Michael72688
New Member
I think its funny though, Universal isn't complaining, they aint changing their hours!
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
More Changes in Hours/Parades
- Thread starter johnmb
- Start date
Scrooge McSam
New Member
:fork:
Maybe you're not at that point, but I am. I didn't enjoy cancelling my vacation, but I'm not giving them any more of my hard earned money to p_ss away on second rate park attractions, overpriced hotel rooms, non-profitable cable and broadcast networks and direct-to-video junk.
As long as the stock price is Eisner's ONLY concern, things aren't gonna get any better, folks.
Superman, you can have my place in line. I won't be needing it.
Don't sugar-coat it, Scrooge, come out and say what you really think!
Really, though, I don't disagree with you at all. My comments at the start of the thread were aimed at people who talk as though WDW's "disclaimer" gave it the unfettered right to change hours as much as they want AFTER people have paid IN FULL, NON-REFUNDABLE, PEAK RATES.
As a legal matter, the disclaimer gives WDW some room to re-jigger their hours & attractions; but this wiggle room is not infinite.
(To my mind, all of the arguing about hours, attractions, room-rates, etc. among people who have NOT already paid non-refundable money, while emotionally understandable, is just a matter of opinion. You might as well argue about whether a company that makes widgets is charging too much. All company's do what they think will make them the most money -- although some imprudently ignore the long term for the immediate gain. No one, not even Eisner himself, will ever be truly sure about whether any given decision was right or wrong. WDW will do what it thinks best, and each potential customer will do what he or she wants. Extreme squawking by customers may influence WDW at the margins, but not much, I wouldn't think. But none of this says people don't have a right to complain -- what's the Net for, otherwise. I'm just surprised how often the participants in these arguments seem to expect to convince others whose tastes, values, economic positions, etc. are necessarily different.)
I am not cancelling my up-coming trip, but at least part of the reason is that I had to pay for all of it long before the hours were shortened. The other reasons are that my kids would be heart-broken -- they only get one spring break.
The last reason, to be fair to WDW, is that I will have much less to complain about if attendance is truly as light as some suggest it might be. (Though you hear in these threads so many different, seemingly conflicting versions of the same days' attendance.)
In other words, I'm going, I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but if I see packed parks and days too short for my little ones to do the parks (they need naps in the middle of the day), it'll be a cold August day in Orlando before I go back.
KathyG/poohbear
New Member
Everyone can argue and Eisner can blame 9/11, the economy, code orange and the war but I still believe that part of the reason......WDW is having trouble is that we are taught to expect so much from WDW. WDW used to provide the best customer service and have plenty of ride attendants to help at entrances and exits plus the cms loved their jobs....in other words, it was magical. Now due to staff cuts you are aware of the bottom line most of the time you are in the parks. I was getting over a broken foot and got on a moving ride and they promised to stop it when I returned so I could exit and quess what no one was there. Wrong or right I notice little things like that. They are one of the things that separated WDW from every other amusement park.
(Plus it was spooky when the terror alert went up to orange while I was there....they were checking everything and wrong or right it made me nervous. I know I have to learn to live with it but I hope they learn to be a little less obvious and use more plain clothed security people) Just my 2 cents.
(Plus it was spooky when the terror alert went up to orange while I was there....they were checking everything and wrong or right it made me nervous. I know I have to learn to live with it but I hope they learn to be a little less obvious and use more plain clothed security people) Just my 2 cents.
Michael72688
New Member
Last I checked money was fairly important to making it in life, I know Eisner has plenty of it, but I'm guessing that you would do the same if you were in his shoes! You wouldn't have park hours so long so that the parks dont make money or have people working their when there are no tourists to spend any money, I think you get my point.
Scrooge McSam
New Member
If you had a point to be made, I'm sure I have the intellectual capacity to "get it". I'm wondering if you "get" what I said.
First of all, Disney is not losing money. The Disney parks are not losing money. Disney is making less PROFIT now and that has them in an uproar. Why are they making less profit? Is some of it due to 9/11 and uncertainties regarding a possible war with Iraq? Certainly, it is. But are those the only reasons? No, they are not.
Mr. Eisner has made some incredibly short sighted decisions of late that have put the company in a rather awkward position. The parks are being bled dry to prop up Eisner's dream of being king of all media. This is bad business and I choose not to participate.
If you choose to buy into that game, be my guest. Maybe paying more money for less product suits you. Only you can make that decision. I have made mine.
Dwarful
Well-Known Member
Well, like others have said, Universal isn't complaining so maybe Disney needs to see what U is offering thier guests. I know when we went to WDW in may/june 2002 we bought 5 day passes to U/IOA for $90 adult and $80 kids, we only used them for 2 1/2 days but it was cheaper than buying 2 day tickets.
We bought those online and they were only good for 5 consecutive days, but it was still enough of a bargain for us to factor in 2 more days to add those parks to our 10 day trip to WDW!
Perhaps a one time offer on cheaper tickets that must be used in by a certain date and are only good for say 5 consecutive days might bolster attendance..everyone knows once you get them in the gate you start to make your profit on food, drinks, photos, gifts, snacks etc!
I know in 1998 we had the same special deal for DL in CA so Disney knows how to do it, they just haven't done it yet when they can get by w/cutting hours, parades, staff and still charge PEAK rates!
We bought those online and they were only good for 5 consecutive days, but it was still enough of a bargain for us to factor in 2 more days to add those parks to our 10 day trip to WDW!
Perhaps a one time offer on cheaper tickets that must be used in by a certain date and are only good for say 5 consecutive days might bolster attendance..everyone knows once you get them in the gate you start to make your profit on food, drinks, photos, gifts, snacks etc!
I know in 1998 we had the same special deal for DL in CA so Disney knows how to do it, they just haven't done it yet when they can get by w/cutting hours, parades, staff and still charge PEAK rates!
BRER STITCH
Well-Known Member
Re: no way
Thank you CIVILENG68!!! :wave:
I have grown weary trying to explain this very thing to others.
Some just choose NOT to learn....what can ya do??
Profits are down in businesses all over the world because a year ago they were PROJECTED, without possible knowledge of such drastic changes in global political and economic climates. Good projections drive a company's stock price up (which is what investors demand).
When the PROJECTED EARNINGS are not there a year later, they are called LOSSES...instead of "miscalculations", and the stock price takes a dive. (Some dishonest companies dump theirs at a profit before the announcement of these "losses" is made.
Even with all this, the money usually keeps rolling in at Disney and other companies, and a profit is made. But because the profit isn't as large as the PROJECTION, it is deemed a LOSS.
But again, I grow weary of trying to condense 4 years of economics into a message board post. You said it quite nicely!
It's all VOODOO.......REALLY!
:lol:
P.S. Keep in mind that most companies react to this situation strictly with job cutbacks (real or on paper) and do not attempt to make the consumer pay for a corporate mistake. MOST companies...Disney is just not one of them.....
:hammer:
Thank you CIVILENG68!!! :wave:
I have grown weary trying to explain this very thing to others.
Some just choose NOT to learn....what can ya do??
Profits are down in businesses all over the world because a year ago they were PROJECTED, without possible knowledge of such drastic changes in global political and economic climates. Good projections drive a company's stock price up (which is what investors demand).
When the PROJECTED EARNINGS are not there a year later, they are called LOSSES...instead of "miscalculations", and the stock price takes a dive. (Some dishonest companies dump theirs at a profit before the announcement of these "losses" is made.
Even with all this, the money usually keeps rolling in at Disney and other companies, and a profit is made. But because the profit isn't as large as the PROJECTION, it is deemed a LOSS.
But again, I grow weary of trying to condense 4 years of economics into a message board post. You said it quite nicely!
It's all VOODOO.......REALLY!
:lol:
P.S. Keep in mind that most companies react to this situation strictly with job cutbacks (real or on paper) and do not attempt to make the consumer pay for a corporate mistake. MOST companies...Disney is just not one of them.....
:hammer:
niteobsrvr
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: no way
I don't honestly believe anyone here really has a good grasp of economics or business management. The statement made above is a very narrow in its scope. When a company makes cutbacks in employment there is most definitely a ripple effect that will eventaully touch every consumer associated with their particular product as well as those "innocent" bystanders. You cant possibly cut employment without having both social and economic impacts on everyone.
As far as making business projections is concerned, you do the best you can with the data you have available with a certain amount of gut feeling and voodoo thrown in for good measure. There is not currently nor will there likely ever be a scientific methad that allows for exacting predictions of the future. Furthermore, when companies make such analyses, they are immediately followed by the necessary appropriations and actions to allow them to mature. Business plans take time to mature, that is why most organizations work not only on a 1 year plan but also project 3, 5 or more years into the future and continually revise these estimates as they go along.
Unfortunately, in times like these, you cannot account for the human factor and consequences of individuals actions not immediately related to your company. Therefore, it becomes not only necessary, but prudent that the company act on behalf of itself and its shareholders to shore up earnings. Each one of you who has a retirement account invested in either stocks or funds, benefits or loses net worth based on a company's actions. You certainly wouldn't give your money away. Why would you want the CEO responsible for a portion of your retirement to give it away for you.
On the subject of getting less for more money, I implore everyone to take a look at a vast majority of consumer food products as an example. For years now, the weight of the contents of the package has been decreasing while the price remains the same or increases. In effect, you receive less benefit for your money. If you don't beleive this is true, then ask yourself why it is now harder to find a 1 gallon container of ice cream on a store shelf? More importantly, ask yourself why you are paying more for a pint of icecream now than you did for the gallon 20 years ago. Its not all just inflation.
At least at Disney, when they shorten hours it typically means that you will need less time to receive the same amount of benefit per dollar spent. Additionally, if guests at the parks begin to exceed their expectaions, they have been known to extend the hours in the parks on very short notice (even same day) to allow everyone to enjoy theirselves.
I don't honestly believe anyone here really has a good grasp of economics or business management. The statement made above is a very narrow in its scope. When a company makes cutbacks in employment there is most definitely a ripple effect that will eventaully touch every consumer associated with their particular product as well as those "innocent" bystanders. You cant possibly cut employment without having both social and economic impacts on everyone.
As far as making business projections is concerned, you do the best you can with the data you have available with a certain amount of gut feeling and voodoo thrown in for good measure. There is not currently nor will there likely ever be a scientific methad that allows for exacting predictions of the future. Furthermore, when companies make such analyses, they are immediately followed by the necessary appropriations and actions to allow them to mature. Business plans take time to mature, that is why most organizations work not only on a 1 year plan but also project 3, 5 or more years into the future and continually revise these estimates as they go along.
Unfortunately, in times like these, you cannot account for the human factor and consequences of individuals actions not immediately related to your company. Therefore, it becomes not only necessary, but prudent that the company act on behalf of itself and its shareholders to shore up earnings. Each one of you who has a retirement account invested in either stocks or funds, benefits or loses net worth based on a company's actions. You certainly wouldn't give your money away. Why would you want the CEO responsible for a portion of your retirement to give it away for you.
On the subject of getting less for more money, I implore everyone to take a look at a vast majority of consumer food products as an example. For years now, the weight of the contents of the package has been decreasing while the price remains the same or increases. In effect, you receive less benefit for your money. If you don't beleive this is true, then ask yourself why it is now harder to find a 1 gallon container of ice cream on a store shelf? More importantly, ask yourself why you are paying more for a pint of icecream now than you did for the gallon 20 years ago. Its not all just inflation.
At least at Disney, when they shorten hours it typically means that you will need less time to receive the same amount of benefit per dollar spent. Additionally, if guests at the parks begin to exceed their expectaions, they have been known to extend the hours in the parks on very short notice (even same day) to allow everyone to enjoy theirselves.
lentesta
Premium Member
Scrooge McSam
New Member
Re: Re: Re: no way
Maybe not... but I have control over my own money... and who gets it.
Disney won't get my vacation money this year. Considering the fact that WDW's park attendance has been crumbling for the last 3 years ( WAY before 9/11 BTW), sounds like quite a few people have made the same decision. Funny, but a lot of them probably don't have an extensive knowledge of the intricate workings of financial models either. Maybe they should be better educated about how to spend their own money.
Curiously, attendance figures for Six Flags parks, Cedar Point and Universal's IOA have been climbing for the same period. Now that's a puzzler. They could probably use an education too. Building really cheap off the shelf attractions and cutting park hours could probably help them curb that pesky growth problem. It sure seems to be working for Disney.
Name for me, please, a Disney animated film in the last few years that can touch what Pixar's been doing. Don't hurt yourself, now
And the whole time Pixar's trouncing them in ticket sales, Disney just can't seem to get along with this little upstart company. Pixar could probably use an education about how they should be thrilled to give half of their ticket sales to Disney.
And even harder to believe is the way Disney stock has lost 2/3 of it's value over the last few years. I propose a dismantling of the financial markets and a re-education of everyone involved. <Ya know, up to now I've used a lot of sarcasm, but after learning how the whole investment banking scam works, I'm not so sure this shouldn't actually be done HaHaHa>
Since your stated concern was our mis-application of the principles of economics and business management, I submit it's Disney that needs some schooling in these subjects
Nite, I'm almost tempted to ask which office in the Team Disney building is yours.
I'm actually heartbroken to have to say these things, Nite. I really am. You'll probably never meet a bigger Disney dweeb. "Where ya going on vacation this year, Sam? AGAIN?" You know the type.
The Disney company I once knew was rooted in quality first, profit after. And the profits were there... the building of the studios, film after film after film - mostly hits, some misses, Disneyland, the beginnings of WDW, a few years of stumbling, rebirth. We all know the story. If it was from Disney, I was there.
Sadly, that is no longer the case. Inept management has brought Disney low, seriously eroding customer goodwill and product quality. I've noticed it. Wall Street's noticed it. Moviegoers have noticed it. And I have my suspicions the people who haven't been making that trip to WDW "AGAIN" have noticed it.
Maybe not... but I have control over my own money... and who gets it.
Disney won't get my vacation money this year. Considering the fact that WDW's park attendance has been crumbling for the last 3 years ( WAY before 9/11 BTW), sounds like quite a few people have made the same decision. Funny, but a lot of them probably don't have an extensive knowledge of the intricate workings of financial models either. Maybe they should be better educated about how to spend their own money.
Curiously, attendance figures for Six Flags parks, Cedar Point and Universal's IOA have been climbing for the same period. Now that's a puzzler. They could probably use an education too. Building really cheap off the shelf attractions and cutting park hours could probably help them curb that pesky growth problem. It sure seems to be working for Disney.
Name for me, please, a Disney animated film in the last few years that can touch what Pixar's been doing. Don't hurt yourself, now
And the whole time Pixar's trouncing them in ticket sales, Disney just can't seem to get along with this little upstart company. Pixar could probably use an education about how they should be thrilled to give half of their ticket sales to Disney.And even harder to believe is the way Disney stock has lost 2/3 of it's value over the last few years. I propose a dismantling of the financial markets and a re-education of everyone involved. <Ya know, up to now I've used a lot of sarcasm, but after learning how the whole investment banking scam works, I'm not so sure this shouldn't actually be done HaHaHa>
Since your stated concern was our mis-application of the principles of economics and business management, I submit it's Disney that needs some schooling in these subjects
Nite, I'm almost tempted to ask which office in the Team Disney building is yours.
I'm actually heartbroken to have to say these things, Nite. I really am. You'll probably never meet a bigger Disney dweeb. "Where ya going on vacation this year, Sam? AGAIN?" You know the type.
The Disney company I once knew was rooted in quality first, profit after. And the profits were there... the building of the studios, film after film after film - mostly hits, some misses, Disneyland, the beginnings of WDW, a few years of stumbling, rebirth. We all know the story. If it was from Disney, I was there.
Sadly, that is no longer the case. Inept management has brought Disney low, seriously eroding customer goodwill and product quality. I've noticed it. Wall Street's noticed it. Moviegoers have noticed it. And I have my suspicions the people who haven't been making that trip to WDW "AGAIN" have noticed it.
BRER STITCH
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: no way
:brick: :brick: :brick:
WOW......quite the generalization, huh?
Some of us DO know the topic we are addressing. It's the art of explaining it to those who don't, perhaps, that takes some mastering on ALL of our parts.
Don't be so quick to judge. We're entitled to our explanation of Basic Economic Theory just like you are.
It doesn't make ANY of us correct. Just thoughtful.
:brick: :brick: :brick:
P.S. Is this why people are reluctant to help out at the scene of an accident, too??
:brick: :brick: :brick:
WOW......quite the generalization, huh?
Some of us DO know the topic we are addressing. It's the art of explaining it to those who don't, perhaps, that takes some mastering on ALL of our parts.
Don't be so quick to judge. We're entitled to our explanation of Basic Economic Theory just like you are.
It doesn't make ANY of us correct. Just thoughtful.
:brick: :brick: :brick:
P.S. Is this why people are reluctant to help out at the scene of an accident, too??
Michael72688
New Member
What exactly do you mean?
Scrooge McSam
New Member
The Disney brand name no longer stands for quality in the marketplace.
They'll get no more money from me.
niteobsrvr
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: no way
I actually don't work for Disney presently and when I did it was not as a member of management. I decided several years ago to give up my pursuit up the corporate ladder while working at another Fortune 500 company as a business analyst. When I realized that much of corporate management in America couldnt see the forest before the trees, I decided I could expend my efforts better on improving my own life and those closest to me.
It would be unfair to try to address some of the issues related to the general business environment of the 90's and the aspects that carried over into the new millenium in this limited amount of space. The unfortunate reality of this period on Wall Street is that Companies who traditionally had known what they were doing were forced to throw those principles to the wind in an effort to catch up the "Dot Com" boom and make their stock perform as well or better than all of those startups who were actually on the eve of their own destruction. What we are wading through now is most aptly described as an economy trying to correct itself from the runaway train that it had become.
Disney is not the only company in America to experience bad times so to speak. For better than a year now, we have had quite a bit of doom and gloom news. The reality is these companies in many cases are still realizing a profit. Unfortunately, it is the shareholders that are screaming because their expectations were set to a new level during the latter part of the ninties. These are the people that each company is trying to appease and Disney is no exception.
From what I know of Eisner's time with Disney he has successfully tried to grow the parks and other business units. SOme efforts have been successful while others have not. I must say that he has made a reasonable amout of resources available for the parks over the years even if the last few have been somewhat lacking.
The lack of investment in the US parks over the last few years has not been by accident. While WDW is still the one of the biggest vacation draws in the world, the company also realizes that the "Florida Vacation Market" has reached a certain saturation or maturity point. This however is not true of parks built to serve regional international markets. The company is all to well aware of its untapped international markets and is trying to make its brand of entertainment as easily available over-seas as it is here in the US.
A lot of people have referred to Universal and Seaworld as indications of how Disney can do business differently. There are two things to keep in mind with those entertainment venues though. One they attract alot more of the local or 1 day visitors than Disney does. They dont have the same level of exposure to fluctuations in Interantional tourism in that respect. Secondly, Universal and seaworld dont have anywhere near as many hotel rooms to fill as Disney thus elminating quite a bit of overhead there.
Disney tries their hardest not to lay folks off when things take a downturn which means they have a lot more "overhead" to cover regardless of attendance. Universal and seaworld both hire a much larger percentage of their staff as seasonal or part-time employees allowing for much more flexibility in staffing.
However, the biggest single factor I see affecting Disney right now other than ABC is product maturity. I used to love Disney for its uniqueness but that really isn't true anymore. SOme folks loved them for their classic films because that is what they grew up with. Others loved them because Disney, whether it be parks or films, was a part of family traditions. Somewhere along the way though, Disney has missed that its market is changing. The classic attractions are losign appeal with the younger folks and Disney lacks enough thrill rides (well themed of course) to keep them interested. It is the biggest truth in marketing that if you want a lifetime customer you need to win them over as young as possible and then keep them coming back for more.
Disney is still good and getting them on the hook at a young age but then they can't seem to real them in as easily as they grow up into teenagers and then adults. If you look around at a Disney park the next time you go you can see what I am saying. There is a significant void in teenages and early 20 somethings without children. THis is concerning, because it is these folks that will eventually become the young families that Disney once attracted easily. When I was a teenager in the 80's Disney conjured up images of wonder and we all thought that DIsney could achieve even the most impossible things. I get the impression these days that teenagers feel that DIsney has lost that edge and amazement.
I didnt mean to get so long winded here. I still love Disney like everyone else. I understand their present position and while I may not like it I can tolerate it while the world straightens itself out. What I won't have the patience for is that lack of magic continuing after the current political drama has been put to rest. The company needs its vision, creativity and excitement back. If they can see theirselves to make that happen, the profits will once again follow.
Originally posted by Scrooge McSam
Nite, I'm almost tempted to ask which office in the Team Disney building is yours.
I'm actually heartbroken to have to say these things, Nite. I really am. You'll probably never meet a bigger Disney dweeb. "Where ya going on vacation this year, Sam? AGAIN?" You know the type.
The Disney company I once knew was rooted in quality first, profit after. And the profits were there... the building of the studios, film after film after film - mostly hits, some misses, Disneyland, the beginnings of WDW, a few years of stumbling, rebirth. We all know the story. If it was from Disney, I was there.
I actually don't work for Disney presently and when I did it was not as a member of management. I decided several years ago to give up my pursuit up the corporate ladder while working at another Fortune 500 company as a business analyst. When I realized that much of corporate management in America couldnt see the forest before the trees, I decided I could expend my efforts better on improving my own life and those closest to me.
It would be unfair to try to address some of the issues related to the general business environment of the 90's and the aspects that carried over into the new millenium in this limited amount of space. The unfortunate reality of this period on Wall Street is that Companies who traditionally had known what they were doing were forced to throw those principles to the wind in an effort to catch up the "Dot Com" boom and make their stock perform as well or better than all of those startups who were actually on the eve of their own destruction. What we are wading through now is most aptly described as an economy trying to correct itself from the runaway train that it had become.
Disney is not the only company in America to experience bad times so to speak. For better than a year now, we have had quite a bit of doom and gloom news. The reality is these companies in many cases are still realizing a profit. Unfortunately, it is the shareholders that are screaming because their expectations were set to a new level during the latter part of the ninties. These are the people that each company is trying to appease and Disney is no exception.
From what I know of Eisner's time with Disney he has successfully tried to grow the parks and other business units. SOme efforts have been successful while others have not. I must say that he has made a reasonable amout of resources available for the parks over the years even if the last few have been somewhat lacking.
The lack of investment in the US parks over the last few years has not been by accident. While WDW is still the one of the biggest vacation draws in the world, the company also realizes that the "Florida Vacation Market" has reached a certain saturation or maturity point. This however is not true of parks built to serve regional international markets. The company is all to well aware of its untapped international markets and is trying to make its brand of entertainment as easily available over-seas as it is here in the US.
A lot of people have referred to Universal and Seaworld as indications of how Disney can do business differently. There are two things to keep in mind with those entertainment venues though. One they attract alot more of the local or 1 day visitors than Disney does. They dont have the same level of exposure to fluctuations in Interantional tourism in that respect. Secondly, Universal and seaworld dont have anywhere near as many hotel rooms to fill as Disney thus elminating quite a bit of overhead there.
Disney tries their hardest not to lay folks off when things take a downturn which means they have a lot more "overhead" to cover regardless of attendance. Universal and seaworld both hire a much larger percentage of their staff as seasonal or part-time employees allowing for much more flexibility in staffing.
However, the biggest single factor I see affecting Disney right now other than ABC is product maturity. I used to love Disney for its uniqueness but that really isn't true anymore. SOme folks loved them for their classic films because that is what they grew up with. Others loved them because Disney, whether it be parks or films, was a part of family traditions. Somewhere along the way though, Disney has missed that its market is changing. The classic attractions are losign appeal with the younger folks and Disney lacks enough thrill rides (well themed of course) to keep them interested. It is the biggest truth in marketing that if you want a lifetime customer you need to win them over as young as possible and then keep them coming back for more.
Disney is still good and getting them on the hook at a young age but then they can't seem to real them in as easily as they grow up into teenagers and then adults. If you look around at a Disney park the next time you go you can see what I am saying. There is a significant void in teenages and early 20 somethings without children. THis is concerning, because it is these folks that will eventually become the young families that Disney once attracted easily. When I was a teenager in the 80's Disney conjured up images of wonder and we all thought that DIsney could achieve even the most impossible things. I get the impression these days that teenagers feel that DIsney has lost that edge and amazement.
I didnt mean to get so long winded here. I still love Disney like everyone else. I understand their present position and while I may not like it I can tolerate it while the world straightens itself out. What I won't have the patience for is that lack of magic continuing after the current political drama has been put to rest. The company needs its vision, creativity and excitement back. If they can see theirselves to make that happen, the profits will once again follow.
hthbellhop
New Member
Not trying to be rude or anything, but it's ridiculous to try comparing Universal to Disney based on hours. First of all, Universal is only two parks. They have much more business (as has already been said) by locals and one/two day visits. The thing is, their March and April hours are no more than Disney's, only difference is that they did not cut them, they were planned that way. The only time the Universal parks are open later than 7PM for March/April (except 8pm on weekends) are during the weeks surrounding Easter....same as Disney.
civileng68
Account Suspended
YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD! WDW isnt LOSING MONEY! they're not MAKING AS MUCH PROFIT! I stated the same thing in an earlier post. They're literally using plays on words to make their customers believe what they say. They're "not lying" but at the same time they "are lying". it's all a play on words. They're simply making less PROFIT.
About Eisner, I agree with you completely. My fiance and I say all the time.
"Walt would roll over in his grave if he knew what his world was being turned into".
wdwfan22
Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Re: Re: no way
Attendance figures have gone up for parks like Six Flags and Cedar Point because they are day parks and easy to drive to. Walt Disney World requires most guests to fly in. Walt Disney World also depends on many International guests to meet there projected attendance figures. And with the possibility of war many guests are holding back on making there vacation plans. It's not because of the declining quality or reduction in Theme Park Operating Hours. Your right that you have the choice over who gets your money, and if your happy with giving it to Six Flags or Cedar point so be it.
Attendance figures have gone up for parks like Six Flags and Cedar Point because they are day parks and easy to drive to. Walt Disney World requires most guests to fly in. Walt Disney World also depends on many International guests to meet there projected attendance figures. And with the possibility of war many guests are holding back on making there vacation plans. It's not because of the declining quality or reduction in Theme Park Operating Hours. Your right that you have the choice over who gets your money, and if your happy with giving it to Six Flags or Cedar point so be it.
scottnj1966
Well-Known Member
I sure wish Disney would find another way to save money instead of cutting hours. It is the worst thing they can do to people that have annual passes.
Many people dont go if the parks close to early. I cannot understand how they have not figured that out.
The parks have always been better at night to me.
Many people dont go if the parks close to early. I cannot understand how they have not figured that out.
The parks have always been better at night to me.