Main Street U.S.A. hub redevelopment at the Magic Kingdom

[Martiyoman]

How much money tho? Exactly how much of a profit margin do they need Do they need to be cutthroat with everything and squeeze every dollar? Does that behavior alienate your core audience? How much of those revenues should be used as reinvestments? How should you grow your business?

So. Yes. Disney is a business. By all means, feel free to elaborate in essay form to some of those questions posed above.

I don't know, you tell me, how much is too much? I am not yet alienated, nor is it for me to say what an appropriate profit margin is.
I don't know about anybody else, but when I argue "Disney is a business," what I am referring to is that in actuality, they don't owe me anything. I can look at what they have and what they're doing, and compare it to their competitors and my other options, and decide at that point whether I want to give them my money, spending habits be damned. It's not that they can't spend because they have to save because they're a business, but that they get to make the choices that us commonfolk don't have the ability to, and apart from your beloved complaining that Cesar and ford and whoever else prop up as viable options for change, there's nothing we can do about it. Disney isn't losing anything by being frugal. Attendance is rising, people are buying the raised ticket prices, and Walt is dead. What motivation do they have to spend if they won't get anything back from it? I build things for my nieces and nephews and get nothing in return but their joy, but something tells me iger isn't scanning to magic kingdom security cameras to see how joyous we are abut the new hub.

 

[betty rose]

I don't know, you tell me, how much is too much? I am not yet alienated, nor is it for me to say what an appropriate profit margin is.
I don't know about anybody else, but when I argue "Disney is a business," what I am referring to is that in actuality, they don't owe me anything. I can look at what they have and what they're doing, and compare it to their competitors and my other options, and decide at that point whether I want to give them my money, spending habits be damned. It's not that they can't spend because they have to save because they're a business, but that they get to make the choices that us commonfolk don't have the ability to, and apart from your beloved complaining that Cesar and ford and whoever else prop up as viable options for change, there's nothing we can do about it. Disney isn't losing anything by being frugal. Attendance is rising, people are buying the raised ticket prices, and Walt is dead. What motivation do they have to spend if they won't get anything back from it? I build things for my nieces and nephews and get nothing in return but their joy, but something tells me iger isn't scanning to magic kingdom security cameras to see how joyous we are abut the new hub.

As an older person going to Disney, I'm looking for a relatively safe place to vacation, and Disney provides that. I love the warm weather (from Colorado), we have to pretend we have summer And Florida provides that. But, we: my husband and I are retired, and it's getting harder to find the dollars to enjoy Disney. I want to go as long as we can, but we are having to find every penny to stay in the Magic.

 

[psuchad]

How much money tho? Exactly how much of a profit margin do they need Do they need to be cutthroat with everything and squeeze every dollar? Does that behavior alienate your core audience? How much of those revenues should be used as reinvestments? How should you grow your business?

So. Yes. Disney is a business. By all means, feel free to elaborate in essay form to some of those questions posed above.

How much is too much? Why is that any of your business? In 2014 Disney averaged about 16% profit margin (based on very quick research). That means that 84% of the money they bring in, goes out in salaries, operating costs, taxes, and reinvestment. That remaining 16% is then available to later reinvest in the company by expanding and making purchases like the Pixar and Marvel deals.

Do I feel that this behavior alienates their core audience? No. Disney knows their audience better than anyone. Every company must be attentive to that and avoid the bite the hand that feeds you scenario. Nobody is making you spend money at Disney. Nobody is forcing you to go to the parks and buy over priced food and trinkets. That is the choice of the consumer. If costs go beyond what the consumer will bear, sales will suffer and profits will diminish. Simple supply and demand.

How much of those revenues should be used as reinvestment? Technically the full 16% profit could go towards reinvestment. However, if a company constantly runs at full tilt and burns through every dollar earned without saving for future reinvestment or market downturns, when the inevitable happens, that company will be hurting.

How should you grow your business? I would take that 16% and bank it for the future. Save the money for acquisitions such as Pixar, Marvel, The Lord of the Rings rights, Avatar, etc. Bank it for future major expansions such as Hollywood Studios, but also keep in mind the need to have a safety net for when things don't go as expected.

I don't think anyone can argue that Disney has failed to make reinvestments in their parks. Sure you can argue that your favorite ride or area of the park isn't getting the attention you expect. Keep in mind that many investment decisions are made long before the work is done. A highway close to where I live was recently completely rebuilt. Some questioned why it was designed the way it was and why the work was completed in sections at all. I spoke to the engineer that designed the rehab 15 years ago. All that work was planned out and budgeted 15 years prior by estimated what would need to be done. Planning takes time and projects do not happen overnight. When they are planned overnight, the results can be troublesome. Look at what Disney is now attempting to fix with the rushed production of MGM Studios.

 

[PhotoDave219]

How much is too much? Why is that any of your business? In 2014 Disney averaged about 16% profit margin (based on very quick research). That means that 84% of the money they bring in, goes out in salaries, operating costs, taxes, and reinvestment. That remaining 16% is then available to later reinvest in the company by expanding and making purchases like the Pixar and Marvel deals.

Do I feel that this behavior alienates their core audience? No. Disney knows their audience better than anyone. Every company must be attentive to that and avoid the bite the hand that feeds you scenario. Nobody is making you spend money at Disney. Nobody is forcing you to go to the parks and buy over priced food and trinkets. That is the choice of the consumer. If costs go beyond what the consumer will bear, sales will suffer and profits will diminish. Simple supply and demand.

How much of those revenues should be used as reinvestment? Technically the full 16% profit could go towards reinvestment. However, if a company constantly runs at full tilt and burns through every dollar earned without saving for future reinvestment or market downturns, when the inevitable happens, that company will be hurting.

How should you grow your business? I would take that 16% and bank it for the future. Save the money for acquisitions such as Pixar, Marvel, The Lord of the Rings rights, Avatar, etc. Bank it for future major expansions such as Hollywood Studios, but also keep in mind the need to have a safety net for when things don't go as expected.

I don't think anyone can argue that Disney has failed to make reinvestments in their parks. Sure you can argue that your favorite ride or area of the park isn't getting the attention you expect. Keep in mind that many investment decisions are made long before the work is done. A highway close to where I live was recently completely rebuilt. Some questioned why it was designed the way it was and why the work was completed in sections at all. I spoke to the engineer that designed the rehab 15 years ago. All that work was planned out and budgeted 15 years prior by estimated what would need to be done. Planning takes time and projects do not happen overnight. When they are planned overnight, the results can be troublesome. Look at what Disney is now attempting to fix with the rushed production of MGM Studios.

How is it my business? I'm a shareholder. That makes it my business.

 

[Martiyoman]

How is it my business? I'm a shareholder. That makes it my business.

Then why are you complaining? It does nothing but grow. And in the same sense, you're not under any kind of contract, and entitled to sell as you please. In layman's terms, if I screw up, my boss fires me. You don't get to fire bob. So yeah, it's your business, but c'mon, you're not THAT important.

 

[Cesar R M]

I don't know, you tell me, how much is too much? I am not yet alienated, nor is it for me to say what an appropriate profit margin is.
I don't know about anybody else, but when I argue "Disney is a business," what I am referring to is that in actuality, they don't owe me anything. I can look at what they have and what they're doing, and compare it to their competitors and my other options, and decide at that point whether I want to give them my money, spending habits be damned. It's not that they can't spend because they have to save because they're a business, but that they get to make the choices that us commonfolk don't have the ability to, and apart from your beloved complaining that Cesar and ford and whoever else prop up as viable options for change, there's nothing we can do about it. Disney isn't losing anything by being frugal. Attendance is rising, people are buying the raised ticket prices, and Walt is dead. What motivation do they have to spend if they won't get anything back from it? I build things for my nieces and nephews and get nothing in return but their joy, but something tells me iger isn't scanning to magic kingdom security cameras to see how joyous we are abut the new hub.

conformism at its finest...

also "beloved"? talk about belittling.

How is it my business? I'm a shareholder. That makes it my business.

dont you love when they always have a fast snipping answer?

"I am a shareholder." and they spit "You're not important".

 

[Martiyoman]

conformism at its finest...
View attachment 88404




also "beloved"? talk about belittling.

I'm confused, and not at all sure what you mean by calling me a confirmist.

And, what goes around comes around, friend.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Then why are you complaining? It does nothing but grow. And in the same sense, you're not under any kind of contract, and entitled to sell as you please. In layman's terms, if I screw up, my boss fires me. You don't get to fire bob. So yeah, it's your business, but c'mon, you're not THAT important.

What, if any, is your point?

 

[mergatroid]

From the footage I've seen it looks very, very good.

 

[betty rose]

From the footage I've seen it looks very, very good.

It is really nice, with the flowers and such. But, much smaller than I was expecting....I see why there is no room for bench's. Besides, without shade it would be hotter than Hades.

 

[NearTheEars]

The new outer ring and paths will and as already has done wonders for traffic flow. So no, it will be much less likely to be "trapped" the barren MK Hub desert.

A parklike hub would be beautiful no doubt. But there is no way it fits in modern MK. It would be nightmare.

BUT many say they miss how the mature trees provided better perspective fir Main Street and the castle. So would it have been possible to keep some large trees right at the end of MSUSA to keep that view intact, then open up into an open, functional hub? I'd dig that.

 

[mergatroid]

It is really nice, with the flowers and such. But, much smaller than I was expecting....I see why there is no room for bench's. Besides, without shade it would be hotter than Hades.

Burnt my bottom more than once on metal garden furniture in Florida

 

[Goofyernmost]

How is it my business? I'm a shareholder. That makes it my business.

Just a dose of reality though Dave. As a shareholder if the value of your shares drop, you will be one upset camper. Unless, of course, you only own shares of Disney as a personal hidden Mickey. Then you don't care about the value. That isn't the feeling of the majority of shareholders. To them it sure the hell is a business and it sure as hell had better show a healthy profit.

Since there is no guarantee that in today's world the way things were done in the past would work, I would think that the higher the profit the better it is for you. If you could prove that massive additional investment would result in a comparable increase in profit, then fine, we can all play make believe and think that Disney is different then any other current business. We can all imagine that Disney is a fantasy organization that happens to make money, but, that is not, should not be their objective.

Walt's success was somewhat because he created something that was an original idea. That is no longer the case. It is now the same as McDonald's vs. Burger King vs. Wendy's vs. Taco Bell vs. Kentucky Fried Chicken vs. etc. There is also another economic "law" that everyone forgets and that is the law of diminishing returns. In WDW, at least, it seems that they are skirting pretty close to that point. They could invest more, but, it would have a much more difficult time recapturing that investment. How do you go beyond full up?

 

[Cesar R M]

I'm confused, and not at all sure what you mean by calling me a confirmist.

And, what goes around comes around, friend.

Its pretty simple, you seem very happy to be stepped on and claim "oh lol who cares" and at same time telling someone who DOES NOT LIKE to be stepped on to "lol you're not that important".

There are people who dont like to be stepped on or abused you know. And they try what they can to prevent so.
Even if that includes making "noise". Thats what activists or interested persons do.

Sad that thanks to the current world media brainwashing.. being an activist (or someone who doesn't follow the "flow" set by mega corporations) is shunned by their fellow citizens instead of cheered at.

Just a dose of reality though Dave. As a shareholder if the value of your shares drop, you will be one upset camper. Unless, of course, you only own shares of Disney as a personal hidden Mickey. Then you don't care about the value. That isn't the feeling of the majority of shareholders. To them it sure the hell is a business and it sure as hell had better show a healthy profit.

Since there is no guarantee that in today's world the way things were done in the past would work, I would think that the higher the profit the better it is for you. If you could prove that massive additional investment would result in a comparable increase in profit, then fine, we can all play make believe and think that Disney is different then any other current business. We can all imagine that Disney is a fantasy organization that happens to make money, but, that is not should not be their objective.

Walt's success was somewhat because he created something that was an original idea. That is no longer the case. It is now the same as McDonald's vs. Burger King vs. Wendy's vs. Taco Bell vs. Kentucky Fried Chicken vs. etc. There is also another economic "law" that everyone forgets and that is the law of diminishing returns. In WDW, at least, it seems that they are skirting pretty close to that point. They could invest more, but, it would have a much more difficult time recapturing that investment. How do you go beyond full up?

I think the issue currently we see is.. people DO NOT CARE about the future or even 10 years further.

Companies used to invest to LIVE and THRIVE.

Now...Since the rise of the wall street creed.. they want the money NOW, even if it collapses tomorrow in a huge fiery ball of fire a la Enron or Worldcom or many other companies that fell in the shockwave.
to resume.. this changed the BUILD AND MAINTAIN to RISK AND GAMBLE.

For them its easier to invest.. make it grow.. get the company dry and get out as soon there is the minimum danger. For them its better to see a company drop thousands of employees on restructure than actually invest for future.

As a shareholder he might have the opportunity to "pull out" in time. But I dont think there will be much warnings like those in the top position do.

Right now, we only have the image of TWDC as a single giant unit. But who knows if P&R in WDW is doing perfect as they claim. We do not have real numbers. Even @ParentsOf4 uses proyections.

Will Shangai be the "umbrella" if WDW goes to the trash? what if a quake hits in California and all the money went to Shangai and "concealed" by the Chinese gov?
Would it still be happy to do use most money on repurchases and gambling the wall street than build cash for stability?

I'm no economic expert, but current guys seem to favour gamble for quick buck than medium buck for long term stability.

 

[Cesar R M]

From the footage I've seen it looks very, very good.

the statues and fountains are definitively look really good.

I think the only real complain are the empty trees right now and the parade/night lamps.

 

[mergatroid]

the statues and fountains are definitively look really good.

I think the only real complain are the empty trees right now and the parade/night lamps.

Will sample it in person in October when we visit. Not seen footage during the parade at night yet, hope it's not too much of an issue though.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Just a dose of reality though Dave. As a shareholder if the value of your shares drop, you will be one upset camper. Unless, of course, you only own shares of Disney as a personal hidden Mickey. Then you don't care about the value. That isn't the feeling of the majority of shareholders. To them it sure the hell is a business and it sure as hell had better show a healthy profit.

Since there is no guarantee that in today's world the way things were done in the past would work, I would think that the higher the profit the better it is for you. If you could prove that massive additional investment would result in a comparable increase in profit, then fine, we can all play make believe and think that Disney is different then any other current business. We can all imagine that Disney is a fantasy organization that happens to make money, but, that is not, should not be their objective.

Walt's success was somewhat because he created something that was an original idea. That is no longer the case. It is now the same as McDonald's vs. Burger King vs. Wendy's vs. Taco Bell vs. Kentucky Fried Chicken vs. etc. There is also another economic "law" that everyone forgets and that is the law of diminishing returns. In WDW, at least, it seems that they are skirting pretty close to that point. They could invest more, but, it would have a much more difficult time recapturing that investment. How do you go beyond full up?

Through all our discussions on the topic, you know I'm all about long term sustainability. Long term profits. Long term investments meant to keep Disney as the preeminent family entertainment company in the world.

I just feel their lack of CAPEX and ignoring of Florida for years is a problem. If - God forbid - Another terrorist attack causes the tourism market to come to a screeching halt, Disney has a giant problem in Florida. Their business has moved to a model that's based on first time guests and seeming apathetic towards return business.

I'm all for them making a profit but I'm also all for them treating their front line employees right. I'm all for them being good corporate neighbors in Central Florida. I don't see them doing either anymore.

So as deal with diminishing returns? I think you invest. You give people reasons to return. You make them feel valued and that they got a great deal for their money. Disney is in the business of selling the experience and you do that (or what they taught me when I went through traditions) is to treat every guest as if they're someone special.

Summed up? It's how they use the money they make that I question. The simplton statements of "it's a business" lack the nuances of the complexities that surround the Walt Disney World Resort. It's more than profit margin - it's what they do with those profits.

 

[PhotoDave219]

The new outer ring and paths will and as already has done wonders for traffic flow. So no, it will be much less likely to be "trapped" the barren MK Hub desert.

A parklike hub would be beautiful no doubt. But there is no way it fits in modern MK. It would be nightmare.

BUT many say they miss how the mature trees provided better perspective fir Main Street and the castle. So would it have been possible to keep some large trees right at the end of MSUSA to keep that view intact, then open up into an open, functional hub? I'd dig that.

I miss the trees.

But that was 12 years ago.

 

[psuchad]

There has been a lot of general statements of Disney not doing enough with their capital at WDW. Please share what you would like them to do with it. As far as I can see they are making a ton of investment to the property. They have several major projects currently under construction and several coming down the pipe.

 

[jkpmac]

I have been following this argument about trees verses no trees, but as I see it, the hub design is reminiscent of the garden's at Versailles. In that design any large trees are in the periphery. And by Periphery I mean the big trees are so far to the side that they would not offer any shade opportunities in the "garden". In the gardens in front of the castle, the trees that are present are small, and many are in planters. Also I wonder if part of the design was from complaints of visitors who felt trees blocked photo opportunities over the years. We can complain all we want in this forum, and Disney may keep an eye, but I bet they pay more attention to complaints made directly. If more people complained about the trees directly to Disney than those who wanted them to stay, then the trees go. This is a great debate however, any personal attacks aside.