News Disneyland Magic Key Program

[CaptainAmerica]

So how do they make up the loss in revenue? Charge $30 for churros? Their is no way they get nearly the same amount of bodies in the parks with those tiny discounts/ pricing you proposed

They don't want the same amount of bodies in the parks, that's the whole point. They're deliberately trying to throttle back attendance because the crowds were starting to affect the guest experience.

 

[Jefro]

We used to buy a deluxe (then flex pass) and go 10 days (2 x 5 days) over a year. That made the $600 ticket work. As long as it doesn't limit the days per month, it could be workable. Not local to CA, so more frequent visits were not doable.

 

[Californian Elitist]

In Orlando, not that many. In Anaheim, quite a few, and many of them are "bad" guests. Low-spending, entitled, disruptive, generally off-putting.

That’s quite a claim. During my time as a CM, I can count on one hand how many super-regulars were disruptive and entitled. Not sure how someone would know about their spending habits.

 

[mickEblu]

They don't want the same amount of bodies in the parks, that's the whole point. They're deliberately trying to throttle back attendance because the crowds were starting to affect the guest experience.

I understand. That’s been the rumor but we can see how they are packing in the parks like the good old days. They may not necessarily want 2018 # of bodies (although personally I have my doubts) in the parks but they want that revenue. They would be losing a lot of bodies which = revenue with some of the programs I’ve seen proposed around here so I’m wondering how they’d make it up. Charge substantially more for everything? They re still packing the parks. What happened to the guest experience they wanted to improve? They re on track to just charging substantially more (for entry) the same or worse experience.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

That’s quite a claim. During my time as a CM, I can count on one hand how many super-regulars were disruptive and entitled. Not sure how someone would know about their spending habits.

Cast-as-guest are even worse (and CPs the worst of all).

Guest spending patterns are very clear. Disney would rather have a higher number of different guests visiting for a fewer number of days than the same handfuls of guests visiting over and over again.

Scenario 1: Three families visit the parks for 3 days each.
Scenario 2: One family visits the parks for 9 days.

Scenario 1 is MUCH more profitable.

 

[el_super]

We used to buy a deluxe (then flex pass) and go 10 days (2 x 5 days) over a year.

How did the math on that work out? Certainly not blaming you, but if an AP is cheaper than a multi-day ticket something is wrong. I would think two five day park hoppers would be less than $600.

 

[Touchdown]

There better not be a limit on reservations other then your total, my trips are typically 6 days and I want to know I can get in all those days.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Cast-as-guest are even worse (and CPs the worst of all).

Guest spending patterns are very clear. Disney would rather have a higher number of different guests visiting for a fewer number of days than the same handfuls of guests visiting over and over again.

Scenario 1: Three families visit the parks for 3 days each.
Scenario 2: One family visits the parks for 9 days.

Scenario 1 is MUCH more profitable.

Not sure how this response correlates with what I said.

I’m curious as to where your claims stem from.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I’m curious as to where your claims stem from.

It's industry standard knowledge. Daily guest spending is inversely correlated with mean length of stay.

Think about it like this. Let's say you KNOW that your souvenir on this trip is going to be a $300 Citizen Mickey Mouse watch. You're going to spend that $300 if you have a six day vacation ($50 per day), but you're also going to spend it if you have a three day vacation ($100 per day). I'd much rather have two of you visit for 3 days each than one of your visit for six days.

 

[el_super]

The rumor floating around on social media is 12 visits, 24 visits, 36 visits, 48 visits and 52 visits.

48 visit and 52 visit are the only Keys that include parking.

Something that straight forward doesn't account for the complex blockout calendar that would be required for it. People spending the least to buy 12 visits aren't going to be able to use them on the highest value days (summer/holidays).

The reason I think the discount program makes sense, is that it allows them to adjust the price of admission based on demand (like an airline). Higher demand/more reservations = higher price. No need to worry about blockout dates if someone would still have a price barrier to entry.

Managing admissions like an airline would make the most sense.

 

[Stevek]

The rumor floating around on social media is 12 visits, 24 visits, 36 visits, 48 visits and 52 visits.

48 visit and 52 visit are the only Keys that include parking.

Minor discounts to add visits a la carte with the 52 visit key having the most meaningful discount.

If this is the case then it'll work great for some people, myself included. Twice a month is plenty Disneyland for me.

Gotta believe that those top 2 tiers are going to be wicked expensive...like a couple grand. I really can't see me doing any of these...I'm pretty much ok going once or twice a year now. The big question will be if they allow a monthly payment or it's all upfront.

 

[Doberge]

I don't understand why there's an expectation that this will be similar to the old AP program. They've only shown that they don't want the old system with tons of people with unlimited access to fill parks and not spend as much per guest per visitor compared to an out of town visitor. If they wanted old AP patterns they'd have kept the AP program like WDW. I think they're okay limiting AP revenue to capture more from other buckets with bigger spenders (relatively, because obviously any Disney trip is a big spend).

The entire point seems to be to decrease the number of AP holders attending each day. To do that either the price needs to hurts badly for unlimited visits ( top tier) or visits need to be limited for about the same price. Rephrased, it seems baked in that the new system will not be as nice as the old system, so they'll need to dangle a ton of carrots / "perceived benefits," probably ones that drive spend too (bump up merch discounts to 30%, etc.)

I think lower tiers should be more segmented than 12/24/36/48 etc. That seems both overly simplistic and also not segmented in a way to trick people into overbuying because that's a spot they're hoping to get people (unused visits). To that, if there are a number of visits I'd guess they'll allow rolling over to some degree, either requiring to maintain same plan or paying to roll some over.

 

[Stevek]

Why would it be 52 times and not 60? 12, 24, 36, 48, and 52? We’ll give you the opportunity to visit about 4.15 times each month!

That doesn’t sound right.

Probably just a simple cap of an average of 1 time per week per year.

 

[SplashGhost]

The rumor floating around on social media is 12 visits, 24 visits, 36 visits, 48 visits and 52 visits.

48 visit and 52 visit are the only Keys that include parking.

Minor discounts to add visits a la carte with the 52 visit key having the most meaningful discount.

If this is the case then it'll work great for some people, myself included. Twice a month is plenty Disneyland for me.

I am dreading how much the 48 and 52 visit passes will cost. I would probably get the 24 visit pass, but the lack of parking being included would make me far less likely to visit the park. I would probably start parking at the Gardenwalk since it is cheaper and a shorter walk to the park than the Toy Story Lot, so Disney would lose some money that way. I am too lazy to wait in the ridiculously long lines you often have to wait for to get on the buses.

I also think this system might end up just confusing the average guests and make them less likely to want to go.

 

[Stevek]

I don't understand why there's an expectation that this will be similar to the old AP program. They've only shown that they don't want the old system with tons of people with unlimited access to fill parks and not spend as much per guest per visitor compared to an out of town visitor. If they wanted old AP patterns they'd have kept the AP program like WDW. I think they're okay limiting AP revenue to capture more from other buckets with bigger spenders (relatively, because obviously any Disney trip is a big spend).

The entire point seems to be to decrease the number of AP holders attending each day. To do that either the price needs to hurts badly for unlimited visits ( top tier) or visits need to be limited for about the same price. Rephrased, it seems baked in that the new system will not be as nice as the old system, so they'll need to dangle a ton of carrots / "perceived benefits," probably ones that drive spend too (bump up merch discounts to 30%, etc.)

I think lower tiers should be more segmented than 12/24/36/48 etc. That seems both overly simplistic and also not segmented in a way to trick people into overbuying because that's a spot they're hoping to get people (unused visits). To that, if there are a number of visits I'd guess they'll allow rolling over to some degree, either requiring to maintain same plan or paying to roll some over.

I don't think most people are expecting it to be similar...in fact, seems that most of the guesses are that it would be something completely different. I think you are spot on that only the wealthiest or most willing to break the bank would buy into the top tiers.

 

[Stevek]

I am dreading how much the 48 and 52 visit passes will cost. I would probably get the 24 visit pass, but the lack of parking being included would make me far less likely to visit the park.

And now you are getting the point...if any of this is true, they are trying to make it undesireable for some and push people down to lower tier passes while rewarding those that are willing to spend the most aka 48/52 days.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Something that straight forward doesn't account for the complex blockout calendar that would be required for it. People spending the least to buy 12 visits aren't going to be able to use them on the highest value days (summer/holidays).

The reason I think the discount program makes sense, is that it allows them to adjust the price of admission based on demand (like an airline). Higher demand/more reservations = higher price. No need to worry about blockout dates if someone would still have a price barrier to entry.

Managing admissions like an airline would make the most sense.

I thought weekends were the big headache at Disneyland.

 

[Californian Elitist]

It's industry standard knowledge. Daily guest spending is inversely correlated with mean length of stay.

Think about it like this. Let's say you KNOW that your souvenir on this trip is going to be a $300 Citizen Mickey Mouse watch. You're going to spend that $300 if you have a six day vacation ($50 per day), but you're also going to spend it if you have a three day vacation ($100 per day). I'd much rather have two of you visit for 3 days each than one of your visit for six days.

Your claims are assumptions.

But sure. Okay.

 

[Stevek]

I thought weekends were the big headache at Disneyland.

They were at one point, I think with the flex pass and maybe even before that, they became better days to visit.

 

[el_super]

Gotta believe that those top 2 tiers are going to be wicked expensive...like a couple grand.

I can't imagine selling park hoppers for less than $100 a day. That would put the starting price at $1200.