The Spirited Seventh Heaven ...

GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Goofyernmost said:
Absolutely, but that is our opinion and it is based solely on what we would like to see and not what they were aiming for. What you are saying is exactly what I am saying. But, what bothers me is that we are so critical of those decisions without really knowing why they are making them. Their reasons may be just so much bullpoop, but we do not know that and assuming that that money would have been funneled into P&R may very well be nothing more then wishful thinking. They could possibly have made many high grossing movies with that money as well. Think about how much money Frozen made with no future maintenance required. Wouldn't that be a more intelligent way to spend the money then MM+? Unfortunately, none of us are in the position to influence those decisions based on our perceived insight, so why make it worse then it is. I don't believe that they had any plans, whatsoever, to make that money into attractions, why continue to torture ourselves with that fantasy. WDW was and has been in desperate need of updating their electronic infrastructure as well. It hadn't really been addressed for many years.
Click to expand...
We're just dancing around in circles. The bottom line is they spent money (at least a billion dollars) on NextGen. I think there are many better things they could have spent that money on. We can just agree to disagree on that point.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
71jason said:
Blue Ocean Theory. This was a deliberate attempt to channel P&R spending.
Click to expand...
With my admittedly limited vision of the Blue Ocean Theory it seems to me that Disney (early Disney) was Blue Ocean. They innovated and created a new product previously untouched. That, as suggested, others would have to change their game plan to compete. Their reaction would be considered Red Ocean. Matching or exceeding the accomplishments of the Blue Ocean Theory in order survive and excel.

So based on that isn't it Comcast that is currently playing the part of Blue Ocean. Changing the existing rules (raising the bar) to put space between them and the competition, thus forcing the competition to react. (i.e. giving the public something they demand that the other isn't either willing or able to provide) The only correlation that I can see in the argument that Disney is practicing Blue Ocean is that they have placed a new system in the works that better shows them what is actually happening, but not competing on the same level. It seems more to me like Blue Ocean Theory without the Ocean. Offering something that on the surface does not necessarily create a demand (who cares what system they use in the operational sense). It might change the behavior of the Theme Park Guests, but, it will only create a small demand to play along and expand it. Since they are not, on the surface, generating any revenue from it that didn't already exist.

Again, I'm not arguing this point because, as I said, my understanding of the two theory's is totally superficial, but, to me it contradicts itself in a number of areas. Blue Ocean turns to Red Ocean as soon as it damages the business of the, so called, competition. In this case, to this point, neither one has adversely affected the outcome of the other. Maybe they both should call it Purple Ocean because there is a mixture of Blue and Red in both.
 
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
We're just dancing around in circles. The bottom line is they spent money (at least a billion dollars) on NextGen. I think there are many better things they could have spent that money on. We can just agree to disagree on that point.
Click to expand...
Sounds like a plan. To me the only difference we have is what they might have spent the money on instead of NextGen. You say Parks, I feel it would have gone to something else.
 
ParentsOf4

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
It's not relevant how many parks it eventually spreads to, it's still money poorly spent. If they didn't look at the spending as a choice then that's even worse. Go back and read the posts from @ParentsOf4 referring to the lack of reinvestment in P&R under Iger. They certainly should have been deciding between this and any number of projects for the parks. There is no reason they would not have that money available to invest in something else other than MyMagic+.
Click to expand...
The following is heavily weighed towards what has happened at WDW but should give everyone an idea of how Parks & Resorts additions are tied to capital expenditures.

For the most part, Iger has cashed in on Eisner's investments whereas Iger will leave his successor with little to work with at WDW.

investments.jpg


P.S. This is not comprehensive and doesn't include the hotels and infrastructure improvements added under Eisner's watch.
 
Last edited:
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
ParentsOf4 said:
The following is heavily weighed towards what has happened at WDW but should give everyone an idea of how Parks & Resorts additions are tied to capital expenditures.

For the most part, Iger has cashed in on Eisner's investments whereas Iger will leave his successor with little to work with at WDW.

View attachment 64348

P.S. This is not comprehensive and doesn't include the hotels and infrastructure improvements added under Eisner's watch.
Click to expand...
Nice graph. To support my statement, if you took away MyMagic+ there would be a very small bar left over in 2013 and 2014 (basically just Mine Train) which would be by far the lowest investment in P&R in 30 years.
 
ParentsOf4

ParentsOf4

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
Nice graph. To support my statement, if you took away MyMagic+ there would be a very small bar left over in 2013 and 2014 (basically just Mine Train) which would be by far the lowest investment in P&R in 30 years.
Click to expand...
Eisner tended to hurry projects, sometimes resulting in misfires.

Iger prefers to delay projects, spreading their costs over years.

From a budgetary perspective, MyMagic+ has been a particularly ugly project. With its unintended delays, its cost has been spread out over several years.

Thus, the capex ramp-up from 2009 to 2012 paid for several projects, including a large chunk of MyMagic+.

Iger carries the dubious distinction of several years of the lowest domestic P&R capex budgets ever. As a percentage of revenue, this year's domestic capex is actually below post-9/11 levels.
 
Last edited:
TubaGeek

TubaGeek

God bless the "Ignore" button.
bhg469 said:
Just for him. :)

I don't need convincing, I already know universal is doing a better job at being disney than disney has in 10 years.
Click to expand...
I thought as much, but had to check. Of that crackpot's stupid spoutings, that one is one of the less inflammatory. Having not experiences Carsland myself, I saw his statement as unlikely, but within the realm of possibility.
 
RSoxNo1

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
ParentsOf4 said:
Let’s put what Eisner and Wells did into perspective.

By the end of their first 5 years, they had introduced price increases that doubled Parks & Resorts revenue. However, they also had more than quadrupled Parks & Resorts capital investment!

Within their first 5 years, Eisner & Wells had built Disney-MGM Studios, Typhoon Lagoon, Pleasure Island, Mickey's Toontown Fair (then called Mickey's Birthdayland), the Norway Pavilion, the Living Seas, Captain EO, Illuminations, the Grand Floridian, Caribbean Beach Resort, and more.

Eisner and Wells took the money they generated and created the modern WDW.

During his first 5 years, Iger built Toy Story Mania. :banghead:
Click to expand...
You forgot Wonders of Life.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom