Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
And have been to USO, DLR, TDR etc.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
People Seem Jaded About Disney World in General
- Thread starter pridejam02
- Start date
And have been to USO, DLR, TDR etc.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
WDW is an inanimate object. It cannot be jaded, but you are correct that the people, classified as regular visitors, can and do get easily jaded. It's a natural reaction to familiarity. It is those of us that have been regularly that are not able to reach the degree of excitement we once were automatically achieving when we first started visiting. That translates into WDW fault, instead of our own inability to get the joy we once did. It's like reading an exciting mystery, after we have read it once, the excitement and mystery is gone. But we have to remember that those that have not had the good fortune to go a lot or even once, still get that feeling and therefore do not understand all the "jaded" talk that fills the boards.
If you are referring to WDW in the sense of management...then I think it is important to acknowledge that they, like it or not, must work within certain confines that do not stifle the imagination of those of us that have no limit to what we can imagine. Budgets, cost vs. return, overhead, stockholders and the economy are all things that we do not have to plug into our desires. They do and that is why, I will sometimes cut them some slack. That doesn't mean that I think that every move they ever made was stellar. A few that come to mind are Imagination, Aladdin spinner or Tiki (new management). But I like to think that they want to keep those high paying jobs working for the mouse and try to do that best they can to make sure that the parks stay as viable as their restrictions allow.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Running a for-profit business is not an excluisve goal for WDW. The same factors you listed affect the operations and goals of competitors (USO) and cousins (DLR) too, yet they do a much better job of reinvesting in new experiences and maintaining existing ones. When you consider that and the price you pay to go to WDW, it's difficult not to feel disapointed to some degree.
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
Ive have no problem enjoying myself but thanks for the patronising pish.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
So that's what it's called. Here I thought I was just trying to communicate. Who knew? Well, anyway, if that is what you read, I can only say that it was not what I intended.
mergatroid
Well-Known Member
So that's what it's called. Here I thought I was just trying to communicate. Who knew? Well, anyway, if that is what you read, I can only say that it was not what I intended.
Doesn't read as patronising to me in the slightest either?
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
No matter who you think is calling the shots at WDW, Burbank or TDO, it's clear that they've adapted a "number crunching" view of any investment at WDW. You might think it's acceptable to hide behind a balance sheet but it's exactly this type of tunnel vision management that eventually leads to failure. This is best demonstrated by the following quote from the 1984 Annual Report:
If TWDC management in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s had adapted the mentality you seem to be willing to defend, WDW in 2012 would consist of the MK, DTD, and a bunch of DVCs. It's only because TWDC management demonstrated real leadership in the past that they have the incredible revenue stream that WDW is today. Today's TWDC's management has those high paying jobs today because of the bold decisions made by management in previous decades.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I agree completely with what you are saying to an extent. We have what we have today because they made bold decisions back then, however, if they were to continue to wildly spend without taking return into consideration before long there would be no WDW. There would be an empty lot with a lot of colorful decaying buildings. There is a line at which one must stop spending and start building up a war chest. I think we have seen those years and as evidenced by recent activity have started to reinvest in the parks. It may have been brought on by Uni's recent successes or it might just be part of a, so called, 10 year plan. I don't know that, you don't know that, so the best we can do is speculate. I was a business man long enough to know that there is a law of diminishing returns and it is hard and fast.
I don't know if this is the problem, but I do know it is possible and unless they have some type of blockbuster that they absolutely know will bring in additional revenue, they will be cautious about going in that direction. Over the past two decades they had a lot of room for growth. I'm not sure they do anymore. There is just so much water in the well. The more parks that have been put in world wide, the more people stay in there local and have no need to visit Florida. If I were to blame it on anything, that would be it. If the entire population of Florida went once a year, it wouldn't be enough to support the resort. JMHO!
GoofGoof
Premium Member
That can't miss blockbuster is called Carsland. It's a proven winner and that is why it's coming to WDW.
I do think that WDW grew with reckless abandon in the late 80s and 90s and we have to some extent been living through a correction period for the last 10+ years now. They have to be more cautious when selecting new projects since the existing resort is already over built. The overhead of just maintaining the existing rides and infrastructure makes WDW a more risky investment than it's smaller competitors like Uni and SW. WDW needs to maintain much higher attendance and spending levels to maintain profit margins. This is great in prosperous times since they have the capacity to make much more money, but when times are tough it makes them vulnerable to some extent. The issues with Europe has had a large economic impact on WDW.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I wasn't really blaming the general recession for WDW's recent lack of desire to spend money (although I do think it played in). WDW has a much larger and material portion of its guests from Europe than any of the other parks you listed. The European economy is a bigger mess than the US or Asia.
Seperately, WDW cannot just keep expanding indefinitely. None of the other parks can either. There will always be periods of growth followed by more stable periods. Part of the reason Universal has been growing so much recently is because they had to in order to stay in business. I give them lots of credit for picking winners and following through. Once they expand to a certain level they will be forced to step back and determine if more expansion is necessary or desired. I agree with the sentiment that current Disney management is coming around to the idea of investing more in WDW now. They are just being cautious to pick the right projects and taking their time getting them right. We might not like it as fans since the pace is sometimes so painfully slow, but in the end what matters is that they get the right projects green lit and built.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I'm just gonna say here that Net Profit doesn't really mean much. What counts is what is left over after you repay your capital investment. It is amortized over many years, but it doesn't show up as an expense because it is part of capital. If you took cash and paid down your debt you just trade off one asset for another. It doesn't mean you have all that cash in your hand. Interest on the debt incurred is considered an expense, payment on capital isn't.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
I don't intend to turn this into an accounting discussion but, normally, amorization and interest expense (basically the cost of long-term debt) are included in the calculation of Net Income. Net Income is supposed to represent the net increase in stockholder equity. Does TWDC follow generally accepted accounting principles?
Todd L
Well-Known Member
Im in agreement with you. I would complain to management if something out of hand went on with a Cast member!
I dont like the way some people act in the parks. Cutting line, pushing past kids to get ahead,Showing up last minute and Trying to get in front of people at parades is my biggest peeve !!
Somebody in this forum made a trip report a few years back where they posted pictures of park guest and made fun of their clothes, looks, weight...It was really nasty and mean spirited.
Whats the point of Going to Wdw to Be miserable and To make everyone around you unhappy in the process???
Stay home and save the money....go be miserable at work and leave the fun for the rest of us Grown-up Kids!
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
You are correct. I kind of got off on a different track there. I'll blame it on old age.
How do you define Net Income as opposed to Net Profit though. There is a difference in my mind. Net Income has no guarantee of Net Profit. If you are using the two interchangeably then I will give to that. However, if net income is 1 billion and net expenses are 2 billion it doesn't reflect the health of a company.I will end my part of this particular discussion because I am not an accountant and did everything I could throughout my life to not be one. Noble field, just not of interest to me. My understanding of its workings are sketchy at best.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
It's really simple. Disney is making a lot of money. If they want to continue to make a lot of money, they need to spend a lot of money.I feel like I'm in a CPA convention.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Amen. And they do. If you look at capital spending the Walt Disney Company is not afraid to invest free cash flow back into the business. It's just in recent years the spend in the parks division has been on other things besides WDW. As fans we want a piece of the love. Looks like maybe that is probably, sorta, possible to be happening some time in the maybe near futureIt's really simple. Disney is making a lot of money. If they want to continue to make a lot of money, they need to spend a lot of money.
.
Ray Karen Kaitie
Member
i think the point here is that most people understand a cut back on napkins, as long as the general maintance is kept up with. but when they cut napkins emblems, and fine details on other attractions don't work properly. or the price of tee shirts goes up 5 bucks at the same time the quality goes down that is disappointing. they cut housekeeping staff and rooms only get cleaned every other day. a cut back is fine as long as it doesn't effect quality. and or value however i think it is apparent that it has. the thing is if the cuts get much deeper and or quality declins too far even die hard disney fans will stop comming.
G00fyDad
Well-Known Member
It's really simple. Disney is making a lot of money. If they want to continue to make a lot of money, they need to spend a lot of money.
Oh, I understand what is being said.
It just makes my head hurt.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
So really, what's the point of this whiney little thread?
To bash those of us who still hold Disney to its own standards? To rant and complain about those of us who will rant and complain about the things Disney conditioned us to know are not acceptable in its parks? Or just to feel better in knowing that there are enough folks out there who either think WDW has never been better (PURE and utter BS!) or that it still is great, so that the addiction to the place is more justifiable?
Or is there really no point at all?
As to the other thread, which I never saw or took part in regarding grading Disney, I'd put it somewhere around a C+/B- product based on what it has offered in the past, its current standards and offerings, its price points, what it offers at its other resorts around the globe (as I've been lucky enough to travel to all of the other resorts multiple times) and what the competition is offering. ... In some individual areas, I'd give higher grades to Disney and in some lower ones.
To bash those of us who still hold Disney to its own standards? To rant and complain about those of us who will rant and complain about the things Disney conditioned us to know are not acceptable in its parks? Or just to feel better in knowing that there are enough folks out there who either think WDW has never been better (PURE and utter BS!) or that it still is great, so that the addiction to the place is more justifiable?
Or is there really no point at all?
As to the other thread, which I never saw or took part in regarding grading Disney, I'd put it somewhere around a C+/B- product based on what it has offered in the past, its current standards and offerings, its price points, what it offers at its other resorts around the globe (as I've been lucky enough to travel to all of the other resorts multiple times) and what the competition is offering. ... In some individual areas, I'd give higher grades to Disney and in some lower ones.