Is attendance really down at WDW this or…

Dranth

Dranth

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
*bold by me*

Actually these metrics are used in the real world and are common in entertainment. A broadway show doesn’t announce they recouped the investment until they have paid off all investors for example.

Movies often are considered a loss if they don’t make back the money to produce the film plus all of the marketing, etc.
Click to expand...
Great, that may be true as I am not very familiar with how Broadway works but a single Broadway production is structurally more like a movie than an entire company in my mind. A movie has a defined life and a fixed budget to measure its success/failure against, just like a play.

With a publicly traded company we get quarterly results and yearly results for a reason, and those don't include total spend since inception vs. total profit except as an occasional aside to mark an occasion. Year over year matters, one quarter to the next matters, your plans moving forward matter. What you spent to get to this point is already baked in.

We even have plenty of examples of companies whose stock continued to increase even though they hadn't made a cent. For example, no one cared that Tesla took 17 years to finally have a profitable year and I don't believe they have covered all the losses for those 17 years in the few profitable ones they have had. Instead, it goes up and down based on what the market thinks will happen with earnings going forward, changes in demand, leadership, direction, new laws or regulations, not what they spent to reach today.
 
BrianLo

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Dranth said:
Great, that may be true as I am not very familiar with how Broadway works but a single Broadway production is structurally more like a movie than an entire company in my mind. A movie has a defined life and a fixed budget to measure its success/failure against, just like a play.

With a publicly traded company we get quarterly results and yearly results for a reason, and those don't include total spend since inception vs. total profit except as an occasional aside to mark an occasion. Year over year matters, one quarter to the next matters, your plans moving forward matter. What you spent to get to this point is already baked in.

We even have plenty of examples of companies whose stock continued to increase even though they hadn't made a cent. For example, no one cared that Tesla took 17 years to finally have a profitable year and I don't believe they have covered all the losses for those 17 years in the few profitable ones they have had. Instead, it goes up and down based on what the market thinks will happen with earnings going forward, changes in demand, leadership, direction, new laws or regulations, not what they spent to reach today.
Click to expand...

No need to go to Tesla. Netflix is therefore also not yet profitable by the groups measurements here. It still has a ways to go to clear its start up debt. Though of course no one actually measures it that way.
 
DisneyNittany

DisneyNittany

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
but Eisner did not have the wheeling and dealing that Iger had for Iger to acquire Star Wars, Pixar and Marvel.
Click to expand...

The more the years pass, the more the "wheeling and dealing" of those deals looks like a college kid running up their parents' credit card.

Iger was always rumored to be eyeing a political career. That makes so much sense. He'd be perfect as a politician. He lacks the ability to create anything, but is very good at adding to the debt.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
DisneyNittany said:
The more the years pass, the more the "wheeling and dealing" of those deals looks like a college kid running up their parents' credit card.

Iger was always rumored to be eyeing a political career. That makes so much sense. He'd be perfect as a politician. He lacks the ability to create anything, but is very good at adding to the debt.
Click to expand...
Adding to the debt is the selective lifestyle of many. This is what fuels our economy. If more were to change lifestyle and save, pay down debt instead of spend more and more , that would cause our economy to collapse.
 
TrainsOfDisney

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
but Eisner did not have the wheeling and dealing that Iger had for Iger to acquire Star Wars, Pixar and Marvel.
Click to expand...
Under Eisner, Disney acquired ABC, The Muppets, Power Rangers, and Fox Family - and of course the original partnership with Pixar, which was extremely successful - was during Eisner’s time as CEO - Pixar’s best years were during that time as well.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
Under Eisner, Disney acquired ABC, The Muppets, Power Rangers, and Fox Family - and of course the original partnership with Pixar, which was extremely successful - was during Eisner’s time as CEO - Pixar’s best years were during that time as well.
Click to expand...
Nothing like the bid dogs Iger acquired like Pixar, Star Wars and Marvel. What Eisner acquired which was an accomplishment fell on deaf ears when the shareholders spearheaded by Roy Disney and Stanley Gold forced out Eisner.
 
TrainsOfDisney

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
Nothing like the bid dogs Iger acquired like Pixar, Star Wars and Marvel. What Eisner acquired which was an accomplishment fell on deaf ears when the shareholders spearheaded by Roy Disney and Stanley Gold forced out Eisner.
Click to expand...
The partnerships with Pixar and Lucas began with Eisner though…. So I’m not sure what Iger did other than open up the piggy bank.
 
Grimley1968

Grimley1968

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
Began but could not complete. Iger knew how to wheel and deal to get Disney to own both which Eisner could not.
Click to expand...

I'm not clear on why owning things is necessarily better than profitable partnerships for each. Many people, especially me, will argue that Star Wars was a far better franchise when not owned by Disney, but partnering with them. Maybe more profit is being squeezed out of Star Wars under Iger (at the expense of the future of Star Wars), but that's not the same as pleasing the fan base. IMO, Disney's ownership of Star Wars has cheapened that franchise as well as Disney.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
Grimley1968 said:
I'm not clear on why owning things is necessarily better than profitable partnerships for each. Many people, especially me, will argue that Star Wars was a far better franchise when not owned by Disney, but partnering with them. Maybe more profit is being squeezed out of Star Wars under Iger (at the expense of the future of Star Wars), but that's not the same as pleasing the fan base. IMO, Disney's ownership of Star Wars has cheapened that franchise as well as Disney.
Click to expand...
We thoroughly enjoyed back in the day when MGM had those famous Star Wars Weekends every May. Only time I recall dedicated fans slept outside the main entrance ticket booths for 3 nights to get first dibs on autograph places in line for SW celebrities that weekend. Many thought what a great idea if Disney were to buy the StarWars franchise. It happened and made George Lucas into a billionaire.
 
Grimley1968

Grimley1968

Well-Known Member
Disstevefan1 said:
Iger's greatest talent is to use TWDC's money to overpay for stuff.
Click to expand...

TBH, I think the only WDW parks/resorts thing done well under Iger's tenure is the Skyliner, because it goes perfectly where it was put (and wouldn't necessarily work as well in other areas of WDW). It actually increases value for guests in a WDW vacation. Nothing else for the WDW parks in Iger's tenure, IMO, increased value. Under his tenure the WDW parks saw:

- loss of Fastpass into FP+, which was worse and then loss of even FP+ in favor of a paid LL/Genie+ system
- nickel and diming guests, from resort parking fees for a time to charging people for trying to use a line queue system that was formerly included to no longer providing DME, which still somehow failed to drop resort charges for guests
- an aversion to increasing ride capacity or number of rides to meet demand for them
- homogenization of most of WDW's table service dining to meet DDP requirements, instead of just leaving them out of the DDP altogether
- increased encroachment of DVC on beloved resorts, which cheapened both DVC and the original resorts

I understand this isn't from the POV of a corporate earnings report, but it is at least (IMO) a partial list of reasons why attendance has been lagging at WDW recently, and it all happened under Iger's overall leadership. If he does get into politics, I'm not sure he could be voted dogcatcher.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom