It seems like more competition in the Orlando theme-park space is bad for the consumer.

Smiley/OCD

Well-Known Member
Because $4 for a bottle of water in 105 heat index weather isn’t price gouging.
And the $10 I had to pay for children’s acetaminophen to help my sick daughter wasn’t price gouging.

I understand what you’re saying, but defending Disney via technicalities doesn’t exactly progress the discussion.
Sorry have to disagree with you there...any theme park, concert, sports event, etc. will cost you at least 4 bucks for a bottle of water. I just went to a Jets game this afternoon...I pay 1.59 for a 44 oz. super big gulp at 7-11..I paid 7.00 for the same cup at Met Life...now, you can make the argument that that's price gouging. Bottom line is, you're a captive audience. You can always drink out of the fountain for free. Now if Disney raised the price of a bottle of water to 10.00 when the heat index rises over 105, that would not only be price gouging, it would be unethical. As far as the OTC meds goes, if that actually happened to you, and you didn't travel with meds or you didn't want to travel off property 15 minutes to Walgreen's or CVS, that's 100% on you. I guess you were never a scout...you know, "Be prepared". It's really no different than paying .50 cents more for a gallon of gasoline on a parkway/turnpike rest stop than if you got off said road and purchased the fuel "off property". You're a captive audience. For me, driving a Suburban with a 30 gallon gas tank, I would get off and buy the gas off property and get right back on, even if I had to pay extra tolls. That just makes more sense to me.
 

Benjamin_Nicholas

Well-Known Member
“Giving it away”?! Did you go to school for hyperbole?
An enterprise that PROFITS over 4 BILLION dollars in a single year is hardly close to “giving it away.”

And clearly I’m only considering price in my “schpiel” because it’s the single greatest factor for the wide majority of park visitors.

You still haven't said anything to make your argument plausible.

You really sound like a bitter family of eight who can no longer afford the Disney of the 1990s
 

MagicRat

Well-Known Member
You still haven't said anything to make your argument plausible.

You really sound like a bitter family of eight who can no longer afford the Disney of the 1990s

I completely agree. Everything goes up, a lift ticket to Breckenridge is now $109 and then they got you for the skis. I remember getting lift tickets half that price twenty years ago. Springsteen tickets were $70 for any seat in the building in 1999. First come first serve. He is now north of $150 and that’s cheap for a rock show. This is all superfluous entertainment and they can charge for what the market will allow. Don’t go if you think it’s too high.
 

macefamily

Well-Known Member
The parks serve a particular consumer niche. Not everyone enjoys the amusement park experience. I have relatives with kids who have gone to Disney once and never went back; not for them. However, there are some of us who love the experience. I live in Pennsylvania, and I have annual passes for both Universal and Disney. We also have just bought into the Disney Vacation Club. Right now we can afford to enjoy the parks. If the day comes when prices are too much for us, so be it. I'll stick to the PA state parks or Knoebel's Amusement Park.
 

jloucks

Well-Known Member
Competition is always supposed to benefit the consumer by keeping companies in check but it seems like in the Orlando theme park space, this notion is non-existent. If either Disney or Universal were to magically drop off the map, I can't foresee the surviving company having much more room to actually gouge the customer any further; both companies are already on the verge of pricing-out consumers. Which begs the question, how exactly does the consumer benefit from this competition?!

Even Sea World, who is a step-sibling, has joined the fray with single day ticket prices that are almost in line with both Disney and Universal. None of these parks, not even Sea World, attempts to cannibalize the customer-base of the other. These parks are so incredibly brash, they price their tickets with an all-or-nothing approach; pay an outrageous price for a few days, or pay a little more on top of that for a full week (or more).

Given Universal's Epic Universe plans, I would argue that such an inclusion into the Orlando theme park arena will actually hurt the overall consumer as Universal will most certainly increase prices on the new park which will lead Disney to justify an increase in their prices as well.

Thoughts?

I've said it before, but worth saying it again, demand dictates price in luxury goods like Orlando vacations. I get what you are saying tho, Supply (competition) should affect Demand. And, it does. The thing is, with Orlando we are seeing global demand still high enough that the prices on, what, 7 parks, are out of the cheap and affordable range for many people. Most people, if you go global. Only the financial elite on this planet get to go to WDW. The top 10%? 5%? But 5% of 7 billion is still a lot of people. And there is the demand base, and it is huge.

The thing about adding more gates, is that the more you build, the more that come. You can never really have enough gates. You could have 20, and they would fill up just as full as 5. The economic term everyone needs to google and think about is Induced Demand. Induced demand trumps competition as far as consumer benefit is concerned. You build it, they will come.

I saw an article posted here recently linking directly from Disney talking about low attendance figures caused by perceived high attendance. This is proof of what I said before as far as crowd levels having a significant affect of Demand. People generally, do not like large crowds and long lines. You could build 100 gates and they will all fill up, to the point of overcrowding, and then will level off at the moderately uncomfortable level. Only when folks have no choice as to when they go (kids in school mainly) do they brave undesirable conditions at the parks.
 

ppete1975

Well-Known Member
You clearly didn't go to business school.

They are nowhere near pricing out the consumer. Just look at attendance figures. Parks are doing fine, even if the blogosphere would like to think otherwise. They claim the sky is falling on a weekly basis.

Bottom line... Competition benefits the consumer if it first benefits the company. Look at the theme parks like the airline industry and you'll have an easier time swallowing the price hikes.

You're only considering ticket prices in your schpiel. What you're not saying is the investment that all parks are making and how much that costs. BILLIONS. That's not a gift to us. That needs to be returned (and then some).

More bottom line, not everything in life is affordable (especially for a family). Disney and Uni aren't in the business of just giving it away and frankly, if it's too expensive, you always have other options. Like the airline industry, there will always be someone there to buy that available coach or first class seat at full-fare.
I also don't think Disney is meant to be a bi annual trip or every year. It should be a every 4-5 year experience.. unless you are local and that's a different story. Most people I see complain, say they cant go every year like they used to or 2-4 times a year. It really shouldn't be that. Explore the world, the magic will be stronger if you take a break.
 

jloucks

Well-Known Member
I also don't think Disney is meant to be a bi annual trip or every year. It should be a every 4-5 year experience.. unless you are local and that's a different story. Most people I see complain, say they cant go every year like they used to or 2-4 times a year. It really shouldn't be that. Explore the world, the magic will be stronger if you take a break.
I agree with your first statement. Based on average income in this country, it would be annual at best. More like every 2-3 years. No way it could be twice a year.

To be fair, it is all about priorities. I suppose at average income, you could buy a cheap house, cheap car, and not pay for kids college, and afford to go 2-3 times a year.
 

Shouldigo12

Well-Known Member
I also don't think Disney is meant to be a bi annual trip or every year. It should be a every 4-5 year experience.. unless you are local and that's a different story. Most people I see complain, say they cant go every year like they used to or 2-4 times a year. It really shouldn't be that. Explore the world, the magic will be stronger if you take a break.
Agreed. Everyone is different, so if you're really happy going multiple times a year than you do you. But I'm very much a "variety is the spice of life" person. If I went multiple times a year (and honestly probably even just once a year), I would be bored to tears of the place.
 

Benjamin_Nicholas

Well-Known Member
I also don't think Disney is meant to be a bi annual trip or every year. It should be a every 4-5 year experience.. unless you are local and that's a different story. Most people I see complain, say they cant go every year like they used to or 2-4 times a year. It really shouldn't be that. Explore the world, the magic will be stronger if you take a break.

This is a sage point. People now return to Disney more frequently than in the past.

I also agree that taking a break and seeing the ACTUAL world is always a good thing :)
 

ppete1975

Well-Known Member
I agree with your first statement. Based on average income in this country, it would be annual at best. More like every 2-3 years. No way it could be twice a year.

To be fair, it is all about priorities. I suppose at average income, you could buy a cheap house, cheap car, and not pay for kids college, and afford to go 2-3 times a year.
or use your credit cards....
Consumer debt having more of a penaltyor if credit cards ever disappeared would do more harm to theme parks and travel than any thing else lol
 

MrMcDuck

Well-Known Member
Yep. Unfortunately, a good number of people overextend themselves to cover the cost of these trips and for some it eventually all comes crashing down. Not that it's Disney's job to care about that.
 

OG Runner

Well-Known Member
Competition is always supposed to benefit the consumer by keeping companies in check but it seems like in the Orlando theme park space, this notion is non-existent. If either Disney or Universal were to magically drop off the map, I can't foresee the surviving company having much more room to actually gouge the customer any further; both companies are already on the verge of pricing-out consumers. Which begs the question, how exactly does the consumer benefit from this competition?!

Even Sea World, who is a step-sibling, has joined the fray with single day ticket prices that are almost in line with both Disney and Universal. None of these parks, not even Sea World, attempts to cannibalize the customer-base of the other. These parks are so incredibly brash, they price their tickets with an all-or-nothing approach; pay an outrageous price for a few days, or pay a little more on top of that for a full week (or more).

Given Universal's Epic Universe plans, I would argue that such an inclusion into the Orlando theme park arena will actually hurt the overall consumer as Universal will most certainly increase prices on the new park which will lead Disney to justify an increase in their prices as well.

Thoughts?

I agree with your assessment of the situation and I believe we have even more additional evidence. Disney had never charged a fee
for resort guests to park their vehicles at the resorts. Universal and many of the hotels in the area did. Disney saw that as an opportunity
and took it. How many times on these discussion boards do you read "but They are doing it"? There is competition, based on what is
offered in the parks, but it is clear that there is competition to see which park can get the most money for what they offer.
 

Walt Disney1955

Well-Known Member
Disney isn't different than, say, the sporting world. I wish I could go to any NFL game that I want to but I can't. Try going to New England to see the Patriots. Or go to Boston at Fenway to watch the Yankees come to town. I remember reading a book and it was from 2003 and it was a sports book and in that book the writer was complaining that 10 years ago (which would have been 1993) a Super Bowl ticket didn't cost $400 like it does today. I almost fell off my chair. In 2019 I think people would murder each other if there was a chance at going to the Super Bowl for just $400. To me, that's part of my bucket list, seeing a Super Bowl. But how? You'd be lucky if you can get a seat for $3000 these days. So I just watch it on TV.

What can you do? Disney is no different. Do they gauge the customer? Yeah, they do. It has gone up higher than it should have in my opinion. But, in North America we have the luxury of going, or not going if we can't afford it. I think when Disneyland opened the cost was $1. Take inflation into account and I believe you had to pay for E-ticket rides too, it still is a lot cheaper than today. It's too bad, but that's how it is.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
The "Theme Park" competition is overstated. Sure Disney and Uni (and to a lesser extent Sea World) do have a sort of competition/one upmanship thing going on. And of course, they are always trying to gain more of the "Theme Park" market, and the revenue associated with it. And to that extent they compete.

Disney and Universal's main competitors are other forms of vacations. They compete against the land based destinations (Vegas, Europe, Hawaii, The Caribbean etc) and cruises. That is their true competition. In order for Disney and/or Universal to go after the discretionary spending of the "theme park" visitor, they first must get that prospective visitor to make the decision to go to a theme park in the first place vs spending a week in Spain or Italy.

Regardless if there were only 1 theme park or 16 of them, if they can't present value and experience for the consumer to visit a theme park vs other forms of vacation options.......there are your checks and balances.
Theme park “competition” doesn’t exist in Orlando...it’s always been an ebb and flow market governed by the perception of economic boom or bust.

When it booms...they collude and push the boundaries of upper price points. When it busts, they slash costs and cry poverty and MAYBE do temporary discounts.

That is modern Orlando. It won’t change because they have no reason to. The one caveat is if
Universal does the planned buildout and becomes a weeklong destination...that’s a game changer - potentially
 

MrMcDuck

Well-Known Member
Try going to New England to see the Patriots. Or go to Boston at Fenway to watch the Yankees come to town.

Your general point about prices is noted, but just FYI, there is a significant difference between NFL and MLB pricing due to several factors (general popularity, huge difference in number of games in a season, etc.). A crappy seat at a Patriots game could cost three hundred dollars or more, but a crappy seat at a Red Sox game will usually run you 20 to 30 bucks.
 

Walt Disney1955

Well-Known Member
Your general point about prices is noted, but just FYI, there is a significant difference between NFL and MLB pricing due to several factors (general popularity, huge difference in number of games in a season, etc.). A crappy seat at a Patriots game could cost three hundred dollars or more, but a crappy seat at a Red Sox game will usually run you 20 to 30 bucks.

I was at a Dodgers vs. Red Sox game at Fenway in July. It was about as cheap of a seat as possible and it still was $57. Maybe the prices were higher when they were still in the playoff hunt?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom