Interview with Bob Iger about the Parks

[jt04]

And then Universal opened up the runaway hit themed land of the 2010's and changed both their game and Disney's.

And then did it again with Diagon Alley, proving they had the goods to keep it coming if they wanted. Disney had to change course.

Even AFTER that, Disney STILL toyed with the idea of Star Wars Land being a simple overlay of Echo Lake. That we're getting what we're getting instead of that is a testament to the fact that they know they can't get away with playing this one safe if they want to assert their creative dominance with the park-going public.

For the first time in history there are significant numbers of people who unabashedly prefer Universal's product over Disney's. "Catching up" doesn't mean Universal is suddenly making more money than Disney, it means Universal is making them look bad and they're working to get ahead of it. Context clues. Epcot and MK being built first have nothing to do with it.

It is an interesting possibility but we will never know for sure where that money might have gone with a more modest SWL. I know there were voices that wanted a Carsland clone and Future World upgrade.

Remember, WDW was developing Potter when Uni was still trying to sell people on IoA.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Yeah.. it kind of does!

????

lol I wish, unfortunately it doesn't. CEO's are know to play that childhood game where you go round and round the chairs until the music stops and they land some where.

I worked for a major chemical company, the latest ceo was given the nickname as the "break up" artist. lol He does not care about the company products nor does he pretend to. His job is to enhance the bottom line. liking has nothing to do with it.

Now I with a speciality chemicals brought by wall street hedge fund, do you honestly think they like the product? again, the CEO is brutally honest. they are giving the company 7 years to reach profit objects, they are sinking a boat load of money into the company but they don't care a whit about the product. In 7 years they will either, sell, merge or launch a IPO.

I really do think the further you move away from the original guy, in this case Walt, the love affair is over. Lol

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

His comments are kinda the key reason why he should go...

I wish someone would ask: “hey bob, what happens in 10 years when no one cares about Star Wars and frozen? And the budget isn’t gonna be there to rip it out and start from scratch?”

It’s obvious to me (just returned) that while the parks are being consumed in almost “go for broke” fashion...it is designed in an unsustainable path.

 

[SirLink]

I doubt the board will approve anything non-IP at this point. There is just too much source material so can't blame them.

They approve funds to be spent on the parks not individual minutia. The only things that get pitched are IP ones because Chapek is the gate keeper.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Did we have this detail before?

"When Star Wars opens in Anaheim in June"

Publicly, no.

If they make the deadline...

The Orlando version (as seen from slinky) is “not close”

 

[lazyboy97o]

Because the pattern is meeting the metric. The object is to make money and increase shareholder profit. We simply don't like the way that is being done. But seriously what incentive do they have to change? The parks are packed. The parks will probably continue to be robust for the next 10 years thanks to the current slew of upgrades.
So why would they change? serious question. I wouldn't vote them out.

The parks are being upgraded as part of a panicked last resort. There is no internal confidence, thus a small dip in attendance results in an all out panic. At some point, cut after cut, there will be nothing left to cut and no strategy on how to handle inevitable dips. People who know theme parks would also be more likely to offer a better return on investment. They would know that, despite being branded with a beloved movie franchise, it doesn't make sense to pay 2x-3x more for a roller coaster. Or to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for coasters in a box. Or more than $100 million for a glorified paint job.

 

[Oddysey]

Great Points! I think folks are reading what they want into an interview with a Business publication about the Parks Business and turning it into an indictment of Iger as a businessman.

He said what we wall wanted him to say...investing in the Parks is a good return on invested capital, that it pays out nearly 3x. We can disagree with the Movie IP component, but Iger knows that Capital is well spent in the parks and that is a major complaint we levied against him for a long time.

And I love that he mentioned Crowding as a concern. That speaks volumes.

It think it has been evident that crowding is a concern. If it wasn't then we never would have got the exclusive upcharge after hours event at the parks. When Disney finds a problem, their solution rarely enhances the value proposition to the consumer.

I would argue that Iger has been great for parks from a business perspective, and poor for consumer value/experience in relation to said parks. So, from the only perspective he should really care about (business), love him or hate him, he has been a success.

 

[SirLink]

????

lol I wish, unfortunately it doesn't. CEO's are know to play that childhood game where you go round and round the chairs until the music stops and they land some where.

I worked for a major chemical company, the latest ceo was given the nickname as the "break up" artist. lol He does not care about the company products nor does he pretend to. His job is to enhance the bottom line. liking has nothing to do with it.

Now I with a speciality chemicals brought by wall street hedge fund, do you honestly think they like the product? again, the CEO is brutally honest. they are giving the company 7 years to reach profit objects, they are sinking a boat load of money into the company but they don't care a whit about the product. In 7 years they will either, sell, merge or launch a IPO.

I really do think the further you move away from the original guy, in this case Walt, the love affair is over. Lol

The difference is between a leader and a manager, a CEO must be a leader one that inspires all beneath them and the board to go a long with their vision. What you have got is a manager - who wants to get by and improve the benefits to their shareholder.

Slightly different again with entertainment companies whose customers should be the most important thing: DisneyLife, Disney+, ESPN, Parks, Cinema.

They are the ones Iger needs to concentrate on - not some bozos on wall street who sank the global economy thanks to shady business practices.

Thankfully the next CEO will come outside of snake pit.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It think it has been evident that crowding is a concern. If it wasn't then we never would have got the exclusive upcharge after hours event at the parks. When Disney finds a problem, their solution rarely enhances the value proposition to the consumer.

I would argue that Iger has been great for parks from a business perspective, and poor for consumer value/experience in relation to said parks. So, from the only perspective he should really care about (business), love him or hate him, he has been a success.

The business of the parks is the customer experience.

 

[jt04]

His comments are kinda the key reason why he should go...

I wish someone would ask: “hey bob, what happens in 10 years when no one cares about Star Wars and frozen? And the budget isn’t gonna be there to rip it out and start from scratch?”

It’s obvious to me (just returned) that while the parks are being consumed in almost “go for broke” fashion...it is designed in an unsustainable path.

Frozen is an overlay. I think it gets an MK or DL attraction depending on reception of the next movie. OLC seems all in. Are you also second guessing them?

Star Wars will never not be popular. Potter should be more of a concern for Uni.

 

[jt04]

If they make the deadline...

The Orlando version (as seen from slinky) is “not close”

Check bioreconstruct. WDW is about 90 days or so behind DL.

 

[jt04]

They approve funds to be spent on the parks not individual minutia. The only things that get pitched are IP ones because Chapek is the gate keeper.

IP connected attractions go back to 1955. Before the board or Chapek.

 

[SirLink]

Well the last two Star Wars films: Episode VIII and Solo did a number on the brand - especially Solo with its pitiful merch sales. Same goes fro Toy Story 4 and Frozen 2: Electric Boogaloo.

But then again maybe if you visit the parks you could see what would happen

 

[SirLink]

IP connected attractions to back to 1955. Before the board or Chapek.

That has nothing to do with the fact of incorrect information you spread. I simply corrected you when it comes to the board the only projects being pitched are IP projects because Chapek is the one needed for approval. The board votes on whether to spend $2billion on the parks or not. Not if its none-IP or IP.

 

[jt04]

That has nothing to do with the fact of incorrect information you spread. I simply corrected you when it comes to the board the only projects being pitched are IP projects because Chapek is the one needed for approval. The board votes on whether to spend $2billion on the parks or not. Not if its none-IP or IP.

IP in the parks is not something Chapek invented. Not seeing the connection.

 

[Conno]

True, and the plus side for all of us is massive investment into truly immersive and fantastic worlds. You don't have to like Cars to LOVE Cars Land.... I've never seen Cars! The formula works and we get mega attractions like RSR and FOP as opposed to crap like Mouholland Madness...

Completely agree. No doubt in my mind that I (or anyone else) needs to be familiar with an IP to truly enjoy and love a physical land Disney creates. For example, I've never seen Avatar - but I love the land and it's truly breath taking when you first see it all lit up.

However, my argument was about bringing in first time visitors, or coaxing occasional visitors to book another stay. To them, an IP they identify with is more likely to do that.

 

[Conno]

Star Wars is the most successful IP of all time, so I’m not sure how much is proven by that cherry-picked example.

Star Wars Land, Toy Story Land, Pandora. If people identify with it, it will have more of an impact than a Generic Land.

Avatar is a successful IP but I think the staying power of Africa and Asia far exceeds Pandora’s.

Possibly. This wasn't the point I was trying to make though.

 

[twebber55]

Balance, even 70/30 balance is all I'm asking for. The only non-IP addition under Iger has been Rivers of Light.

and how is that working out for Disney?
i agree with you Tim but execution is what im after not IP or Non IP

 

[SirLink]

IP in the parks is not something Chapek invented. Not seeing the connection.

The only projects pitched to Chapek are non-theme park IP for rides, as that is something Chapek has demanded. Its down to him what budget is asked from the board for projects again not down to the Board as previously corrected you on.

 

[Oddysey]

The business of the parks is the customer experience.

The business of the parks is profit and increasing shareholder wealth. You can gain profit while devaluing consumer experience through upcharges events, aggressive price increases, and even something as minor as charging a premium for parking spots 100 feet closer to the entrance. Not long ago, I could stay at MK late and walk onto attractions in the last couple of hours without having to pay for a specially ticketed crowd control event. I could also park my vehicle near the front of the park just by arriving early and paying the standard fee (or using my AP). Now I park in the back no matter the time of arrival. Notably parking is a very small issue, but I am noting it to identify how even the littlest things can degrade consumer experience by charging more for what used to be free.

People are still visiting in droves while Disney is still searching for price equilibrium. Typically in any business, consumer experience lags behind performance of a company. Especially a company that has spent nearly a century building a brand based on providing a one of the highest quality (if not the highest) quality experiences in the hospitality field. In other words, it takes a while for a customer to realize they are being bamboozled. Specifically if the majority of your consumer base is ignorant by how the product is declining by degrees because there is limited interaction. This is especially true for DW where much of the consumer base consists of people who visit from other Countries and cannot visit often or domestic consumers who visit once every few years.

Iger has done a great job for the parks from a business perspective at least in the short term. The parks are gaining attendance annually while increasing prices at an unprecedented rate. The real question is whether or not the current business practices are sustainable.