The bosses have changed. TWDC, like pretty much every other company out there, answers to Wall St now, not the guest. As you pointed out, Wall St likes low capital expenditures and that is what they are delivering.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter CheekBoys
- Start date
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Yes they have, Yet UNI is taking the 'old Disney' formula and running with it and it at least for now seems to be a winning strategy as both their gate clicks and more importantly PROFITS are growing rapidly as opposed to Disney's P&R results.
And the thing with Comcast's Media properties if ALL of their customers dumped their cable subs tomorrow Comcast would STILL have a good business providing the internet link.
I think the main issue is Disney has forgotten how to take calculated risks, They are interested only in 'sure things'
Both companies theme parks divisions were and still are in very different positions.
Before Potter, US/IOA was a step away from becoming City Walk flanked by condos. Large and aggressive spending was necessary to stop the free fall.
Disney had no such problems. Their 4 parks and 25 resorts were pretty much printing money. There was no need to spend, spend, spend.
This is generally correct.
There is something to this statement. The current reliance on IP for attraction ideas does speak to a certain amount of risk aversion on the creative side.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
No question about it, Potter marked a huge change in strategy for UNI, The problem is at Disney was the money generated by P&R fueled a mindset we don't need to spend anything at all or maintain our properties to keep them fresh because we are making so much money. That works till it doesn't and there is no obvious transition until one quarter the numbers start to drop and the next they fall off the cliff.
Do you think this will happen? I think there was some survey data that helped spur this round of expansion. As long as they are somewhat mindful of customer's opinions, falling of the cliff can be staved off indefinitely even if us aficionados get frustrated by long periods of price hikes accompanied with small improvements at best.
All true, but we have one major park expansion already well underway and 2 more on the horizon. One of which has the potential to eclipse Potter. I would hardly call that sitting on their laurels just because they are not going to try an build each expansion over a three day weekend.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
We generally don't have any way to know that so the dates are based on when the first evidence of construction was spotted.
danlb_2000
Premium Member
Pandora broke ground in January of 2014 and is scheduled to open in "early 2017", so that would put the construction time at over 3 years.
IMO, how Avatar and more importantly, how Star Wars Land turns out will be either the dawn of a new era in which Disney is back to building on a grand and miraculous scale (<===
), or it will be the final nail in the coffin for us die hard fans in terms of evidence that Wall Street is determined to do it their way and abandon the tried and true formula of magic in favor of a stock increasing metric of expansion that is more of an Illusion designed to draw people in for turn style clicks and less of a true immersive experience meant to keep people coming back for decades.
That's a cute excuse that is hardly ever valid.
i think Iger is peaking torwads his legacy and he knows these expansions have to be done rightIMO, how Avatar and more importantly, how Star Wars Land turns out will be either the dawn of a new era in which Disney is back to building on a grand and miraculous scale (<===
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Sadly I do think it will happen, Disney has begun to think of themselves as invincible and the arrogance behind that mindset is what will take them down in the end. Disney no longer CARES about customer opinions as shown by the recent surveys which boot you when you give the 'wrong' answer to a survey question. In that case it's really just a selective data gathering exercise to provide biased data to support some management position. Once the surveys were to collect data on how the guests liked or disliked various WDW products and services, This appears to be no longer the case and that's a bad way to go as the customer is the ultimate arbiter of business strategy.
If Disney manages to turn off it's most enthusiastic customers (US and others like us on various Disney fan sites) it's only a matter of time before the other customers become turned off as well.
It's why big ticket products like airlines and hotels have loyalty programs, They want their best customers to be ambassadors for their brand.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
IMO, how Avatar and more importantly, how Star Wars Land turns out will be either the dawn of a new era in which Disney is back to building on a grand and miraculous scale (<===
Yes I believe that is EXACTLY the case. Except in the latter case social media will spread the meme that 'Disney is no longer "worth visiting" sort of what happened to SeaWorld after "Blackfish" '. Public opinion can turn on a dime and it's very difficult once the court of public opinion has turned against you.
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
No reasonable person expects a E-ticket every year, But it's been over a decade since the last one opened at WDW and almost 2 decades since the last at the MK.
Chris82
Well-Known Member
That may very well be true but it sure seems odd, especially given that a huge percentage of what changes they HAVE made to WDW over the past ten years all seem to be utilitarian responses to survey results - hub expansion, 3rd Toy Story Mania track, 3rd Soarin' theater, MyMagic+, possibly some other stuff I've forgotten. The only explanation I had in my mind for this is that they were trying to correct negatives rather than create positives. But if they're ignoring customer surveys, then... well... I don't get it!
ford91exploder
Resident Curmudgeon
Look at what all the changes actually DO, They expand capacity so the parks can support additional paid admissions. None of them really positively impact the guest experience. NFL expanded the park's official capacity by about 10,000 which translates roughly to 1 Million per day in additional revenue (at $100 per entry) it probably increases revenue by about $200 million per year using multi-day ticket media and park not being full, But it's not chump change either.
But people still show up by the boat load. So much so that the park seems to be busting at the seems on an average weekday in October. Adding yet another thing to attract more people would make that problem worse.
I would much rather see MK fix its lack of dining space problem and add E-tickets to the other parks to possibly shift the load.
andysol
Well-Known Member
Disney has been spending money in the parks- particularly recently. It's just not where most of us thought it should go.
-NFL- Oh... NFL... what you could have been.
-Hub Expansion- I'll give them that, it was needed.
-Toy Story third track? A different attraction would have helped the load more.
-Soarin third theater? A different attraction would have helped the load more (see a theme?)
-MyMagic+? Some things were here that were needed- like internet and infrastructure changes throughout the parks. But clearly the rest- while not useless- was not the best allocation of resources. Several attractions would have helped the dispersement more.
And up to bat we have:
-Disney Springs- I love the change and improvement- massive resources in the short-term. But this was needed and will pay dividends in the future long-term for sure.
-Frozen- will make a killing $ wise as much as we hate where it went and why.
-Avatar- Won't sell merch like they think it will. It isn't HP. But as a theme park fan- it like the anti-frozen ride. We park goers are going to absolutely love it but the park won't recoup what they think they will.
-RoL- needed for crowd control, if nothing else.
-Star Wars & Toy Story Land- This is what they should have done instead of the TSMM third track or my magic+. And we'd have it already. And theyd have bigger crowds and more $.
That all said- the future is bright for Disney, as much as you don't think it is @ford91exploder . In typical fashion, they are doing things now they should have done 3-4 years ago at the latest, but at least they are getting done.
-NFL- Oh... NFL... what you could have been.
-Hub Expansion- I'll give them that, it was needed.
-Toy Story third track? A different attraction would have helped the load more.
-Soarin third theater? A different attraction would have helped the load more (see a theme?)
-MyMagic+? Some things were here that were needed- like internet and infrastructure changes throughout the parks. But clearly the rest- while not useless- was not the best allocation of resources. Several attractions would have helped the dispersement more.
And up to bat we have:
-Disney Springs- I love the change and improvement- massive resources in the short-term. But this was needed and will pay dividends in the future long-term for sure.
-Frozen- will make a killing $ wise as much as we hate where it went and why.
-Avatar- Won't sell merch like they think it will. It isn't HP. But as a theme park fan- it like the anti-frozen ride. We park goers are going to absolutely love it but the park won't recoup what they think they will.
-RoL- needed for crowd control, if nothing else.
-Star Wars & Toy Story Land- This is what they should have done instead of the TSMM third track or my magic+. And we'd have it already. And theyd have bigger crowds and more $.
That all said- the future is bright for Disney, as much as you don't think it is @ford91exploder . In typical fashion, they are doing things now they should have done 3-4 years ago at the latest, but at least they are getting done.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
This is totally misleading and I am not even going to explain why because you already know the answer.