Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[PeterAlt]

That ship has sailed. There was an FCC rule that you couldn't own 2 network tv stations in the same market, but so much has changed in the last few years that I'm not even sure that's still on the books. Even if its not I doubt a merger would go through that would allow 1 company to control 2 of the 4 major networks. They would have to spin off one of the networks and a bunch of cable channels and even then it still may not fly.

I wasn't thinking of the networks. I was thinking just the theme parks.

 

[Tim_4]

Yes. But. Now your game device is linked to a unique identifier. Will that be able to see what other games you play and hense, targeted advertising to you?

Unlikely. The device can't search for things or do anything in its own. It requires a trigger action to perform (i.e. touching it to the game pad).

 

[Tim_4]

OK, your post made me LOL.

Your point is completely valid (all of them, not just the quoted) and astute. However, I just had a giggle thinking about tying the turkey leg to the plush example.

I'm picturing a dad who ate the turkey leg having bad gas that night, grossing out his little kid so he bought them a plush toy the next time they were in a store in the park to make up for "Daddy's smell bad time". And when the kid gets home, proudly showing off the toy and telling everyone how his favorite time at Disney was when Daddy had too much gas, ROFL.

I know, I know...juvenile...but it instantly came to mind.



Amen. Gosh I like you, LOL. You get it.



That's really completely trivial in this case.

• Your console is already tied to (at least one) unique identifier particularly if you take it online.

• Disney Infinity already has access your system, and any possible reporting of your games, activities, etc. as any other console game (whatever is allowed by the manufacturer of the system to access).

• Each Disney Infinity product/figure/etc. comes (everything except the blind-pack power discs) with a web code to register online, so your Disney Infinity stuff will be usable in the coming PC version and the iPad App (if you don't register them, among other things, that content you have unlocked in the console game will not be available so you cannot edit your Toy Box on the PC or iPad, which is a major game feature)

• Your unique console ID is linked to all this through the Disney Infinity website, which you access with...your DISNEY.COM account.

• Your DISNEY.COM account is already linked to your Resort Account/Information, so Disney could already get this data without involving the Magic Band.

Since your DISNEY.COM account is already linked to your Magic Band, it would serve no purpose because you are just telling it what it already knows (that you own both products, and what their unique identifiers are) should Disney care to know.

It's simply an Easter Egg, a treat since both use the same technology, and reenforcing the marketing goal of Disney Infinity which is to make it the "hub" of your Disney-life. My guess is, lots of Disney products will be coming with web codes should it really take off - buy that new Cars lunchbox? Stick a web code inside, and when you get home and add it you suddenly have a lunch-box accessory in-game, too. The possibilities are rather limitless of how many Disney products it could touch - "Disney Infinity Enhanced!" on even the most innocuous items.

It's also much more fail-prone - people are already buying Magic Bands off of eBay solely to unlock the feature in the game (which just takes one pass of the band, you never need it again, unless they release more stuff). Bands that are either blank, or are connected to other people. So if Disney did want to cross-reference this data, this would be the dumb way to do it - since they already can do that on their end per above without anyone ever having the Magic Band near their game console.

Personally, I have zero privacy concerns with the Magic Band. It's the same way I feel about my TiVo. It records every single press of the remote, it knows when you do a replay (that's how they were able to say that Janet Jackson's Superbowl slip-up was the most replayed moment of the game), it knows what I've been watching, it knows when I've been naughty, it knows when I've been nice...inside the capsule of what I watch on TV.

A Disney vacation is a capsule, and I couldn't care less however Disney tracks me when I am on their property (the only place the Magic Band means anything, aside from this one other Disney product, Infinity). They already tracked us 8 ways to Sunday - you are video recorded hundreds of times a day all over property, credit card transactions were already linked, fastpasses, etc. The list goes on. To be quite honest, the more I think about it - if they are going to do all this tracking, I almost RATHER it be this way than them trying to link up all those various data sources. At least they are getting complete/accurate data now about how many times someone uses a bathroom, or how many times they go on a certain ride or buy a certain food product. At least this way they are able to make informed choices instead of all the guess-work in using all the previous tracking methods in tandem.

I think the privacy concerns are really taking away from the real issue - the fact that the entire system is a huge waste of money compared to what Universal is getting for the same kinda dough as far as guest experience.

"What was your favorite part of your vacation, Sally?"

UNIVERSAL ANSWER
"Well, we went to Hogwarts and then took the magic train to Gringotts, and then met Lisa Simpson in Springfield and went on her ride and then we went on an adventure with the Transformers!"

DISNEY ANSWER
"It was so neat when we got this pretty bracelet - LOOK IT'S PINK! It let us through the gate of the park, and then when we stopped for sodas Daddy just waved his and and didn't have to take his wallet out! Oh and we got our Fastpasses to Splash Mountain way months before...too bad that day it was kinda rainy so people weren't on it anyway so we didn't even end up needing the Fastpass anyway."

That's the real concern here - not the remote possibility that Disney will serve us targeted advertising based on products we already have purchased (which, to be honest, again, since they are gonna give me ads anyway - yeah, I'd rather get ads related to what I am interested in, and not feminine hygiene products or hair removal systems).

If NextGen is nothing more than what you wrote under "DISNEY ANSWER" then I'm with you 100%. However, NextGen is much more than bands and Fastpass+, or at least it's supposed to be. Go back a few pages and read the conversation on Disney Infinity and iTunes. I'd quote them here but multi quoting is a challenge on my mobile device.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Perhaps the most amazing aspect of NextGen is that Disney abandoned what they historically do best, brick-and-mortar theme park attractions, for what they historically do worst, digital technology ventures.

Disney does have an abominable track record for IT projects.

But the comparison with brick and mortar doesn't hold up. Disney doesn't abondon brick and mortar. No, they already have a thriving theme park resort. In fact, so succesful there seems no limit to the amount of price increases Disney can afford even in time of crisis while still increasing attendance.

WDW doesn't need to spend $2 billion on a fifth gate. It can not viably exploit that. No, WDW needs to exploit the brick and mortar that's already there. The investments in b&m have already been made the last few decades. Disney needs to exploit their pole position and add a new virtual layer on top of their brick and mortar, while UNI is playing catch-up and has to spend billions just to get to where WDW was three moves ago.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I think the privacy concerns are really taking away from the real issue - the fact that the entire system is a huge waste of money compared to what Universal is getting for the same kinda dough as far as guest experience.

"What was your favorite part of your vacation, Sally?"

UNIVERSAL ANSWER
"Well, we went to Hogwarts and then took the magic train to Gringotts, and then met Lisa Simpson in Springfield and went on her ride and then we went on an adventure with the Transformers!"

DISNEY ANSWER
"It was so neat when we got this pretty bracelet - LOOK IT'S PINK! It let us through the gate of the park, and then when we stopped for sodas Daddy just waved his and and didn't have to take his wallet out! Oh and we got our Fastpasses to Splash Mountain way months before...too bad that day it was kinda rainy so people weren't on it anyway so we didn't even end up needing the Fastpass anyway."

That's the real concern here - not the remote possibility that Disney will serve us targeted advertising based on products we already have purchased (which, to be honest, again, since they are gonna give me ads anyway - yeah, I'd rather get ads related to what I am interested in, and not feminine hygiene products or hair removal systems).

UNI answer:
Wow, at last I enjoyed UNI. Simpsons and Potter finally turned their parks into a fun full day experience for our kids.

Disney answer:
Wow, we totally enjoyed Pirates and ToT and walking WS promenade again. And this new tech really elevates the experience above the competition. Something about Disney is just magic.

For UNI, in 2008/9 the right strategy to pursue was to invest heavily in brick and mortar, to rejuvenate their underperforming parks. For WDW at this time, the right strategy to pursue was to invest heavily in new technology to better exploit the existing, thriving parks, which held up amazingly well even in the crash.

 

[Nemo14]

Don't count your chickens yet. Easier to spread a few billion over 6 parks...

I agree - it's just a matter of time...

 

[GoofGoof]

I wasn't thinking of the networks. I was thinking just the theme parks.

I guess if they spun off just the theme parks it would be possible. I'm not sure Comcast would be interested in running more parks while paying royalties to Disney. They are already doing that with the Marvel characters.

 

[Tim_4]

I hope people will take the time to read this because (at least in my opinion), it answers the question of why the heck Disney would be shelling out over a billion dollars on the NextGen project. The logic is all here, in a Harvard Business School case called "Hilton Hotels: Brand Differentiation through Customer Relationship Management." Some highlights follow.

http://faculty.mu.edu.sa/public/uploads/1361962401.026customer relationship95.pdf

Tim Harvey, EVP of Shared Services and CIO captured the role of information technology at Hilton: “At Hilton we have a belief that information technology is so intertwined with our brands and their culture that you need a consistent infrastructure to enable the brand promise."

The nervous system of the Hilton Hotels Corporation was a comprehensive, integrated infrastructure known as OnQ.

OnQ embodied both the one-stop shopping nature of an integrated solution and a readiness to serve customers “on cue.” Built on the premise that technology was an enabler for employees to deliver great customer service, OnQ was an ambitious custom-built enterprise system designed to support the property-level operations of each hotel in the Hilton family, regardless of size and segment, and to enable the firm’s Customers Really Matter initiative at each customer touch point.

Hilton estimated the cost of OnQ to be about $93 million, with approximately $40 million for application development and $53 million for hardware and infrastructure implementation. By 2007, the investment in OnQ had grown by another $102 million,

Over double its original budget. Hmm.

“CRM is a way to use technology to give you the power to solidify relationships with our best customers.” The technology enabler was OnQ CRM, an application built on the OnQ infrastructure that consolidated far-flung customer data and produced comprehensive arrival reports.

At every one of our customer touch points there were barriers to good service because information was not integrated and easily available. If there is no holistic view, talk times [time taken per call] are longer at the call centers, we can’t provide continuity to guests that stay with multiple brands, we can’t recognize them properly, if they had a bad experience in their last stay we don’t know. With CRM we set out to fix all that.

Fostering a closer relationship with best guests throughout their lifecycle of interaction with the Hilton family of brands was indeed a critical objective of the CRM initiative. As Subramanian put it: “We want to ensure that our best guests don’t sleep around with the competition.”

Our success is going to come down to execution. That’s the reality. We know what the opportunity is, we have the infrastructure and the data, what it comes down to is how effectively to harness the promise of CRM, the potential of OnQ, and execute it consistently and flawlessly across the network.

And there's the rub. Can they execute?

 

[ParentsOf4]

Disney does have an abominable track record for IT projects.

But the comparison with brick and mortar doesn't hold up. Disney doesn't abondon brick and mortar. No, they already have a thriving theme park resort. In fact, so succesful there seems no limit to the amount of price increases Disney can afford even in time of crisis while still increasing attendance.

WDW doesn't need to spend $2 billion on a fifth gate. It can not viably exploit that. No, WDW needs to exploit the brick and mortar that's already there. The investments in b&m have already been made the last few decades. Disney needs to exploit their pole position and add a new virtual layer on top of their brick and mortar, while UNI is playing catch-up and has to spend billions just to get to where WDW was three moves ago.

So WDW doesn't need any attractions at DHS or DAK?

Seriously though, an amusement park's life blood is a steady stream of replacement attractions, the same way every 12 months we get a new iPhone. A theme park can never be "done" with brick-and-motor attractions.

WDW doesn't have a thriving theme park resort. They have the Magic Kingdom setting attendance records while, increasingly, guests are abandoning DHS and DAK in droves, often heading up the road to see the cool attractions being built at Uni. WDW now has the same attendance imbalance problem that DLR had, the one that Iger spent over a billion dollars to fix.

Disney Parks & Resorts revenue was up only 7% last quarter, despite overall price increases greater than that, despite a billion dollar investment at DLR (this was the last quarter with the Cars Land bump), and despite close to a half-a-billion dollar investment at the Magic Kingdom.

There's a reason Disney is going to spend perhaps another billion at DAK and DHS, and its not because they "have a thriving theme park resort".

 

[Goofyernmost]

ParentsOf4 said: ↑
Perhaps the most amazing aspect of NextGen is that Disney abandoned what they historically do best, brick-and-mortar theme park attractions, for what they historically do worst, digital technology ventures.

Disney does have an abominable track record for IT projects.

But the comparison with brick and mortar doesn't hold up. Disney doesn't abondon brick and mortar. No, they already have a thriving theme park resort. In fact, so succesful there seems no limit to the amount of price increases Disney can afford even in time of crisis while still increasing attendance.

WDW doesn't need to spend $2 billion on a fifth gate. It can not viably exploit that. No, WDW needs to exploit the brick and mortar that's already there. The investments in b&m have already been made the last few decades. Disney needs to exploit their pole position and add a new virtual layer on top of their brick and mortar, while UNI is playing catch-up and has to spend billions just to get to where WDW was three moves ago.

To a certain degree I agree with both of you with a possible added thought. Disney was always a leader in technology. Not only in use of modern ideas but also in creating many things that, at the time were, technologically and systematically brand new and worked for the company no end. The use of technology to enhance attractions and entertainment venues WAS the strong point of the Disney Co. It is what separated them from the competition.

Walt himself was without doubt an innovator and had the ability to adapt not only his ideas but that of others in his business. So what is different? In my mind, it is the slowness that today's Disney Co. reacts and gets on board. In today's world one does not have a lot of time to adapt to new stuff before it has become yesterdays technology. They try to work with old technology and morph it into current stuff. That would not have been, in my opinion, how it would have worked in the day.

All those words to say, that it's not that they abandoned what they historically did best, because I believe that mixing brick and mortar with technology IS what Disney historically did best. Perhaps all the people that had the talent to do that are now dead, retired or down sized and those ego driven youngun's don't have a clue and are close to not being able to keep their heads above water anymore.

 

[GoofGoof]

I hope people will take the time to read this because (at least in my opinion), it answers the question of why the heck Disney would be shelling out over a billion dollars on the NextGen project. The logic is all here, in a Harvard Business School case called "Hilton Hotels: Brand Differentiation through Customer Relationship Management." Some highlights follow.

http://faculty.mu.edu.sa/public/uploads/1361962401.026customer relationship95.pdf








Over double its original budget. Hmm.








And there's the rub. Can they execute?

Good read. I'll be the first to say it. Hilton's system $200M. Disney = a billion more and growing. I know they aren't the same thing, but 6+ times the money is a lot.

I know I'm obsessed with the cost so to change it up a little I think the most interesting comparison was the quote about not wanting their best customers to "sleep around" with their competitors. Sounds exactly like Disney's plan. Like you said, can they execute? If all the data mining determines exactly who the "best customers" are how does Disney plan to keep them from going down the street? I still think the end game has to involve some sort of loyalty type program that offers incentives to those identified as "preferred guests".

 

[The Empress Lilly]

So WDW doesn't need any attractions at DHS or DAK?

Seriously though, an amusement park's life blood is a steady stream of replacement attractions, the same way every 12 months we get a new iPhone. A theme park can never be "done" with brick-and-motor attractions.

WDW doesn't have a thriving theme park resort. They have the Magic Kingdom setting attendance records while, increasingly, guests are abandoning DHS and DAK in droves, often heading up the road to see the cool attractions being built at Uni. WDW now has the same attendance imbalance problem that DLR had, the one that Iger spent over a billion dollars to fix.

Disney Parks & Resorts revenue was up only 7% last quarter, despite overall price increases greater than that, despite a billion dollar investment at DLR (this was the last quarter with the Cars Land bump), and despite close to a half-a-billion dollar investment at the Magic Kingdom.

There's a reason Disney is going to spend perhaps another billion at DAK and DHS, and its not because they "have a thriving theme park resort".

Parks and Resorts was up seven percent, on account of viable price increases and succesful investments?

I'm sorry, I think I'm going to go with Wall street's interpretation of that sort of performance, and run to Disney stock to push it to yet another record. It's a sign of staggering succes, not of failure.

Imbalances in the thriving WDW resort are being adressed. NFL adressed issues in the MK, large investments in DAK and DHS are being planned (in brick and mortar!), price differentiation and NextGen initiatives adress imbalances between parks. Alas, WDW is not on the verge of imminent collapse. It is a thriving resort, a complete cash cow, a darling of Wall Street.


We, fans, want new rides. It may even make financial sense. In fact, I think massive investments in physical WDW could elevate the resort to another plane altogether, move it into Dubai territory for the global consciousness. But in the absense of a truly inspired WDW, it remains a very succesful resort ran very succesfully by competent bean counters. Sadly, yes. A financially succesful, creatively mediocre resort it has become.

 

[Nubs70]

They set it all up in 1999.. and basically gave up on it in 2001. 2+ billion dollars to aquire properties and brands.. which they turned around and threw out to create their own new identity that NO ONE had any interest in. The whole thing basically was a disaster from the start.. and was a great example of people with too much money trying to simply buy their way into the internet era without a freaking clue. The dot-com bubble pop crushed them in the process.

So what happened to price of admission, lodging and quality of experience in the following years? Did price increases accelerate and quality of experience decrease?

 

[Radok Block]

This NextGen initiative at last is the Spirit of EPCOT again.

It can be if used correctly, but I'm worried that it'll never get to that point. Disney (esp. in WDW) in recent years has shown itself to be pretty gun-shy when it comes to truly going to the next level. For years now, 'good enough' seems to be the standard.

I hope you're right. This project has potential to redefine the park experience beyond marketing and efficiency, but I don't trust the current bunch running things to get there.

 

[WDWDad13]

It can be if used correctly, but I'm worried that it'll never get to that point. Disney (esp. in WDW) in recent years has shown itself to be pretty gun-shy when it comes to truly going to the next level. For years now, 'good enough' seems to be the standard.

I hope you're right. This project has potential to redefine the park experience beyond marketing and efficiency, but I don't trust the current bunch running things to get there.

I don't think they have a choice now... they are so far out now... they have to keep going now and get it right

 

[MattM]

Good read. I'll be the first to say it. Hilton's system $200M. Disney = a billion more and growing. I know they aren't the same thing, but 6+ times the money is a lot.

Understood and you're right. But Disney's revenues were almost 5x Hiltons in 2012, so it's all relative.

 

[Goofyernmost]

It can be if used correctly, but I'm worried that it'll never get to that point. Disney (esp. in WDW) in recent years has shown itself to be pretty gun-shy when it comes to truly going to the next level. For years now, 'good enough' seems to be the standard.

I hope you're right. This project has potential to redefine the park experience beyond marketing and efficiency, but I don't trust the current bunch running things to get there.

I think it is possible to achieve, but I also believe that they will have to throw a lot of money and time into making it happen. Discarding all the conspiracy theories and sticking just to what the workings of the system will be, balancing what might be perceived as negative with what possible positives can be achieve, then, indeed one does have a EPCOT like scenario. I cannot think of any new thing that didn't come with bad things. Be it pollution, cost, privacy issues or more. Even a slinky had that get tangled in your sister hair so that mom had to cut large chunks out of those curly blond locks to free her from her coiled prison problem. I personally loved my slinky for that reason alone!

 

[GoofGoof]

Understood and you're right. But Disney's revenues were almost 6x Hiltons in 2012, so it's all relative.

You are right that its apples and oranges plus the Nextgen project has a much larger scope than really anything of its kind. The casino companies all have some version of a loyalty program, but aren't linked to literally everything you do on property. Just players cards used when gambling linked to hotel reservations.

 

[Tim_4]

Understood and you're right. But Disney's revenues were almost 5x Hiltons in 2012, so it's all relative.

Plus, Hilton basically has one product: room nights. Maybe some Food and Beverage sprinkled in. I'm no network expert, but my guess is that it's easier to link a few thousand hotels together than to link thirty hotels, dozens of restaurants, retail outlets, a transportation fleet, media networks, film distribution, and everything else. Volume is solved inexpensively. Costs come from diversity. Also, the Hilton product requires MUCH fewer bells and whistles to meet guest expextations than Disney's. Hilton can get away with clean and functional. Disney needs that too, but tack on "pretty" and "magical."

 

[Wikkler]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

Just because some dingus added it to a dictionary doesn't make it any more of a word.
It's a double negative.
The word you are looking for is "regardless".