Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks

[wdwmagic]

Interesting. I recall that the WDW repeat audience was shrinking to like 35% and mostly coming from the north east or something. This was a decade ago. But the point at the time was that the audience of 7 year repeaters was smaller but more loyal. They had to widen it fast and it looks like they did with the DVC.

Did you hear much about the Animal Kingdom boutique park experience? Curious to hear what you think about that type of premium experience at a Disney location. I know Sea World pull it off with the Cove, but I'm just not sure how a $200 per person experience at Disney would play out when you have so much entertainment already included in your typical WDW admission.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Did you hear much about the Animal Kingdom boutique park experience? Curious to hear what you think about that type of premium experience at a Disney location. I know Sea World pull it off with the Cove, but I'm just not sure how a $200 per person experience at Disney would play out when you have so much entertainment already included in your typical WDW admission.

Steve,

If I can chime in about this also...

I was just thinking about this last night...and I think it's a perfect addition to add NOW. With DTD in shambles as far as nightlife is concerned, they should add this experience before DTD and see how it takes off. Think of all of the conventions they have. Those "convention-goers" want more than theme parks...and they aren't with their families or any children.

My uncle has been to many conventions in the Disneyland area and at WDW and he can't get anybody to go to the parks with him. They only want to go and drink. If they had another option (say, a nighttime "adventure" park that wasn't riddled with rides and was only for the older crowd)...they'd most likely try it out because it would offer something that they couldn't do back home...and they also wouldn't be dealing with kids.

(I kinda have a feeling this is why HHN at Universal does so well. The ability to drink and not worry about little kids and still have a unique experience).

Sure, $200 is expensive...but most convention-goers can write that stuff off for "entertainment." Also, this would attract the crowd that isn't traveling with families...and those people don't worry (for the most part) as much about ticket prices because they're only paying for themselves...not themselves and 2-3 kids.

The only problem I see with this type of "park" is the offerings. The offerings must be truly unique...not only to the area...but in general.

I'd love to have a ziplining excursion that goes over some of the more "dangerous" animals...like a crocodile area and a lion den!

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

It will be interesting to see if the big influx of DVC accommodations at WDW bring a similar seasonal change to WDW. WDW will always be the big international draw, but they have to be seeing a bigger AP and DVC visitor base than in the past. Those frequent visitors are going to need to see a constant refresh of offerings. Or does WDW perhaps see that the Epcot and Studios seasonal events are enough to keep things fresh - I'm not convinced it's enough.

It's funny you mention that, because I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if the lack of "events" or "plussing" we get is due to the complacency of most AP and DVC holders?

Maybe it's a different Fanbase all together.:shrug:

 

[mcjaco]

I'm not sure I need to see a "constant" refresh of offerings, but as I've been going annually for the past four years (like when I was younger), I do find myself a little bored when nothing has been plussed.

Back in the day......it seemed like every year we went there was something new. Not so much now.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

I'm not sure I need to see a "constant" refresh of offerings, but as I've been going annually for the past four years (like when I was younger), I do find myself a little bored when nothing has been plussed.

Back in the day......it seemed like every year we went there was something new. Not so much now.

We have new celebrations every year!:sohappy::lookaroun

 

[RiversideBunny]

Just a question-

What does Disney actually get out of offering Annual Passes?
Mabye some money spent in the parks on each visit but isn't that offset, to a large degree, by the fact that they are operating the parks 'for free' to AP holders who come there very frequently?

I mean what is the business angle to offering Annual Passes?
Where's the profit in doing so?
What's in it for Disney?

Tks.

 

[jakeman]

Just a question-

What does Disney actually get out of offering Annual Passes?
Mabye some money spent in the parks on each visit but isn't that offset, to a large degree, by the fact that they are operating the parks 'for free' to AP holders who come there very frequently?

I mean what is the business angle to offering Annual Passes?
Where's the profit in doing so?
What's in it for Disney?

Tks.

For starters, it takes at least 10 visits for your annual pass to be worth more than an unexpiring park ticket.

For locals, the +10 days that they will go will be offset by merchandise and more importantly food that they will purchase.

 

[Master Yoda]

Just a question-

What does Disney actually get out of offering Annual Passes?
Mabye some money spent in the parks on each visit but isn't that offset, to a large degree, by the fact that they are operating the parks 'for free' to AP holders who come there very frequently?

I mean what is the business angle to offering Annual Passes?
Where's the profit in doing so?
What's in it for Disney?

Tks.

For starters, it takes at least 10 visits for your annual pass to be worth more than an unexpiring park ticket.

For locals, the +10 days that they will go will be offset by merchandise and more importantly food that they will purchase.

I am sure that there are quite a few other "x" factors that don't show up on a spread sheet as well. I know we tend to spend a bit more on those second and third trips as we are not putting out money for tickets. Also when it comes to going somewhere else like Sea World or US the "We already have Disney tickets" argument figures prominently in the decision.

 

[WDWFigment]

It will be interesting to see if the big influx of DVC accommodations at WDW bring a similar seasonal change to WDW. WDW will always be the big international draw, but they have to be seeing a bigger AP and DVC visitor base than in the past. Those frequent visitors are going to need to see a constant refresh of offerings. Or does WDW perhaps see that the Epcot and Studios seasonal events are enough to keep things fresh - I'm not convinced it's enough.

I know the generally offered reasoning as to why DL gets seasonal makeovers is because annual passholders make up so much greater of the guest population, and DL needs this type of thing to continue attracting guests, or, alternatively, from the other crowd, because WDW's management is too cheap (...this thread is not meant to be an argument over which is the case).

That said, at what point in time do you anticipate this changing? WDW continues to build DVC resorts, and I think it's a safe presumption that these individuals are thus not once in a lifetime guests. Rather, many of them visit several times per year and even have annual passes. I think it would be a fair assertion that the AP percentage differential between DL and WDW has gradually began closing since 1992. At some point, it seems The Walt Disney Company would need to acknowledge this, and begin creating more seasonal offerings and plussing attractions (among other things) to keep these guests coming back to WDW.

I think the time to start that is now. Right now, Disney has the most DVC properties available (at WDW alone) that it has ever had. Saratoga Springs, Bay Lake Tower at the Contemporary, and the Animal Kingdom Villas all have large unsold inventories. Additionally, the resale market has the largest inventory that it has ever had, and prices both direct from Disney and via the resale market continue to drop to their lowest amounts in several years. It's quite easy to blame these numbers on the economy (and there is no denying that the economy is causing some of the decline), but why not take a different approach?

Rather than shrugging off the poor numbers as a result of the economy, why not adopt the DL tactic of creating seasonal offerings and plussing attractions? Market these changes as something WDW does to specifically appeal to those DVC members who want to visit yearly or even several times per year. (For those unfamiliar with DVC's current marketing strategy, it is solely aimed at looking at all of the places besides WDW that you can stay. However, these "outside offerings" (besides Vero Beach & Hilton Head Island) offer terrible value for your money, and most DVC members join to stay at WDW). I think at some point, WDW will have to adopt similar practices out of necessity, or they will begin to face an outflux of members (those who bought-in in the early 1990s) who have grown tired of WDW's offerings. However, when will that point occur? I don't think we've seen such an outflux yet, nor have WDW's AP numbers reached a high enough percentage of total guests that management believes they must adopt such a strategy out of necessity, but surely it isn't far away.

Whether you love or hate all of the DVC properties being built, I think we should all appreciate DVC for what it offers to WDW that would never otherwise exist: demand for those "little things" that DL does to attract repeat visitors. Hopefully WDW adopts similar strategies soon!

 

[SirGoofy]

I know the generally offered reasoning as to why DL gets seasonal makeovers is because annual passholders make up so much greater of the guest population, and DL needs this type of thing to continue attracting guests, or, alternatively, from the other crowd, because WDW's management is too cheap (...this thread is not meant to be an argument over which is the case).

That said, at what point in time do you anticipate this changing? WDW continues to build DVC resorts, and I think it's a safe presumption that these individuals are thus not once in a lifetime guests. Rather, many of them visit several times per year and even have annual passes. I think it would be a fair assertion that the AP percentage differential between DL and WDW has gradually began closing since 1992. At some point, it seems The Walt Disney Company would need to acknowledge this, and begin creating more seasonal offerings and plussing attractions (among other things) to keep these guests coming back to WDW.

I think the time to start that is now. Right now, Disney has the most DVC properties available (at WDW alone) that it has ever had. Saratoga Springs, Bay Lake Tower at the Contemporary, and the Animal Kingdom Villas all have large unsold inventories. Additionally, the resale market has the largest inventory that it has ever had, and prices both direct from Disney and via the resale market continue to drop to their lowest amounts in several years. It's quite easy to blame these numbers on the economy (and there is no denying that the economy is causing some of the decline), but why not take a different approach?

Rather than shrugging off the poor numbers as a result of the economy, why not adopt the DL tactic of creating seasonal offerings and plussing attractions? Market these changes as something WDW does to specifically appeal to those DVC members who want to visit yearly or even several times per year. (For those unfamiliar with DVC's current marketing strategy, it is solely aimed at looking at all of the places besides WDW that you can stay. However, these "outside offerings" (besides Vero Beach & Hilton Head Island) offer terrible value for your money, and most DVC members join to stay at WDW). I think at some point, WDW will have to adopt similar practices out of necessity, or they will begin to face an outflux of members (those who bought-in in the early 1990s) who have grown tired of WDW's offerings. However, when will that point occur? I don't think we've seen such an outflux yet, nor have WDW's AP numbers reached a high enough percentage of total guests that management believes they must adopt such a strategy out of necessity, but surely it isn't far away.

Whether you love or hate all of the DVC properties being built, I think we should all appreciate DVC for what it offers to WDW that would never otherwise exist: demand for those "little things" that DL does to attract repeat visitors. Hopefully WDW adopts similar strategies soon!

Awesome post. Hit the nail right on the head.

 

[jt04]

I know the generally offered reasoning as to why DL gets seasonal makeovers is because annual passholders make up so much greater of the guest population, and DL needs this type of thing to continue attracting guests, or, alternatively, from the other crowd, because WDW's management is too cheap (...this thread is not meant to be an argument over which is the case).

That said, at what point in time do you anticipate this changing? WDW continues to build DVC resorts, and I think it's a safe presumption that these individuals are thus not once in a lifetime guests. Rather, many of them visit several times per year and even have annual passes. I think it would be a fair assertion that the AP percentage differential between DL and WDW has gradually began closing since 1992. At some point, it seems The Walt Disney Company would need to acknowledge this, and begin creating more seasonal offerings and plussing attractions (among other things) to keep these guests coming back to WDW.

I think the time to start that is now. Right now, Disney has the most DVC properties available (at WDW alone) that it has ever had. Saratoga Springs, Bay Lake Tower at the Contemporary, and the Animal Kingdom Villas all have large unsold inventories. Additionally, the resale market has the largest inventory that it has ever had, and prices both direct from Disney and via the resale market continue to drop to their lowest amounts in several years. It's quite easy to blame these numbers on the economy (and there is no denying that the economy is causing some of the decline), but why not take a different approach?

Rather than shrugging off the poor numbers as a result of the economy, why not adopt the DL tactic of creating seasonal offerings and plussing attractions? Market these changes as something WDW does to specifically appeal to those DVC members who want to visit yearly or even several times per year. (For those unfamiliar with DVC's current marketing strategy, it is solely aimed at looking at all of the places besides WDW that you can stay. However, these "outside offerings" (besides Vero Beach & Hilton Head Island) offer terrible value for your money, and most DVC members join to stay at WDW). I think at some point, WDW will have to adopt similar practices out of necessity, or they will begin to face an outflux of members (those who bought-in in the early 1990s) who have grown tired of WDW's offerings. However, when will that point occur? I don't think we've seen such an outflux yet, nor have WDW's AP numbers reached a high enough percentage of total guests that management believes they must adopt such a strategy out of necessity, but surely it isn't far away.

Whether you love or hate all of the DVC properties being built, I think we should all appreciate DVC for what it offers to WDW that would never otherwise exist: demand for those "little things" that DL does to attract repeat visitors. Hopefully WDW adopts similar strategies soon!

I think this is the strategy. Namely to be sure the "inventory" of rooms never lags demand. Having a room sit empty does not cost that much. Entire wings can be shuttered during lean times. But losing DVC sales due to a lack of inventory is money that is lost. I think they anticipate selling those DVC's. And now that they are finally in front of the demand curve, I think they will start working on drawing bigger crowds with new attractions and offerings.

Of course all this depends on if the economy recovers.

 

[Master Yoda]

I think this is the strategy. Namely to be sure the "inventory" of rooms never lags demand. Having a room sit empty does not cost that much. Entire wings can be shuttered during lean times. But losing DVC sales due to a lack of inventory is money that is lost. I think they anticipate selling those DVC's. And now that they are finally in front of the demand curve, I think they will start working on drawing bigger crowds with new attractions and offerings.

Of course all this depends on if the economy recovers.

I am sorry but this is one of the most misinformed statements I have ever heard on this site. There is a physical cost for an empty room which granted is small but it is still there. The bigger picture comes in when you look at lost revenue. If empty rooms were no big deal Disney, or any other hotel operator for that matter, would never offer a discount to fill unused rooms.

 

[jt04]

I am sorry but this is one of the most misinformed statements I have ever heard on this site. There is a physical cost for an empty room which granted is small but it is still there. The bigger picture comes in when you look at lost revenue. If empty rooms were no big deal Disney, or any other hotel operator for that matter, would never offer a discount to fill unused rooms.

You do know that they rent DVC rooms to non-DVC members don't you?

 

[Master Yoda]

You do know that they rent DVC rooms to non-DVC members don't you?

Yes. If that is what you were implying you did a poor job of it. You simply said "empty rooms don't cost much" and not "empty rooms that are technically already paid for and being rented to a non DVC member for cash don't cost much money"

 

[Eddie Sotto]

You have no idea how true this is. When my oldest girls were around 7-10 all they wanted to do when we were at WDW is go to the pool.:lol:

Yes. We have 10 year old twins and they spend more time at the GCH waterslide and could care less about going on rides in the afternoon. I think this is a good lesson in that something that tactile and active is of a greater value to a 10 year old than more passive forms of entertainment. The other thing is that in the pool it's all fun, all the time with no lines or crowds. Crowds are not fun for kids who see it all at 48" high. They hate lines for the same reasons. You are in a canyon of legs. They are dying to go to a waterpark and that is their biggest interest in someday going to WDW.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

You have no idea how true this is. When my oldest girls were around 7-10 all they wanted to do when we were at WDW is go to the pool.:lol:

Reminds me of a quote from the Unofficial Guide by a parent who was brought to tears over the idea of spending all that $ on a WDW trip and then finding out the kids just want to swim all day. Makes me think some parents should talk to thier kids more about thier trips while planning.

I know the generally offered reasoning as to why DL gets seasonal makeovers is because annual passholders make up so much greater of the guest population, and DL needs this type of thing to continue attracting guests, or, alternatively, from the other crowd, because WDW's management is too cheap (...this thread is not meant to be an argument over which is the case).

That said, at what point in time do you anticipate this changing? WDW continues to build DVC resorts, and I think it's a safe presumption that these individuals are thus not once in a lifetime guests. Rather, many of them visit several times per year and even have annual passes. I think it would be a fair assertion that the AP percentage differential between DL and WDW has gradually began closing since 1992. At some point, it seems The Walt Disney Company would need to acknowledge this, and begin creating more seasonal offerings and plussing attractions (among other things) to keep these guests coming back to WDW.

I think the time to start that is now. Right now, Disney has the most DVC properties available (at WDW alone) that it has ever had. Saratoga Springs, Bay Lake Tower at the Contemporary, and the Animal Kingdom Villas all have large unsold inventories. Additionally, the resale market has the largest inventory that it has ever had, and prices both direct from Disney and via the resale market continue to drop to their lowest amounts in several years. It's quite easy to blame these numbers on the economy (and there is no denying that the economy is causing some of the decline), but why not take a different approach?

Rather than shrugging off the poor numbers as a result of the economy, why not adopt the DL tactic of creating seasonal offerings and plussing attractions? Market these changes as something WDW does to specifically appeal to those DVC members who want to visit yearly or even several times per year. (For those unfamiliar with DVC's current marketing strategy, it is solely aimed at looking at all of the places besides WDW that you can stay. However, these "outside offerings" (besides Vero Beach & Hilton Head Island) offer terrible value for your money, and most DVC members join to stay at WDW). I think at some point, WDW will have to adopt similar practices out of necessity, or they will begin to face an outflux of members (those who bought-in in the early 1990s) who have grown tired of WDW's offerings. However, when will that point occur? I don't think we've seen such an outflux yet, nor have WDW's AP numbers reached a high enough percentage of total guests that management believes they must adopt such a strategy out of necessity, but surely it isn't far away.

Whether you love or hate all of the DVC properties being built, I think we should all appreciate DVC for what it offers to WDW that would never otherwise exist: demand for those "little things" that DL does to attract repeat visitors. Hopefully WDW adopts similar strategies soon!

Great point made also in a great thread you made that has sadly been ignored. Maybe because you didn't put "ZOMG TOTAL RUMOR CONFIMATIONZZZ!!!(maybe)" in the title.

Yes. If that is what you were implying you did a poor job of it. You simply said "empty rooms don't cost much" and not "empty rooms that are technically already paid for and being rented to a non DVC member for cash don't cost much money"

No kidding.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

I can vouch for the pool.

We had a family reunion down there with a bunch of people and most of the kids (ages 5-15) said they'd rather stay at the hotel and go swimming than go to the parks. (And most of these kids had pools at home!).

IMO, it's not that they don't like the parks...it's the thought of going somewhere when they have "fun" already there. Once they were in the parks they had a blast, but every day they'd complain that they'd rather just stay by the pool. We compromised and went back to the pool when we didn't do "Magic Kingdom" days (only because it takes forever from the time you get your car parked until you actually get through the gates) just for a few hours...and then went back to the parks for the nighttime shows.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I can vouch for the pool.

We had a family reunion down there with a bunch of people and most of the kids (ages 5-15) said they'd rather stay at the hotel and go swimming than go to the parks. (And most of these kids had pools at home!).

IMO, it's not that they don't like the parks...it's the thought of going somewhere when they have "fun" already there. Once they were in the parks they had a blast, but every day they'd complain that they'd rather just stay by the pool. We compromised and went back to the pool when we didn't do "Magic Kingdom" days (only because it takes forever from the time you get your car parked until you actually get through the gates) just for a few hours...and then went back to the parks for the nighttime shows.

A great point and something every parent who takes a kid should think about. As much as you may have payed alot to be at WDW, there is nothing fun about begin stuck in the parks (especially Epcot) when it's hot outside and too busy to see many attractions.

Let kids have their pool fix at some point each day.

 

[WDWFigment]

Great point made also in a great thread you made that has sadly been ignored. Maybe because you didn't put "ZOMG TOTAL RUMOR CONFIMATIONZZZ!!!(maybe)" in the title.

Thanks. It was an interesting discussion, but I think it suffered from not having a grabbing title, and being more of a subject that would appeal to the folks who post in News & Rumors. I even linked to it earlier in this thread, hoping it would catch some interest. Now I know why they all post non-News and Rumors in this forum, too. Lesson learned. From now on, I will just post my topics where I think they will be best received, and let the moderators move them later.

Here it is again, for those who care: http://forums.wdwmagic.com/showthread.php?t=455478

 

[CBOMB]

We have new celebrations every year!:sohappy::lookaroun

They can't even get that right anymore. Remember The Year of a Million dreams, that folks thought was going to become The Decade of a Million Dreams.