awoogala
Well-Known Member
ha, EVERYONE wants to buy this information. Children are the data mining gold mine.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Spirited News and Observations and Opinions ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
awoogala
Well-Known Member
no, not argumentative, it was just back and forth about the same subjecct, and I was getting tired of discussing it.
At any rate, the terms are written out for everyone to read and interpret (and re-read on a regular basis, since they can "change at any time"). Everyone can obviously make their own judgment calls.
flynnibus
Premium Member
What makes you say this?
You can't direct market to a child..
The child has no direct buying power..
Children are influencers (why we have TV ads and magazine ads) but those are 'broadcast' advertising rather than direct advertising.
Knowing Johnny is part of Family ABC's group is important.. but to get to Johnny I still need to reach Johnny through things Johnny initiates.. else I'm still just going through Johnny Sr. I want to know Johnny Sr has kids, and what kind, and influence Johnny Sr's buying. But all of that is done by getting Johnny Sr's demographics.. not Johnny Jr. I need to know how to tap Johnny Jr's market potential.. and that is still through Johnny Sr (which has Johnny Jr's things rolled up into it)
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
The DMA and its members would disagree with that.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Point was.. how do you directly REACH the child. Cell Phones and email addresses are in that age group.. but are still not dominate. Reaching that age group DIRECTLY is tough because they generally only have direct contact with the remote control and what they read.
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
Go retro use direct mail, I'm sure in my murky past that I was told that brand loyalty begins at an early age, Disney fans seem to substantiate this, so starting communication building brand awareness, spreading the brand essence, yes they may not have full purchasing power yet but they will do, and its future custom that is the goal.
nytimez
Well-Known Member
Now you're just being difficult. You know marketing data on children - including specific children - is highly valuable. Children do influence their parents purchase decisions - to a very high degree. And they have an increasing level of buying power of their own from younger-than-ever ages.
But you know that, too. You're too smart not to know that.
Sometimes, I feel like you're a character in the Monty Python argument sketch.
alissafalco
Well-Known Member
More importantly I don't want to wear those big chunky red bracelets because it will give me a terrible tan line around my wrist
Here's another link, to a US news source:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...udents-to-wear-locator-chips-judge-rules?lite
As the article notes, what's interesting about the privacy concerns surrounding RFID use -- especially as it pertains to minors -- is that it's troubling to people on both ends of the political spectrum.
Even though the issues in the Texas case are different (mandatory use of an RFID device as a condition of attending school vs. ostensibly optional use of RFID technology related to recreational activities on private property), what the lawsuit demonstrates is that the widespread employment of RFID technology is problematic to a lot of people, for a number of reasons. There will be substantial resistance to the new scheme, and substantial negative attention paid to it from sources other than the usual Disney fan sites.
Given this type of reception (which had to have been foreseeable), I can't imagine why anyone would have thought it a good idea to spend billions of dollars on this.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
Huh? Children aren't allowed to buy things? That's news to me!
A minor does not have legal standing to enter into a contract. A sales transaction is a form of a contract.
flynnibus
Premium Member
'direct buying power' - they are gated by their parents typically, both in access and in funds typically. That is unless in your town, the 8yr olds grab their wallet, borrow the car and head on down to ToyRUs on their own.
Nonetheless, my 9 year old has purchased candy and toys. Sure, we could have had the transaction rescinded, but it rarely happens.
Another problem with the FP+ scheme that makes it more likely that guest enjoyment will go down across the board, even if a guest has access to FP+: the average person's willingness to wait in a long line dramatically decreases as the length of the line increases -- there is not necessarily a linear inverse correlation between a person's willingness to wait and the length of the wait.
In other words: almost everybody would be willing to wait in a 15-minute line. Fewer people would be willing to wait 30 minutes, and fewer still would be willing to wait 60 minutes. By the time you get to 90-minute (and more) waits, you end up with a very large number of guests who will absolutely refuse to endure such a line, no matter how enticing the attraction might seem (or how many noisemakers and video screens there are in the queue).
A family that has 3 or 4 FP+s will get on those attractions with a relatively short wait, but experience much longer waits for everything else -- and, for many guests, having a small number of short waits is not going to offset the pain and annoyance of dealing with many more long standby queues for the rest of the day. (The problem would be magnified if the FP+s that a hypothetical family obtains are for attractions that don't need and/or don't presently have FP, such as the Tiki Room, CBJ, or CoP. Those would essentially be wasted opportunities.)
Put another way, an average guest is almost certainly going to feel that four cumulative hours of waiting that consist of constantly-moving 15- and 20-minute waits (in a world where FP+ doesn't exist), are preferable and feel more like an enjoyable day, than four cumulative hours of waiting that consist of three 5-minute FP+ waits and the rest 50- or 60-minute standby waits. In the latter example, a group of guests who are absolutely unwilling to spend more than, say, 45 minutes in line, may well leave the park feeling like they only got to do a small handful of things and that their value for money was very poor indeed, despite having FP+.
In other words: almost everybody would be willing to wait in a 15-minute line. Fewer people would be willing to wait 30 minutes, and fewer still would be willing to wait 60 minutes. By the time you get to 90-minute (and more) waits, you end up with a very large number of guests who will absolutely refuse to endure such a line, no matter how enticing the attraction might seem (or how many noisemakers and video screens there are in the queue).
A family that has 3 or 4 FP+s will get on those attractions with a relatively short wait, but experience much longer waits for everything else -- and, for many guests, having a small number of short waits is not going to offset the pain and annoyance of dealing with many more long standby queues for the rest of the day. (The problem would be magnified if the FP+s that a hypothetical family obtains are for attractions that don't need and/or don't presently have FP, such as the Tiki Room, CBJ, or CoP. Those would essentially be wasted opportunities.)
Put another way, an average guest is almost certainly going to feel that four cumulative hours of waiting that consist of constantly-moving 15- and 20-minute waits (in a world where FP+ doesn't exist), are preferable and feel more like an enjoyable day, than four cumulative hours of waiting that consist of three 5-minute FP+ waits and the rest 50- or 60-minute standby waits. In the latter example, a group of guests who are absolutely unwilling to spend more than, say, 45 minutes in line, may well leave the park feeling like they only got to do a small handful of things and that their value for money was very poor indeed, despite having FP+.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
Let's not forget the 2007 reports linking RFID devices to cancer:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/08/AR2007090800997_pf.html
And how's this for a headline:
Big Brother Mickey Mouse to monitor behavior via Disney's MyMagic+ RFID wristbands
http://blogs.computerworld.com/priv...itor-behavior-disneys-mymagic-rfid-wristbands
The article ends with:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/08/AR2007090800997_pf.html
And how's this for a headline:
Big Brother Mickey Mouse to monitor behavior via Disney's MyMagic+ RFID wristbands
http://blogs.computerworld.com/priv...itor-behavior-disneys-mymagic-rfid-wristbands
The article ends with:
Oh my, does Disney really want to go down this path?
nytimez
Well-Known Member
You know he's not suggesting that and no one here is. But the idea that children are somehow gated from purchasing is absurd on the face of it.
SirLink
Well-Known Member
Not ToysRUs here but you'll typically see 8 year olds heading into town on the Metro train system to buy DVDs, video games etc in town. The Parents give them the money sure! But it is up to kid to whatever he/she wants ...
SirLink
Well-Known Member
If it gets Nick, JR, Staggs, Jim and Iger out the company they can go down this Rabbit Hole all they want ... Iger will never taste a political career after some of these headlines ...
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
What you describe has basically been the case since FP arrived more than a decade ago.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
In practice, yes. But, not legally.