Scuttle
Well-Known Member
Where do you get these wonderful stats!?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
71jason
Well-Known Member
Can they throw those levels up in the next two weeks? Because there about to be needed.
Even if they could, only alleviates one issue. Still need to deal with the toll booths. And the access roads, particularly Universal Blvd.
71jason
Well-Known Member
I have APs to both, visit both on average at least once a week, probably more. I enjoy both, but also recognize each has some severe flaws. Discussing those flaws does not mean I "hate" the park. It does mean I'd love it if they were improved.
Lord_Vader
Join me, together we can rule the galaxy.
You keep ignoring the fact that they sold 1000 more rooms per night in 2013 compared to 2012 and that figure is based on your numbers.
I get the streamlining they are doing, don't like it a bit but that has little to do with room vacancies. I also get that room vacancies are at an all time high but the rooms rented are also up which is not an indicator of efficiency it just means they added rooms when they did not need to, they still sold 1000 rooms per night more 2013 than in 2012. With your stated PRGS of $267, the 1000 rooms (year over year additions) rented per night add up to $97,455,000 per year. Lately TDO has been about expanding resort capacity, not attractions which is not popular at all but is absolutely necessary for the long term growth shareholders expect. If I own four fast food restaurants and add a fifth, I expect a bit of my sales from each of the four existing restaurants to go down a small amount and be more than offset by the increased sales at the fifth. Over time all five grow to a total amount that is more than the original four could have but I would have a lot of empty seats possible in the short term.
I didn't state that they intentionally increased room inventory so the unoccupied rooms would increase, my statement was that the anticipated demand did not materialize which might be attributed to the delays in MM+.
Expo_Seeker40
Well-Known Member
I love roller coasters, but the Banshee made me sick as a dog. I had to rest for over an hour. I loved the Beast and how it's going strong after 35 years and it's still the longest wooden roller coaster. The Racer was great too, but needs some new paint, but they were racing the cars, which they can't always do.
I didn't like how generic pop music played throughout the park. Would have really liked to have area specific music, but I found the park to be very well maintained.
tirian
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's easy to go on a shopping spree in Epcot! But I think people are mostly talking about the lack of value in Disney-branded merchandise.
I've lost track of how much $$$ I've spent in the Japan pavilion!
tirian
Well-Known Member
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
Yes, it's easy to go on a shopping spree in Epcot!
Yes theres a strange force that makes me part with cash in the Mexico pavilion.................. I think its alien mind control cause it leaves me confused and disorientated with periods of lost time and I have one hell of a head the net day
Hyperspace Hoopla
Well-Known Member
At what point do DVC sales impact WDW room vacancies? We were always good for at least 15 nights a year until we bought a DVC resale. If a large enough portion of their biggest fans do the same, does it eventually hurt occupancy rates to sell more DVC?
Witchy Chick
Well-Known Member
First, over time, you would hope that combined revenues for your five restaurants exceed revenues for the original four restaurants. Increased revenues at all 5 of your restaurants is not guaranteed. It could be that your customer base is saturated at 4 restaurants and will not support a 5th one. It could be that your combined revenues for the original 4 restaurants are now spread across 5 locations.
When you open restaurant #5, what happens to your overall labor and overhead for all of your restaurants? Or are you cutting labor and food choices at restaurants 1-4 to offset increased overhead and labor now that restaurant #5 is open?
What happens if -- to cover labor/overhead at restaurant #5 -- you start charging 15-30% more for the same food that has always been served? What happens if you decide to cut one of your moderately popular meal choices with no replacement? Or you choose a different, cheaper supplier of your French Fries and your customers don't like the Fries? What do you do when one of your soda dispensers breaks -- fix it or just say "oh well, customers will just have to use the other one even if they have to wait a bit longer to access that machine"?
What happens if these things happen, and some of your (previously) loyal customers are now extremely unhappy with your restaurants? Not only do they find other restaurants to frequent, but they tell their friends "oh don't go to XYZ Burger, that place has gone way downhill since they opened that 5th location."
Lord_Vader
Join me, together we can rule the galaxy.
All good points, from a business perspective you would try to cut labor at 1-4 and offset some initial overhead expenses for #5 but that is a risk/reward discussion.
No argument that TDO is cutting corners lately, some are very noticeable while others I can simply overlook as many guests do. When the cuts reach a pain point, we will spend our vacation dollars elsewhere.
Nope. Still saying it's going to be a dog. It won't gross over $200 mil domestically.
HA! It's funny you mention that. I've never understood why theme parks don't put vendors in queue lines.
We waited for about 30 minutes in the hot florida heat last week for Kilaminjaro Safaris. We would have killed for someplace to buy soft drinks or waters.
Walmart would make the wait times long on purpose and then have vendors at every 5 feet!!
Hula Popper
Well-Known Member
Someone asked the PP who posted the chart where he got his numbers from, but I don't believe he or she has answered. It looks like they are from Disney's Annual Reports. It should be noted that the Annual Report numbers reflect all domestic Disney hotels, not just WDW. Obviously, WDW makes up the vast majority of domestic Disney hotels, but there are also the Disneyland hotels, Aulani, and non-DVC used rooms at Vero Beach and Hilton Head included in the annual report statistics.
I am not entirely clear on this, but it's my understanding that the hotel statistics in the Annual Reports only include DVC rooms to the extent those rooms were not used by DVC members.
Disney's fiscal year ends on September 30, so the 2013 hotel occupancy numbers they report are through September 30, 2013, not through the end of the year. There was an 81% occupancy rate for the October 1, 2011-September 30, 2012 period and a 79% occupancy rate for the October 1, 2012-September 30, 2013 period across all domestic Disney resorts.
The $267 per room guest spending for FY2013 consists of the average daily hotel room rate as well as guest-spending on food, beverage and merchandise at the hotels. Again, this is a Disney-wide statistic (domestic), not just a WDW statistic.
Disney reported 86% occupancy during the the 2Q (January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014), which is reportedly up from 80% in the 2nd quarter last year, despite Easter falling in April this year instead of March like last year. They've also said occupancy was up in Q1, but I don't recall seeing an actual rate for Q1.
I am not entirely clear on this, but it's my understanding that the hotel statistics in the Annual Reports only include DVC rooms to the extent those rooms were not used by DVC members.
Disney's fiscal year ends on September 30, so the 2013 hotel occupancy numbers they report are through September 30, 2013, not through the end of the year. There was an 81% occupancy rate for the October 1, 2011-September 30, 2012 period and a 79% occupancy rate for the October 1, 2012-September 30, 2013 period across all domestic Disney resorts.
The $267 per room guest spending for FY2013 consists of the average daily hotel room rate as well as guest-spending on food, beverage and merchandise at the hotels. Again, this is a Disney-wide statistic (domestic), not just a WDW statistic.
Disney reported 86% occupancy during the the 2Q (January 1, 2014-March 31, 2014), which is reportedly up from 80% in the 2nd quarter last year, despite Easter falling in April this year instead of March like last year. They've also said occupancy was up in Q1, but I don't recall seeing an actual rate for Q1.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
Modern business management doesn't focus on number of units sold or revenue; it focuses on margins. I don't want more sales if it's going to hurt my margins. Frankly, I (politely) dump low-margin customers.
In the case of Art Of Animation (AOA), Disney paid for the expense of completing the resort, hired additional staff to run the resort, incurred additional reoccurring FF&E expenses to maintain the resort, and added buses & drivers to service the resort.
When it comes to hotels, costs are disproportionally born by those who first occupy the rooms. Using a number for a fictitious hotel, a 50% occupancy rate must be achieved to simply cover costs. Beyond that level, profits quickly climb as the incremental cost of servicing additional guests declines to just pennies on the dollar.
In the case of AOA, sales of WDW rooms went up by 360K but inventory rose 720K, the equivalent of a 50% occupancy rate. (Disney's pre-AOA hotel occupancy rate was much higher.) Even worse, AOA almost certainly stole guests from higher margin Moderate Resorts or other more occupied (and therefore more profitable) Value Resorts. AOA cannibalized sales & profits from other Disney hotels.
Meanwhile, sales of AOA's 864 overpriced Family Suites have been lackluster, something that no doubt wasn't anticipated when Disney ran the numbers to decide how many single units vs. suites to construct, and how to price them.
All things considered, AOA probably is close to a breakeven venture for Disney right now. It certainly has eroded margins.
Selling more of something isn't always good if it hurts profitability.
Last edited:
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Meh.. nice upgrade for LAX, but I don't find the visuals all that stunning. Oslo Gardermoen still looks nicer and is over 15yrs old. Glass, exposed wood, and Scandinavian minimalism age well
Agreed. But good Scandinavian design always ages well, that's not a concept exclusive to airport architecture or the 21st century. Much less aging Scandinavians like myself.
That's why the 60 year old "Danish Modern" furniture pieces in my home still look fresh and fantastic in 21st century SoCal. LAX should have been on its third renovation by now, after it stopped being modern and useful about the same time stewardesses stopped wearing miniskirts and go-go boots. But it's finally getting a renovation to the tune of Billions of dollars and it will take years of construction and headache.
I wish them well. But it's still a gross airport. And what a miserably frustrating way to start or end a Disneyland vacation. Much less the embarrassment that LAX provides as a major port of entry to overseas visitors to our country. Eek!
Last edited:
Yes, it's easy to go on a shopping spree in Epcot! But I think people are mostly talking about the lack of value in Disney-branded merchandise.
I've lost track of how much $$$ I've spent in the Japan pavilion!
Except I haven't done so in almost a decade, due to limited selection of quality, unique, items.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I did already and responded to "The Mom" who pointed that out. I read 'bought' instead of 'brought'. Sorry for the error.She spent $28 on a t-shirt. Re-read my post.
Lord_Vader
Join me, together we can rule the galaxy.
I wasn't arguing margins, I get hotel occupancy rates drive profit. The first 30%-40% bear most of the resort costs with the remaining 60%-70% being highly profitable. My point was TDO was willing to sacrifice short term profit for long-term growth. A business has to pick a time to expand at some point or wait until they are turning customers away which is too late. I never advocated that they should have built just that they did sell more room nights on average year over year resort wide countering your implied statement that they were actually declining.
AoA is a highly sought after resort and one of the most difficult to get a room at during peak attendance, especially the high-margin family suites which is why they are not offering discounts or free-dining in AoA. TDO continually offers discounted rooms at most moderates, some values and many deluxe resorts but these have been greatly cut back this year, especially this summer. Margins will be going up as the reservation levels appear to be much higher this summer than last, the much more limited discount offerings are the main clue there. Last summer I was able to secure 35% room discounts at various Deluxe resorts with the best views, this year they are limited to stays of 7 days or more and only the standard view rooms at most resorts and many of those top out at 30%.
Are WDW resorts overpriced, maybe? Many on these boards, as well as others, think so but a great deal of WDWs guests do not or simply pay the price of admission. Along the same line, I personally feel that $125 for a single ticket to a 3 hour concert is crazy but here locally bands routinely sell out 20,000 our seat arena.