mine who is considered wealthy, but not rich, bought his daughter a used beetle bug convertible when she turned 16 to drive to school. She was ridiculed beyond belief, with the “look with rich daddy bought” her, to the point of her not wanting the car anymore. The shame was ruthless, it broke his heart.

A hard working honest family couldn’t even gift a used car to to their daughter for her 16th birthday because of how socially acceptable it has become to belittle people of wealth. Its wrong.

It seems almost linear, the more money somebody makes than somebody else, the more hate people have towards them, for no reason at all.

I don’t like it either...but again it’s not going to change.

It’s the price we pay for constructing a world where money is 95% the motivation for everything.

 

[Lensman]

One of the things that has bothered me about recent Disney practices isn't necessarily the continual rise in prices. I expect Disney to be expensive and to raise prices on an annual basis. What concerns me most is that Disney has started seeking out new ways to add charges: extra charges for parking, extra charges for packages, extra charges for attending at certain times of the year. Once I was able to say, "Disney is expensive but it is mostly all-inclusive." Now, I have to be a bit more concerned about extra charges for which I may not have planned.

I think all the upcharges are a result of businesses discovering/deciding that they could increase revenue by unbundling their andsecondary products/services from their primary product/service and putting higher margins on secondary services relative to primary services. We've seen this in movie theater popcorn, 3D, and large format. We've seen this with airlines charging for checked luggage, premium seats, and early boarding. I'd even argue that we've seen this with freemium price models for online services.

I'm not saying that I like this or that anyone else is supposed to, but I do think we will all have to get used to it. I guess the only hope is that this unbundling will keep prices lower than they would have been on the primary product/services, but in the WDW case I'm not sure that's going to happen.

 

[Chef Mickey]

One of the things that has bothered me about recent Disney practices isn't necessarily the continual rise in prices. I expect Disney to be expensive and to raise prices on an annual basis. What concerns me most is that Disney has started seeking out new ways to add charges: extra charges for parking, extra charges for packages, extra charges for attending at certain times of the year. Once I was able to say, "Disney is expensive but it is mostly all-inclusive." Now, I have to be a bit more concerned about extra charges for which I may not have planned.

Disney has also worked to limit my ability to take advantage of lower prices or deals by putting expiration dates on tickets. I go every other year. At one time, I could purchase tickets well in advance or take advantage of a ticket deal to help limit the costs. It was a win-win situation: Disney knew I would be returning, and I was able to benefit from a lower ticket price. Now, for every trip I have to decide if it is in this year's budget for me to go. The A/C goes out? Well, maybe this time I'll just rent out my DVC points and skip the trip. In years past, I would have already have purchased the park tickets, so I would have been already committed.

If you have DVC and are cancelling trips because of an AC going out or parking fees, might need to rethink having the DVC.

I don’t see any issue with making ancillary services cost extra. The parks are still largely all inclusive, which is why Disney remains such a great value.

I just get concerned when people start talking about cancelling trips because of some fees. You can either afford it or you can’t. If small fees increasing or personal expenses are pricing you out of vacations, you’re probably running too close to the edge anyway.

 

[Po'Rich]

If you have DVC and are cancelling trips because of an AC going out or parking fees, might need to rethink having the DVC.

I don’t see any issue with making ancillary services cost extra. The parks are still largely all inclusive, which is why Disney remains such a great value.

I just get concerned when people start talking about cancelling trips because of some fees. You can either afford it or you can’t. If small fees increasing or personal expenses are pricing you out of vacations, you’re probably running too close to the edge anyway.

Thank you for your sage advice. I will be sure to contact you next time I want advice on finances that totally misses the point.

 

[Po'Rich]

I think all the upcharges are a result of businesses discovering/deciding that they could increase revenue by unbundling their andsecondary products/services from their primary product/service and putting higher margins on secondary services relative to primary services. We've seen this in movie theater popcorn, 3D, and large format. We've seen this with airlines charging for checked luggage, premium seats, and early boarding. I'd even argue that we've seen this with freemium price models for online services.

I'm not saying that I like this or that anyone else is supposed to, but I do think we will all have to get used to it. I guess the only hope is that this unbundling will keep prices lower than they would have been on the primary product/services, but in the WDW case I'm not sure that's going to happen.

I agree that this is happening all over, and I agree that if unbundling was used to keep prices down, then it could be a good thing. The concern that I mentioned in my post was the unbundling seems to be used at WDW as simply another way to further increase prices while still increasing prices. My point was simply that unbundled fees concern me more than prices going up because they can often be hidden, which makes it harder to plan.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Thank you for your sage advice. I will be sure to contact you next time I want advice on finances that totally misses the point.

You’re welcome.

It’s relevant because bad financial habits give people and entitled attitude.

 

[LUVofDIS]

This, exactly. No company will ever make decisions with the purpose of getting less customers.

I don't think this is always true, if, as a business you can charge more, lower the crowds which would reduce maintenance costs than maybe. You wouldn't really care how many are coming as long as your profits are the same or more. I am not saying this is what Disney is doing, I am just saying that this is a possibility.

 

[Shouldigo12]

I don't think this is always true, if, as a business you can charge more, lower the crowds which would reduce maintenance costs than maybe. You wouldn't really care how many are coming as long as your profits are the same or more. I am not saying this is what Disney is doing, I am just saying that this is a possibility.

That's a fair point.

 

[Lensman]

I don't think this is always true, if, as a business you can charge more, lower the crowds which would reduce maintenance costs than maybe. You wouldn't really care how many are coming as long as your profits are the same or more. I am not saying this is what Disney is doing, I am just saying that this is a possibility.

I don't know how common it is for consumer businesses, but with business-to-business, it is pretty common to review your corporate clients to see which ones are either:
1. out and out unprofitable - there are some cases where you're actually losing money on a client because the product and resources they consume are greater than the revenue they generate.
2. super-low margin - in this case you're making money on a customer but you're barely breaking even, so sometimes you'd do better to get rid of them and replace them with customers on whom you can make higher margin.

At one of the companies I worked for, we reviewed the client base on this basis, figured out which clients were money-losers or barely-breakeven, and then raised prices a lot on those customers to either convert them to profitable customers or part with them.

Actually, thinking about the direct-to-consumer businesses, you see this kind of behavior sometimes when you have "unlimited" plans and have customers who consume more than they pay. So for instance cellular phone and data providers sometimes have this problem as well as unlimited web hosting companies or unlimited backup providers.

I think I also recall hearing about companies like Home Depot doing something to try and rid themselves of customers who buy equipment then return it used too often.

I do agree though that you don't see across-the-board reduction in customers being an end goal for a business. All of the above examples are targeted. The equivalent in Disney's case is probably season pass holders who come all the time but don't eat on site or buy souvenirs. At some number of visits such a customer might end up being a money-loser for Disney, or at least so low margin that they'd rather see what they could do to replace said customer with a more profitable one. As an alternative, they could see if it is possible to turn that customer into a profitable one - perhaps by lowering the price of food? Nah!