News Park attendance showing significant softness heading into the Fall 2018

[jt04]

It really wasn't any different from any other summer.

I blame it on the rain. As does Milli Vanilli.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Universal must be soft...and they are trying to lock people in for the first part of the Star Wars land.

Makes sense.

But this begs the question - again - of why disney has not only increased prices? But what are they doing to entice 2019 visits?

That’s fascinating to me. I think they have accepted a really down year to bludgeon people after

 

[Lensman]

I didn’t say defenders “hated it”...they just refuse to call any decisions “bad” or spin it into somehow being “great for them”.

I completely disagree with that...they have no intent of doing anyone any favors long term.

1. I wouldn't try to ascribe motives to anyone. If you want to know motives, then ask. Most of the time, I feel that motives are irrelevant. People express their opinions about what they think are relevant factors or reactions. Because we disagree with them doesn't invalidate their opinion. Calling an individual's option invalid because you believe their motives to be impure is tribalism or factionalism. We should be better than that. I like to just stick to the issues rather than attack the people.

Ot may just be that it's understood that price hikes are obviously against the self-interest of every customer and the arguments by what you call "the other faction" are themselves just reactions against people being angry and indignant. Even those feelings are valid due to the amount of brand loyalty that people built up around Disney. And there's no denying that Disney in the past built up brand loyalty and if a company is going to live by brand loyalty I don't think it's unfair when they start to die by the destruction of it.

2. Even if one insists on ascribing motives to the "defenders", so what? If someone's opinion bothers me, that's my problem. They're not stopping me from complaining or voicing my disappointment. I mean, neither of these may be particularly constructive but it happens that non-constructive repetitive posts of opinions don't happen to be against the posting rules.

Mostly, these discussions go off the rails because people choose to focus on the other posters rather than on the issues. (this post as a case in point!)

BTW, what's the difference between "#2 price" and "#3 (not worth it anymore)"? Isn't the reason it's not worth it anymore is because the price got too high? And to the original thread topic, I'm not sure how price or built-up feelings of being taken advantage of led to a "cliff" of attendance at the end of August and September, but not October, when things seem to have recovered a bit?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

1. I wouldn't try to ascribe motives to anyone. If you want to know motives, then ask. Most of the time, I feel that motives are irrelevant. People express their opinions about what they think are relevant factors or reactions. Because we disagree with them doesn't invalidate their opinion. Calling an individual's option invalid because you believe their motives to be impure is tribalism or factionalism. We should be better than that. I like to just stick to the issues rather than attack the people.

Ot may just be that it's understood that price hikes are obviously against the self-interest of every customer and the arguments by what you call "the other faction" are themselves just reactions against people being angry and indignant. Even those feelings are valid due to the amount of brand loyalty that people built up around Disney. And there's no denying that Disney in the past built up brand loyalty and if a company is going to live by brand loyalty I don't think it's unfair when they start to die by the destruction of it.

2. Even if one insists on ascribing motives to the "defenders", so what? If someone's opinion bothers me, that's my problem. They're not stopping me from complaining or voicing my disappointment. I mean, neither of these may be particularly constructive but it happens that non-constructive repetitive posts of opinions don't happen to be against the posting rules.

Mostly, these discussions go off the rails because people choose to focus on the other posters rather than on the issues. (this post as a case in point!)

BTW, what's the difference between "#2 price" and "#3 (not worth it anymore)"? Isn't the reason it's not worth it anymore is because the price got too high? And to the original thread topic, I'm not sure how price or built-up feelings of being taken advantage of led to a "cliff" of attendance at the end of August and September, but not October, when things seem to have recovered a bit?

Maybe you read me saying “they” doing anyone favors and I didn’t make it clear that “they” was disney management? That could make it look a lot more judgemental than it was...

I’m speaking in general patterns to specifically not do what you’re lecturing me on: personal attacks.

But we can’t deny a general thought pattern...is that what you’re advocating?

I’m confused...just as some people troll, there are those that patronize and defend disney even when what they do looks like a bad plan or will create blowback for their business...

That’s nothing new...far from infallible.

You have me mismarked here...or are reading too much into a generalization. Respectfully.

And the difference between 2 and 3...from my seat...is 2 indicates a permanent loss of a demographic due to lack of money...3 means the loss of those that could go due to frustration or a perceived change in attitude towards the product.

2 Is calculated...3 would be risky and dangerous.

But again...it’s all “possibilities”, no real way to know for sure.

 

[RustySpork]

Universal must be soft...and they aren’t trying to lock people in for the first part of the Star Wars land.

Makes sense.

But this begs the question - again - of why disney has not only increased prices? But what are they doing to entice 2019 visits?

That’s fascinating to me. I think they have accepted a really down year to bludgeon people after

Back in the 2000s they would often have one year get one free at UO. Those were the years!

 

[Lensman]

I didn’t say defenders “hated it”...they just refuse to call any decisions “bad” or spin it into somehow being “great for them”.

I completely disagree with that...they have no intent of doing anyone any favors long term.

Maybe you read me saying “they” doing anyone favors and I didn’t make it clear that “they” was disney management? That could make it look a lot more judgemental than it was...

Are you saying that the "they:" in bold in refers to Disney Management and not the "defenders" from the first part of the quoted sentence?

I’m speaking in general patterns to specifically not do what you’re lecturing me on: personal attacks.

But we can’t deny a general thought pattern...is that what you’re advocating?

I’m confused...just as some people troll, there are those that patronize and defend disney even when what they do looks like a bad plan or will create blowback for their business...

I'm not lecturing, I'm just suggesting something to make discussions here more constructive. I believe it best to confine the arguments to the issues rather than attacking the people making the argument, even when you're attacking a group of people rather than an individual. That way will lead to madness because the obvious retort to complaints about "defenders" are complaints about "complainers", then, like this, you get complaints about complaints about "defenders" and "complainers". And none of it is constructive or relevant to the original topic. I think it's better to live with the original opinions and for each individual reader to give each opinion its own weight.

Again, not a lecture, but rather just a hope that we can focus on the issues rather than the debaters ourselves, either individually or collectively.

And the difference between 2 and 3...from my seat...is 2 indicates a permanent loss of a demographic due to lack of money...3 means the loss of those that could go due to frustration or a perceived change in attitude towards the product.

2 Is calculated...3 would be risky and dangerous.

But again...it’s all “possibilities”, no real way to know for sure.

Ah, I see! So said another way, "2" is the pure economics of raising prices high enough to cut out, say, lower income people, while "3" is more the fact that raising prices will tend to reduce the perception of value and that even people who can afford your product/service will stay away, right? I get it!

 

[Lensman]

Back in the 2000s they would often have one year get one free at UO. Those were the years!

I think we'd all look fondly back to what was effectively half price (actually much less once you factor in the price increases since then), but I also think that most people would prefer the doubling of price and getting all the Potter stuff.

Quality, not quantity!

 

[RustySpork]

I think we'd all look fondly back to what was effectively half price (actually much less once you factor in the price increases since then), but I also think that most people would prefer the doubling of price and getting all the Potter stuff.

Quality, not quantity!

I'm not complaining at all, when compared to WDW the UO annual passes are still a great deal.

 

[iowamomof4]

BTW, what's the difference between "#2 price" and "#3 (not worth it anymore)"? Isn't the reason it's not worth it anymore is because the price got too high? And to the original thread topic, I'm not sure how price or built-up feelings of being taken advantage of led to a "cliff" of attendance at the end of August and September, but not October, when things seem to have recovered a bit?

Since I was the one who brought up #3, I'll explain what I meant by it. I was thinking about ALL the things that return visitors are frustrated by: Price, crowds, paid parking, transportation issues (either road construction if they drive or lack of consistent buses if they rely on Disney), lower quality food, lower quality cm's, lower quality housekeeping, etc... I am not PERSONALLY complaining about all of that, but I see many of those things mentioned by many different people on a few different boards and blogs. All of it put together is more than JUST price (#2), but rather the totality of perceived and real decline some have found over the years (thus my desire to include a #3).

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Are you saying that the "they:" in bold in refers to Disney Management and not the "defenders" from the first part of the quoted sentence?


I'm not lecturing, I'm just suggesting something to make discussions here more constructive. I believe it best to confine the arguments to the issues rather than attacking the people making the argument, even when you're attacking a group of people rather than an individual. That way will lead to madness because the obvious retort to complaints about "defenders" are complaints about "complainers", then, like this, you get complaints about complaints about "defenders" and "complainers". And none of it is constructive or relevant to the original topic. I think it's better to live with the original opinions and for each individual reader to give each opinion its own weight.

Again, not a lecture, but rather just a hope that we can focus on the issues rather than the debaters ourselves, either individually or collectively.

No...I’m saying the first “they” is a certain segment of fans/posters. And I’ll call shenanigans on you if you deny their existence. You know better.

The second “they” was disney management and that’s my rub. This rampant falsehood that prices are being increased to “limit attendance and increase the experience” is perhaps the most silly idea ever...

The first “they” enables the second.

But I get you...I’ll stop assigning motives and generalities and we can have a “wink” agreement - unspoken - of their existence.

Kinda like the “haters” are actually the “lovers” with higher blood diverted to the brain...

The problem with this “discussion” is its about a pricing increase (soft attendance in a boom econony goes right to that area of the woods)...and there’s really no way to not go down the alley on it unless it’s short and the thread just dies.

 

[HauntedPirate]

Disney approaches P&R with logic and accounting, but they sell and depend on emotion and nostalgia to get people into the parks. It's an interesting mix of philosophies. Personally, I think they have drifted too far to the logic/accounting side and as a result have forgotten what it takes to make those emotional and nostalgic connections. Just a guess here, but John and Jane Middle Class are probably loathe to become repeat customers when Johnny and Susie's "magical vacation" cost them into 5 figures when all is said and done. With word of mouth becoming instantaneous now, how does that bode for the future? The trend towards pushing what's hot and hip now means they have to rip-and-replace more frequently when the current hot and hip is no longer hot or hip. More money must be spent. Which means higher prices. Which means more of their once-core customer base will get priced out. Sadly, I don't think current "leadership" cares one whit about any of it, to be honest.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney approaches P&R with logic and accounting, but they sell and depend on emotion and nostalgia to get people into the parks. It's an interesting mix of philosophies. Personally, I think they have drifted too far to the logic/accounting side and as a result have forgotten what it takes to make those emotional and nostalgic connections. Just a guess here, but John and Jane Middle Class are probably loathe to become repeat customers when Johnny and Susie's "magical vacation" cost them into 5 figures when all is said and done. With word of mouth becoming instantaneous now, how does that bode for the future? The trend towards pushing what's hot and hip now means they have to rip-and-replace more frequently when the current hot and hip is no longer hot or hip. More money must be spent. Which means higher prices. Which means more of their once-core customer base will get priced out. Sadly, I don't think current "leadership" cares one whit about any of it, to be honest.

Excellent points...especially the one about catering to current IP.

what’s the shelf life on Chris Pratt?

But the last sentence...is where the real trouble starts. From everything I’ve seen and experienced I see no loyalty to the brand by the management.

 

[Brad Bishop]

If it were, what’s happening now wouldn’t be happening. You have to give the company some credit. Plus, it’s a mix of a few things including soft attendance vs projections.

SWGE won’t bring in that much more profit than any other year.

I could see this, maybe not for the reasons thought of by others:
- Star Wars is a dying property. Yep, you have your fans. Wizard of Oz has it's fans.
- Take the folks who used to go down to WDW for Star Wars weekends and spread them across the year. There's your audience. Many of them probably do WDW anyway because they like the mouse, too.
- Look at the damage they've done to the Star Wars franchise with the latest movies. Even Force Awakens was only thought of as initially good because, basically, it wasn't I, II, or III.

I think it'll end up being a lot like Pandora: Many will want to see it because they're already there. Most wouldn't make a special trip down to see it. With Star Wars, yeah, in that first year some will make that initial trip but not as many as people think.

Look at the movies, really, since Empire. They're not great. People still come because: Star Wars but I think they may be burning out on it (being both nostalgic and disappointed the entire time).

I also think that the dream of SWGE, what it may be during the first year of it being open with it being fully immersive and with people walking around interacting with the guests, will quickly die off to a land with props, rides, food, and merch. I just have a hard time imagining, after the initial fan fare, that WDW will keep on a full crew of actors to interact with the guests. I see it being more more like what DHS had before with: Once in a while they'd bring out Vader and some storm troopers for some stage-show deal.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I could see this, maybe not for the reasons thought of by others:
- Star Wars is a dying property. Yep, you have your fans. Wizard of Oz has it's fans.
- Take the folks who used to go down to WDW for Star Wars weekends and spread them across the year. There's your audience. Many of them probably do WDW anyway because they like the mouse, too.
- Look at the damage they've done to the Star Wars franchise with the latest movies. Even Force Awakens was only thought of as initially good because, basically, it wasn't I, II, or III.

I think it'll end up being a lot like Pandora: Many will want to see it because they're already there. Most wouldn't make a special trip down to see it. With Star Wars, yeah, in that first year some will make that initial trip but not as many as people think.

Look at the movies, really, since Empire. They're not great. People still come because: Star Wars but I think they may be burning out on it (being both nostalgic and disappointed the entire time).

I also think that the dream of SWGE, what it may be during the first year of it being open with it being fully immersive and with people walking around interacting with the guests, will quickly die off to a land with props, rides, food, and merch. I just have a hard time imagining, after the initial fan fare, that WDW will keep on a full crew of actors to interact with the guests. I see it being more more like what DHS had before with: Once in a while they'd bring out Vader and some storm troopers for some stage-show deal.

At first I thought you were nuts...

But then I started chewing on the points and there is a ton of discussion to be had...

There really should be a “What’s the state of Star Wars/is it in trouble?” Thread...

 

[RustySpork]

- Star Wars is a dying property. Yep, you have your fans. Wizard of Oz has it's fans.
- Take the folks who used to go down to WDW for Star Wars weekends and spread them across the year. There's your audience. Many of them probably do WDW anyway because they like the mouse, too.
- Look at the damage they've done to the Star Wars franchise with the latest movies. Even Force Awakens was only thought of as initially good because, basically, it wasn't I, II, or III.

Hey..anything for a buck, right?

 

[HauntedPirate]

Hey..anything for a buck, right?

Gotta make those quarterlies, as we all know.

So if recent cuts were their knee-jerk reaction to some "softness" in September, what happens if the expect bump from SW:GE is softer and shorter than their projections? *shudder*

 

[monothingie]

I could see this, maybe not for the reasons thought of by others:
- Star Wars is a dying property. Yep, you have your fans. Wizard of Oz has it's fans.
- Take the folks who used to go down to WDW for Star Wars weekends and spread them across the year. There's your audience. Many of them probably do WDW anyway because they like the mouse, too.
- Look at the damage they've done to the Star Wars franchise with the latest movies. Even Force Awakens was only thought of as initially good because, basically, it wasn't I, II, or III.

I don't think Star Wars is dying, but I do think that it is becoming oversaturated. To their credit, after Solo Disney decided to hit the brakes on things, but the temptation is always there to do it. However unlike say the MCU which is dependent on the current iterations of their characters, Star Wars has a unlimited story line they can work with and can be successful introducing new characters (Rouge One for example) Do you think anyone will follow a rebooted Ironman without Downey Jr? or GOTG without the current ensemble?

I do agree though that due to the mediocrity of the prequels and the the last two trilogy films, there will be little to no nostalgia factor for fans 10 years from now. (Jar-Jar was my favorite)

 

[MrHorse]

I could see this, maybe not for the reasons thought of by others:
- Star Wars is a dying property. Yep, you have your fans. Wizard of Oz has it's fans.
...
Look at the movies, really, since Empire. They're not great. People still come because: Star Wars but I think they may be burning out on it (being both nostalgic and disappointed the entire time).
.

Honestly, I'm not sure the quality of the movies is going to even matter that much. If Disney is going to put one (or more) out every year no matter what, people are going to start burning out. Even if the films are all high-quality, must-see affairs, people aren't going maintain the same level of excitement with such relentless, predictable releases. I wouldn't go so far as to say the franchise is dead, I'm sure there's plenty of life left in it, especially if they continue to make substantial investments in the property. But, I don't think they can maintain the camping-outside-the-theatre level of excitement without the decade-long gaps between releases.

I think we may be on the verge of the same thing with Marvel. I suspect there are more than a few people that are happy to 'check-out' after a wrapped up Infinity War. There's probably a degree of this going on with the parks as well.

Disney's parks and films have been running white hot for around a decade now. That's a long run and the company has been tapping that fervor pretty hard in recent years. Eventually, people's attention will move to something new, for the sake of change if nothing else. I suspect the question is whether or not the next big thing will be a franchise like SW, Marvel, or something otherwise within Disney's wheelhouse. Or, perhaps the question is whether or not there will even be a 'next big thing'. It's always possible that the appetite for movies and theme parks just cools off for a while.

 

[Princess Leia]

So Tropical Storm Michael is strengthening and will probably be a hurricane when it lands this week (probably on the panhandle). I’m going to assume this will possibly have an effect on some crowds?

Also, I leave for Orlando on Sunday, and would reeeeeallly like the hurricanes and storms to stay away while I’m there. Rain, that’s no issue for me, but hurricanes... ehhh

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

New THREAD!!!

...I’m trying my darndest not to go full tangent!!