Screamscape - Monorail Expansion Rumor

[s8film40]

You don't have to buy it - because what you said is not how the buses operate for one. And two, reality is, guests board the buses at MK instead of riding the monorail to the TTC to ride buses. Because they prefer the direct, more efficient route of the bus, over riding the monorail, to just transfer again.

What are you talking about? There are no resort buses at TTC. Guests don't usually have transportation options theres either a monorail or a bus for any given destination, but not both.

 

[orky8]

Yet you skipped the most important part...

"One that outlines the problems"

You are proposing a solution before agreeing what needs to be solved nor looking at if the proposed solution actually fixes the problem.

This shows everyone is assuming the monorail is the answer.. before even evaluating the choices.

OK, apparently you need this spelled out. Two things.

1) The problem is people aren't visiting AK, and aren't utilizing park hoppers, aren't spending as much time at the parks as they should, and aren't giving Disney every last dime that they have.

2) You don't need to have a problem to better your product. In fact, if you are at that point, then you do have a problem. The iPhone 4S is selling like hotcakes. But Apple is not going to wait for that to stop before releasing the iPhone 5 (ETA:I should clarify they aren't going to wait for a "problem").

3) The PROBLEM is Disney doesn't understand #2 anymore.

 

[orky8]

Because I know what you are trying to do. You know that WL is less expensive that GF and that that reason is solely because of the monorail. While the monorail is one of the factors it is far from the only factor. The GF is the flagship resort of WDW where as WL is at the bottom end of the deluxe category. It is like comparing a Cadillac to a Bentley. When the 4 Season opens we will compare room rates and we shall see how much it not being connected to the monorail drives the price down.

Honestly, I'm not trying to do anything. I'm down-right curious. I thought you would have the numbers handy. One of my basic premises is that expanding the monorail can increase room rates charged. The GF is the premier resort, but one reason of that is because of the monorail. Sure, the victorian theme and spa can explain some of it, but what is the price difference? How much of that is monorail related? You're the expert. What do you think? If the WL and GF magically switched places, all other things being equal (the golf course and the spa [isn't that closed?] and Victoria and Alberts -- they all move), how do you think their rates would change. Me. I bet you WL goes up by $100 and GF down by the same amount.

 

[s8film40]

Honestly, I'm not trying to do anything. I'm down-right curious. I thought you would have the numbers handy. One of my basic premises is that expanding the monorail can increase room rates charged. The GF is the premier resort, but one reason of that is because of the monorail. Sure, the victorian theme and spa can explain some of it, but what is the price difference? How much of that is monorail related? You're the expert. What do you think? If the WL and GF magically switched places, all other things being equal (the golf course and the spa [isn't that closed?] and Victoria and Alberts -- they all move), how do you think their rates would change. Me. I bet you WL goes up by $100 and GF down by the same amount.

I don't think we need to compare room rates. We all know the monorail resorts carry a premium over the others. The fact that they are even referred to as the monorail resorts says it all. If someone refuses to believe that the monorail creates a premium over other resorts they truly are burying their head in the sand.

 

[flynnibus]

OK, apparently you need this spelled out. Two things.

1) The problem is people aren't visiting AK, and aren't utilizing park hoppers, aren't spending as much time at the parks as they should, and aren't giving Disney every last dime that they have.

2) You don't need to have a problem to better your product. In fact, if you are at that point, then you do have a problem. The iPhone 4S is selling like hotcakes. But Apple is not going to wait for that to stop before releasing the iPhone 5 (ETA:I should clarify they aren't going to wait for a "problem").

3) The PROBLEM is Disney doesn't understand #2 anymore.

So you propose spending a few billion to make it easier to park hop.

Yet you chose to ignore all the problems of the existing transportation system.

You aren't helping your cause at all if your premise is 'lets build the monorail to make it easier to park hop' - when that isn't really the complaints from customers on why they don't goto AK in the first place.

I'm tired of going in these circles... if you build a TRANSPORTATION system.. shouldn't it solve your TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS?

 

[Master Yoda]

Honestly, I'm not trying to do anything. I'm down-right curious. I thought you would have the numbers handy. One of my basic premises is that expanding the monorail can increase room rates charged. The GF is the premier resort, but one reason of that is because of the monorail. Sure, the victorian theme and spa can explain some of it, but what is the price difference? How much of that is monorail related? You're the expert. What do you think? If the WL and GF magically switched places, all other things being equal (the golf course and the spa [isn't that closed?] and Victoria and Alberts -- they all move), how do you think their rates would change. Me. I bet you WL goes up by $100 and GF down by the same amount.

The price difference on standard rooms is about $150-$200 more per night. If you were to pick up the Grand Californian, and put it in the same spot of the GF it would fetch the same rates.

Like I have been saying. One of the reasons people like the monorail resorts is the easy access to MK. It would not matter what that transportation is as long as it remains quick and easy. Most guests do not care how they get there. How long it takes is the biggest factor.

 

[s8film40]

So you propose spending a few billion to make it easier to park hop.

Yet you chose to ignore all the problems of the existing transportation system.

You aren't helping your cause at all if your premise is 'lets build the monorail to make it easier to park hop' - when that isn't really the complaints from customers on why they don't goto AK in the first place.

That is absolutely the reason people don't go to AK. I spent many years working at Disney, and countless people every day would ask is there a monorail to DAK or DHS, you reply no and then they all say the same thing oh, well I can ride the monorail to Epcot then right. You reply yes they get on. If you don't believe me go to the MK monorail station stand at the center of the express load ramp for about five minutes you can hear it for yourself.

 

[s8film40]

The price difference on standard rooms is about $150-$200 more per night. If you were to pick up the Grand Californian, and put it in the same spot of the GF it would fetch the same rates.

Like I have been saying. One of the reasons people like the monorail resorts is the easy access to MK. It would not matter what that transportation is as long as it remains quick and easy. Most guests do not care how they get there. How long it takes is the biggest factor.

If you took away the monorail those resorts would not have easy access to the MK. That's the point the monorail provides easier access.

 

[orky8]

So you propose spending a few billion to make it easier to park hop.

Yet you chose to ignore all the problems of the existing transportation system.

You aren't helping your cause at all if your premise is 'lets build the monorail to make it easier to park hop' - when that isn't really the complaints from customers on why they don't goto AK in the first place.

I'm tired of going in these circles... if you build a TRANSPORTATION system.. shouldn't it solve your TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS?

And I'm tired of you pretending I don't answer your questions (and aren't we really all on the same team here?!?)

7 pages back, I said I want to build a system connecting the four parks, including a stop for the Epcot resorts. I said Disney could use the parks as hubs instead of running busses everywhere all the time. I suggested they use hubs for regular and quick trips, but also offer people the option of point-to-point like they have now, but offer that only hourly. For those staying at the Epcot resorts, you can now monorail directly to MK or any park, instead of taking the bus (which downright sucks from those resorts, and I assume the others as well).

Yes, I would prefer that Disney builds personal pods like from the Incredibles that you push a button and go directly to where you want, but I've never even really seen that technology.

You asked for numbers. I gave you numbers. Through increased park hopping and increased hotel rates at the epcot resorts, I estimated over $100 million in annual revenue. Even if the system, returns only $100 million in annual revenue, and only allows better park hopping, and cost $3 billion, meaning it takes 30 years to get back that investment -- I still think that is a wise investment for Disney. But I don't think it will cost that, I think that is understating the revenue boost. I've given you numbers from my guesses. You clearly think like the current suits, which is a lack of "hey wow, we are Disney and our guests shouldn't have to take busses between our theme parks."

 

[orky8]

The price difference on standard rooms is about $150-$200 more per night. If you were to pick up the Grand Californian, and put it in the same spot of the GF it would fetch the same rates.

Like I have been saying. One of the reasons people like the monorail resorts is the easy access to MK. It would not matter what that transportation is as long as it remains quick and easy. Most guests do not care how they get there. How long it takes is the biggest factor.

OK, so, let's conservatively say that being on the monorail adds $100/night to the MK resorts. I think my numbers earlier were accurate that if there was a monorail stop at the Epcot resorts (at the Int'l gateway) those resorts could easily charge $50/night, if not more. That is a huge source of revenue.

And while Flyinnbus seems to think parkhopping has no value (which is contrary to all evidence and the fact that they charge to in fact do this), I think saying monrails to all 4 resorts could get you $7 per person extra each year is pretty dang conservative as well. That may be as simple as a fee on the park hopper, or someone buying an extra dole-whip or two.

I think you are easily looking at $100 million / year in increased revenue. Even at a $1 billion cost, which seems a bit conservative since they own all the land, but lets go with it, is not a bad ROI. And, I think the real ROI is much closer to 5 years or better.

 

[Blueliner]

Here are a couple of questions/ideas inspired by Eddie Sotto’s musings on boat transportation:

1. Are there any environmental restrictions on converting what appear to be non-navigable waterways into navigable waterways?

2. Are there any restrictions on creating new channels that would connect these existing waterways?

3. If the answers to the two questions above are no, then why doesn’t Disney use the high water table to its advantage, and bring us more boats?

In your free time, have a look at the existing waterways/drainage channels on property. There currently is a sizeable waterway that exits Bay Lake just east of Fort Wilderness. This waterway runs virtually unimpeded from Bay Lake all the way to Epcot Center Drive. Just south of Buena Vista Drive, this waterway connects to the “Sassagoula River,” which services Old Key West, Saratoga Springs, Port Orleans Riverside, Port Orleans French Quarter, and Downtown Disney.

Phase One: Make this waterway navigable (which may require some new bridges on Vista Blvd. and Disney Vacation Club Way), and you have just opened up access to the Magic Kingdom via boat to guests from 4 resorts, as well as a new form of transportation from Downtown Disney (a transportation hub) to Magic Kingdom (TTC transportation hub).

Phase Two: Cut a channel that runs from the above-referenced newly navigable waterway to Crescent Lake, just north of Buena Vista Drive (maybe even using the existing water behind the World Showcase). Now you have added boat service from all of the Epcot Resorts to not only the Magic Kingdom but also to Downtown Disney.

Phase Three: Cut a channel and turning basin running south from the newly created channel in Phase Two, across Buena Vista Drive (need a new bridge) into existing woodland that runs roughly parallel to Victory Way. Add short walking paths (or tram paths) from Caribbean Beach Resort (straight west from Caribbean Cay) and Pop Century/Art of Animation (Straight west from the bridge connecting AofA and Pop Century) to boat docks on this new channel, and you now have taken a crazy amount of the load off the buses.

The key concern might be the travel time. The water route from Magic Kingdom to Downtown Disney is about 6.5 miles, so you’re looking at a pretty long boat ride. (Probably about 35-45 minutes if the boat is really moving).

 

[wserratore1963]

OK, so, let's conservatively say that being on the monorail adds $100/night to the MK resorts. I think my numbers earlier were accurate that if there was a monorail stop at the Epcot resorts (at the Int'l gateway) those resorts could easily charge $50/night, if not more. That is a huge source of revenue.

And while Flyinnbus seems to think parkhopping has no value (which is contrary to all evidence and the fact that they charge to in fact do this), I think saying monrails to all 4 resorts could get you $7 per person extra each year is pretty dang conservative as well. That may be as simple as a fee on the park hopper, or someone buying an extra dole-whip or two.

I think you are easily looking at $100 million / year in increased revenue. Even at a $1 billion cost, which seems a bit conservative since they own all the land, but lets go with it, is not a bad ROI. And, I think the real ROI is much closer to 5 years or better.

Thank You
The logic is compelling and so would be the positive press, not to mention the
increaced reveune and the ever so important ":sohappy:CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE"

 

[Master Yoda]

OK, so, let's conservatively say that being on the monorail adds $100/night to the MK resorts. I think my numbers earlier were accurate that if there was a monorail stop at the Epcot resorts (at the Int'l gateway) those resorts could easily charge $50/night, if not more. That is a huge source of revenue.

And while Flyinnbus seems to think parkhopping has no value (which is contrary to all evidence and the fact that they charge to in fact do this), I think saying monrails to all 4 resorts could get you $7 per person extra each year is pretty dang conservative as well. That may be as simple as a fee on the park hopper, or someone buying an extra dole-whip or two.

I think you are easily looking at $100 million / year in increased revenue. Even at a $1 billion cost, which seems a bit conservative since they own all the land, but lets go with it, is not a bad ROI. And, I think the real ROI is much closer to 5 years or better.

OK, last time. Here is the point you are not getting.

The form of transportation used does not have to be a monorail. All it has to be is quick and efficient. That is it.

On an aside....You have the park hopping thing backwards. If Disney made profit from park hopping (excluding what they charge to do it of course), they would not charge for it. A person going from one park to another via Disney transportation costs them money and spending does not really increase.

 

[Master Yoda]

Here are a couple of questions/ideas inspired by Eddie Sotto’s musings on boat transportation:

1. Are there any environmental restrictions on converting what appear to be non-navigable waterways into navigable waterways?

2. Are there any restrictions on creating new channels that would connect these existing waterways?

3. If the answers to the two questions above are no, then why doesn’t Disney use the high water table to its advantage, and bring us more boats?

In your free time, have a look at the existing waterways/drainage channels on property. There currently is a sizeable waterway that exits Bay Lake just east of Fort Wilderness. This waterway runs virtually unimpeded from Bay Lake all the way to Epcot Center Drive. Just south of Buena Vista Drive, this waterway connects to the “Sassagoula River,” which services Old Key West, Saratoga Springs, Port Orleans Riverside, Port Orleans French Quarter, and Downtown Disney.

Phase One: Make this waterway navigable (which may require some new bridges on Vista Blvd. and Disney Vacation Club Way), and you have just opened up access to the Magic Kingdom via boat to guests from 4 resorts, as well as a new form of transportation from Downtown Disney (a transportation hub) to Magic Kingdom (TTC transportation hub).

Phase Two: Cut a channel that runs from the above-referenced newly navigable waterway to Crescent Lake, just north of Buena Vista Drive (maybe even using the existing water behind the World Showcase). Now you have added boat service from all of the Epcot Resorts to not only the Magic Kingdom but also to Downtown Disney.

Phase Three: Cut a channel and turning basin running south from the newly created channel in Phase Two, across Buena Vista Drive (need a new bridge) into existing woodland that runs roughly parallel to Victory Way. Add short walking paths (or tram paths) from Caribbean Beach Resort (straight west from Caribbean Cay) and Pop Century/Art of Animation (Straight west from the bridge connecting AofA and Pop Century) to boat docks on this new channel, and you now have taken a crazy amount of the load off the buses.

The key concern might be the travel time. The water route from Magic Kingdom to Downtown Disney is about 6.5 miles, so you’re looking at a pretty long boat ride. (Probably about 35-45 minutes if the boat is really moving).

This is something I have also pondered. There are a few issues that would need to be over come (in particular elevation changes and road crossings) and as you mentioned, travel time. Getting a boat to a decent speed is costly and a bit dangerous.

 

[s8film40]

The form of transportation used does not have to be a monorail. All it has to be is quick and efficient. That is it.

On an aside....You have the park hopping thing backwards. If Disney made profit from park hopping (excluding what they charge to do it of course), they would not charge for it. A person going from one park to another via Disney transportation costs them money and spending does not really increase.

Ok well buses aren't quick and efficient so what did you have in mind?

If a guests is choosing between leaving for the day or park hopping, then park hopping makes them money especially if that guest then spends more time in the park and then decides to have dinner.

 

[orky8]

OK, last time. Here is the point you are not getting.

The form of transportation used does not have to be a monorail. All it has to be is quick and efficient. That is it.

On an aside....You have the park hopping thing backwards. If Disney made profit from park hopping (excluding what they charge to do it of course), they would not charge for it. A person going from one park to another via Disney transportation costs them money and spending does not really increase.

What?!? Besides the monorail (and a bit of themeing) there is no difference between the WL and the poly/GF. Yet they charge $150-200 more per night. The reason for that is the monorail.

You're right. It doesn't have to be monorails, but I don't think an exclusive bus road running around the three monorail resorts would net you $150-$200 more per night, even if that bus was faster (which it would be) and ran more frequently (which it easily could).

And I don't have park-hopping backwards. Disney charges you for the perk of park-hopping. If the monorail went to all four parks, that perk would (1) be added to more tickets and (2) fetch a higher price tag. Finally, if park hopping were easier, I believe (this is my own anecdotal evidence) people would spend more time and money on property.

This is very straightforward analysis. Someone calls up the TA or Disney directly, and the TA says, "Would you like to add park hopping? You can now easily take the monorail to all four parks, making park hopping quick, easy, and fun. Spend your morning on a Safari, eat lunch in Japan, and watch fireworks by the Castle, and be whisked between all these things on a monorail." That's not worth an extra $2 per person, per year (on average)? You don't think, on average, you could get an extra $5 per person by having a family either spend one more meal on property, or an extra light-stick thingy by going to fireworks at MK instead of back to the hotel?

 

[Blueliner]

This is something I have also pondered. There are a few issues that would need to be over come (in particular elevation changes and road crossings) and as you mentioned, travel time. Getting a boat to a decent speed is costly and a bit dangerous.

I don't know how fast the big ferries run from TTC to the Magic Kingdom, but I am assuming that the Friendship Boats, the resort launches on Bay Lake, and the Sassagoula River pontoon boats rarely exceed 10 knots. I'll put it this way: we spent 2 nights at the Beach Club Villas about a month ago, and I went running along Crescent Lake and the connecting waterways to DHS and the International Gateway both mornings. One of those mornings, I "raced" one of the Friendship Boats from about the Boardwalk's Hospitality House to the bridge underneath Buena Vista Drive, and it was a tie. :lol:

Another idea would be to scrap my Phase One, but keep Phases Two and Three. You still would be reducing car traffic on Buena Vista Drive, which is by far the most congested artery on the property. You might even be able to create a new transportation hub in the area adjacent to Victory Way described in my Phase 3, giving buses a straight shot onto World Drive.

 

[Master Yoda]

Ok well buses aren't quick and efficient so what did you have in mind?

If a guests is choosing between leaving for the day or park hopping, then park hopping makes them money especially if that guest then spends more time in the park and then decides to have dinner.

The buses could be quicker and more efficient. They will never approach what an on rails form of transportation can do in terms of volume when just going from A to B but more of them with shorter stops would start bridging the gap. They are also so much more flexible than anything on rails.

Park hopping has only little effect on spending for an on property guest using solely Disney transportation. They are basically stuck eating three meals a day somewhere on property so going from Epcot to MK is not all that likely to make them eat a 4th meal. Spending on merchandise is fairly consistent. I am sure they make a little extra here and there but when you back out what it costs to get them from one park to another it is not much. If they were raking in the cash by people going from one park to another they would let people do it for free.

 

[s8film40]

The water canals are used for drainage control and there are levees with gates that open and close to adjust the water levels, a way would have to be found to go around this and have it still perform its function.

 

[orky8]

Park hopping has only little effect on spending for an on property guest using solely Disney transportation. They are basically stuck eating three meals a day somewhere on property so going from Epcot to MK is not all that likely to make them eat a 4th meal. Spending on merchandise is fairly consistent. I am sure they make a little extra here and there but when you back out what it costs to get them from one park to another it is not much. If they were raking in the cash by people going from one park to another they would let people do it for free.

Let's also think about the off-site guests, who drive. You are done with your 1/2 day AK because, well, it's pretty much a 1/2 day park for most guests. Are you going to take the bus to another park? Nope. Are you going to drive to another park? Maybe, but then you get in your car, realize you are tired, and instead of having lunch at Epcot for $70, decide to go back to your hotel because you are in the car anyway.

Also, right now, if you are an off-site guest, the parkhopper add-on is a tough sell. But, advertise monorails to all parks, quick and easy access, even for off-site guests, with no need to move your car. The revenue is there.

The numbers to support a monorail will never add up if you are just trying to compare against busses. They only make sense if you understand how the monorail will change guest behavior.

The whole point of the resort is to keep people on property and spending their money there as much as possible. The current bus situation I believe leaves revenue on the table as far as reaching that goal is concerned.