Is Disney complacent , and back on its heels

[Master Yoda]

Is Disney complacent? Yes
Is Disney back on its heels? No

To the OP, in what way has Disney rushed anything in response to anything Universal has done? The most common complaint about Disney's pace of development is that it's way too slow, not that it's rushed in any way.

I think the last thing WDW really ever rushed to production was DHS and look what we got....one of the worst park layouts in theme park history.

 

[POLY LOVER]

I guess you have not been on main street and seen the lines waiting to get into the coffee shop. Disney has been using sponsorship starting on day one. Go back and look at the food service on the opening of Disneyland.

its not a sponsorship it is a change over from a bakery to a coffee store, nothing is baked there now.

 

[POLY LOVER]

Is Disney complacent? Yes
Is Disney back on its heels? No

To the OP, in what way has Disney rushed anything in response to anything Universal has done? The most common complaint about Disney's pace of development is that it's way too slow, not that it's rushed in any way.

the MK expansion was done quick and the little mermaid ride has had to be fixed shortly after opening, I see flaws in the facade that I had to point out to them. There was a spot that the 2x4 showed behind the stone facade. The mine ride is nice but no wow factor. This would have never happened in the past.

I expect technology/Quality assurance and leading edge and I see so so now. I used to marvel at the cleanliness and how fast things got fixed, it seemed over night. I remember being there multiple days and seeing something that needed paint the next day you would go back and it was painted. My wife and I said thats Disney for you.

Compacency is the greatest danger to a successful busness. One day you wake up and say what happened?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

the MK expansion was done quick and the little mermaid ride has had to be fixed shortly after opening, I see flaws in the facade that I had to point out to them. There was a spot that the 2x4 showed behind the stone facade. The mine ride is nice but no wow factor. This would have never happened in the past.

I expect technolgy/Quality assurance and leading edge and I see so so now.

MK expansion was not quick, nor did it have anything to do with Universal Studios.

 

[POLY LOVER]

I guess you have not been on main street and seen the lines waiting to get into the coffee shop. Disney has been using sponsorship starting on day one. Go back and look at the food service on the opening of Disneyland.

The reason for the lines is not the number of customers its the fact that it takes longer to create their complex drinks than pouring a cup of coffee. This has been a Starbucks issue for along time. Its what holds Starbucks back from more revenue. So don't get impressed by the ines.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The reason for the lines is not the number of customers its the fact that it takes longer to create their complex drinks than pouring a cup of coffee. This has been a Starbucks issue for along time. Its what holds Starbucks back from more revenue. So don't get impressed by the ines.

The "complex" drinks are three times the price of a cup of coffee. Long lines are only a detriment to revenue if people aren't willing to wait in them. People are.

 

[rkleinlein]

I'd like your detailed analysis on this.

Disney's attendance domination is even more impressive when one considers fact Disney has literally allowed 3/4 parks to nearly die and still grew attendance and guest spend at all 4 parks.

.

This sentence says it all. Disney World, unlike both Disney parks in Anaheim and both Universal Parks in Orlando, continues to draw crowds, and more importantly rake in the money, even though it coasts along with mediocrity or stagnates. Which, of course, begets more mediocrity and stagnation.

Disney's California Adventure was resoundingly (and rightly) rejected as not up to Disney standards when it opened. It flopped. Nobody came. Then they fixed it, almost overnight. Universal numbers were down, and they fixed it, almost overnight. As long as Disney World numbers are up, there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever to fix it's many problems and return it to its former glory.

The much ballyhooed recent improvements (the new Fantasyland being the most prominent) are utterly lackluster but nobody seems to care. Not the people running the place, and not the people flocking in droves to it. Nobody cares because it does not matter. For some reason, nothing flops at Disney World. The loyalty and fanaticism, expressed by many people who write in these forums, despite the declining quality of WDW is astounding.

Yes Disney's attendance domination is impressive but only in same way that Wal-Mart's domination of retail and McDonald's domination of fast food are impressive. If you talk about quality of product it's quite another story. And like Wal-Mart, McDonalds, and Microsoft, domination does not last when quality remains poor and somebody else starts to beat you at your own game.

 

[WondersOfLife]

I'd like your detailed analysis on this.

Since this is WDW forum, let's stick to Orlando parks.

Since Disney grew every Orlando park, this implies the pie is getting larger.

I realize Disney has 4 parks in Orlando and Universal has 2, but Disney still grew more total guests than Universal. I'd argue Disney parks are more at "capacity" than Universal's parks. Growth rates at Disney parks slow down by the law of large numbers and the fact Disney has failed to expand adequately (I'll get to this later). Let's look at raw attendance numbers

IOA: Flat
Universal Studios in Orlando: +1,200,000 (very nice gain)

MK: 4% Growth +750,000 guests
EPCOT: 2% Growth +225,000 guests
HS: 2% Growth +204,000 guests
AK: 2% Growth +202,000 guests

Total WDW Theme park guests added: +1,375,000*
*Numbers rounded

WDW still added about 175,000 more total guests. Yes, more parks, but that's a Disney advantage. If you consider their market position as the decided leader, the fact they're even competing in total guests added speaks to their utter market dominance, particularly in Orlando.

You have to understand, growth rates are much more difficult with larger numbers and the bottom line is always butts in the park, which has Disney still winning in Orlando. Let me give you an example about growth rates. If I have a stock portfolio worth $100,000 and yours is worth $1,000,000, I might want to talk % gains. What really matters in the end? Dollars. I can boast all day about a 30% gain in my portfolio, but mine is still only worth $130,000. If you make a solid 15%, yours would be worth $1,150,000. You made $150,000 and I made $30,000. Who is winning? I had twice the growth rate, but you made 5 times more money.

To say Universal took a percentage away from Disney is quite misleading. Universal had a nice gain on a larger pie with better growth rate, but I just showed you Disney actually hurt Universal more than Universal hurt Disney in Orlando by adding more total guests. Perhaps Disney should have taken even more of the "new" travelers piece of the pie, but I don't think they're worried in Orlando yet. We can talk percentages, growth rates, and other second place math all you want, but Disney is still adding more total guests to its parks in Orlando despite being at capacity.

Disney's attendance domination is even more impressive when one considers fact Disney has literally allowed 3/4 parks to nearly die and still grew attendance and guest spend at all 4 parks.

Frankly, I was shocked Disney added more guests. I thought AK, EPCOT, and HS would NO WAY have any growth at all. The state of those parks should be negative growth, but Disney's dominance is too strong.

Once Disney world adds more themed lands and expands further, you will see attendance growth accelerate and the gap will widen even more. These numbers certainly don't make Disney feel rushed to expand...which we can all plainly see. They are in no hurry and they don't need to be.

I was doing some more research. According to Orlando Sentinel and other sources, while Disney's attendance did grow, Universal took some percentage out in more detail. 72.6 million visited Orlando's 3 biggest theme park destinations (Disney, uni and sea world). This is a 6% increase since 2013 which explains why Disney's attendance went up. However... Of the 72.6 million people who visited Orlando, 70.9% of visitors went to Disney World. That's a drop of 73.3% from 2013, while Universal's market share went from 19.3% to 22.6%.

While attendance and park rankings and such are fine and all for Disney, it's definitely clear that Universal is starting to make an impact of the overall majority of people attending the theme parks. They took a percentage of the overall Orlando tourist's destination decision by a few percent and I believe that that percentage will keep going up unless Disney decides to do a full scale project on a series just as popular as Harry Potter or Nintendo.

That's just how I am viewing it. You don't have to agree with me.

-http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/tea-attendance-report-now-due-june-3rd.900106/page-10#post-6726962

 

[Chef Mickey]

Yes Disney's attendance domination is impressive but only in same way that Wal-Mart's domination of retail and McDonald's domination of fast food are impressive. If you talk about quality of product it's quite another story. And like Wal-Mart, McDonalds, and Microsoft, domination does not last when quality remains poor and somebody else starts to beat you at your own game.

I agree with everything you said and even liked your post.

However, Walmart, McD, and Microsoft are still 3 impressive companies. I don't like McD food, but their dominance isn't by accident. These companies do what they do better than anyone. I don't like any fast food, so it's not going to appeal to me, but they do it well.

Walmart's logistics, supply chain, and dominance in retail is incredible. They do serve quite a good purpose and although people complain, those same people are shopping there...lol.

Microsoft makes great software. Their Office suite is second to NONE...I use it every day and the things it can do are incredible. Windows is incredible.

I look at Disney the same way. It could always be better, but we can't hate on companies that have achieved greatness. They do so because no one else could do better.

Disney has its shortcoming and the attendance numbers won't make them fix what isn't broken (or even what is) but as you said, if we have MAJOR issues like Cali Adventure, it will be fixed overnight. Consumers will punish Disney if they misstep in a meaningful way. I hate the fact they've let 3/4 parks nearly die and even MK needs a lot, but there is so much I love that it outweighs the shortcomings. I'm sure others feel the same way (clearly).

 

[Chef Mickey]

-http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/tea-attendance-report-now-due-june-3rd.900106/page-10#post-6726962

You're still playing the loser's game of percentages and you just glossed over my very simple, but factual post. I just proved to you Disney in Orlando added more overall guests, but you're still quoting percentages.

I'd argue Disney can't even accommodate more guests. The parks are already over capacity. Disney is NOT concerned with these percentages.

Think about the numbers. 70% versus like 20%!! LOL!! I could argue these percentages are more damning for Universal because the total guest denominator is growing so much and Disney's capacity isn't. Studies such as these always have a margin of error too.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Yes Disney's attendance domination is impressive but only in same way that Wal-Mart's domination of retail and McDonald's domination of fast food are impressive.

That has nothing to do with it. Walmart and McDonald's compete on price. Disney is a premium product that charges a premium price and they still kick the pants off of everyone. Your argument would be valid if they were domination in volume on the backs of $20 tickets and $79 hotel rooms, but they're doing it with $100 tickets and $279 hotel rooms.

 

[DVCOwner]

its not a sponsorship it is a change over from a bakery to a coffee store, nothing is baked there now.

But I got pastries to go with my hot chocolates there the last time I was in the park. I the case of Starbucks, I think Disney is meeting a demand of the average quest coming to the park and I do not drink coffee of any kind). You may not like it but the hundreds of people that go though the line everyday want it.

How if you want to tell me that Disney has allowed the park attendance to grow so large that the food serve offered can not keep up with demand, I will agree 100%.

 

[jloucks]

Again.. Universal still took a percentage away from Disney on attendance.

...and for that we should all be very thankful. Anything that increases amusement park supply is a good thing for the consumer.

Uni is smart to be somewhat parasitic off WDW. WDW has evolved to be a global destination. When people travel far to go to a destination they typically stay longer. ...long enough to visit two or three different amusement parks/attractions. When I was at Uni last month there were tons of foreigners wearing mouse ears; obviously visiting both destination while in Orlando.

But.... for the percent that Uni takes from WDW, you do have to consider the percent they give back by just adding to the awesome draw that is Orlando. ...in other words, how many people from overseas would come to WDW for 14 days if Uni didn't exist. I have no idea what those numbers are, but they must factor into the business model someplace.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Again.. Universal still took a percentage away from Disney on attendance.

How much?

 

[Chef Mickey]

...and for that we should all be very thankful. Anything that increases amusement park supply is a good thing for the consumer.

Uni is smart to be somewhat parasitic off WDW. WDW has evolved to be a global destination. When people travel far to go to a destination they typically stay longer. ...long enough to visit two or three different amusement parks/attractions. When I was at Uni last month there were tons of foreigners wearing mouse ears; obviously visiting both destination while in Orlando.

But.... for the percent that Uni takes from WDW, you do have to consider the percent they give back by just adding to the awesome draw that is Orlando. ...in other words, how many people from overseas would come to WDW for 14 days if Uni didn't exist. I have no idea what those numbers are, but they must factor into the business model someplace.

To your point, how many people would come to Uni from overseas if Disney didn't exist?

Uni grows at least in part because Disney grows and because of Disney's dominance. 12 day trip, 8 at Disney and 4 at Universal probably happens pretty frequently for Overseas visitors.

Great point.

 

[jloucks]

To your point, how many people would come to Uni from overseas if Disney didn't exist?

Exactly! I think those numbers are way more intertwined than you might think.

Uni is sort of like another Disney park (blasphemy!) from an Orlando as a destination perspective.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Exactly! I think those numbers are way more intertwined than you might think.

Uni is sort of like another Disney park (blasphemy!) from an Orlando as a destination perspective.

Excellent point. I've even heard tons of anecdotal conversation of people saying "Well, we might as well hit Universal for a day or two while we are here."

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Again.. Universal still took a percentage away from Disney on attendance.

That's misleading and is just a function of how percentages work.

Example: Assume Disney has 3,000 guests and Universal has 1,000 guests. Disney has 75% of the market (3,000 of a total 4,000).

Now, assume Disney adds 400 guests and Universal adds 300 guests. Disney grew by 13% and Universal grew by 30%. Disney's market share falls to 72% (3,400 of a total 4,700). You think Disney cares about that? Universal grew by a larger percentage and appears to have "taken" market share from Disney, but it's all an illusion created by the fact that Universal's growth is off a much smaller base. Disney still added more people (i.e. more dollars). Universal didn't "take" anything.

Exactly! I think those numbers are way more intertwined than you might think.

Uni is sort of like another Disney park (blasphemy!) from an Orlando as a destination perspective.

Excellent point. I've even heard tons of anecdotal conversation of people saying "Well, we might as well hit Universal for a day or two while we are here."

I agree in general, but it's no longer as much the case as it was pre-Potter. Universal's "old" model was to try and steal a day or two from a family's week-long (or international family's two-week-long) WDW vacation and turn it into an "Orlando" vacation. With Potter, there are definitely folks going down to Universal strictly for Universal's sake. But the argument on the other side of the spectrum (that Universal is "taking" guests from Disney) is absolutely false.

 

[Master Yoda]

Excellent point. I've even heard tons of anecdotal conversation of people saying "Well, we might as well hit Universal for a day or two while we are here."

It has been that way for a while, Potter just turned the volume up on that quite a bit as it was the first big thing to come to that park in quite some time.

 

[jloucks]

But the argument on the other side of the spectrum (that Universal is "taking" guests from Disney) is absolutely false.

So Uni is not competition for WDW and more of complimentary good/service? I think true for foreign visitors, but for short local visits it is harder for me to decide. If you live an hour away, you don't have any motivation to patronize both destinations. ...you pick one.