Two coasts: One very different world

[flynnibus]

It just depends on why Disney is inviting someone. The Unofficial Guide and TP.com both qualify as "media". And since they're Disney-centric, Disney likes to have those kinds of folks at their events because that's just one more blog that will be spreading the word on the web.

It doesn't 'depend' at all. If you take the stance you do not accept comps or freebies from a company.. that's for everything - no distinction between 'inviting just me, or inviting everyone'. The FTC also has set a standard that new media people are supposed to disclose when they give testimonial and receive something that the typical customer would not expect to get - Such as free admission to review a new land in an amusement park...

The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service

See full guidelines at http://ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005revisedendorsementguides.pdf

The blogging community are giving endorsements - they are not traditional news media. Where is that distinction? It's still hard to pin.. and the FTC is working still to further refine this.

When challenged though, there is no question in the past that Tom's coverage has been presented as that of his own - and not as a review written for another site.

It's smart business...even if the people you invite aren't always 100% behind what you do.

People get excluded all the time.. even traditional media. Companies do not treat all as equals and it's just part of the game. The thing isn't if people get comps or not - its do they have the backbone to stay objective and put their gravey train at risk. If you are small, Disney doesn't owe you anything and if you are highly critical, you are less likely to be invited. If you are big, and still highly critical, if you can be 'replaced' you won't be invited out either. Disney isn't going to enter into any 'love/hate' relationships they don't have to.

 

[asianway]

It doesn't 'depend' at all. If you take the stance you do not accept comps or freebies from a company.. that's for everything - no distinction between 'inviting just me, or inviting everyone'. The FTC also has set a standard that new media people are supposed to disclose when they give testimonial and receive something that the typical customer would not expect to get - Such as free admission to review a new land in an amusement park...



See full guidelines at http://ftc.gov/os/2009/10/091005revisedendorsementguides.pdf

The blogging community are giving endorsements - they are not traditional news media. Where is that distinction? It's still hard to pin.. and the FTC is working still to further refine this.

When challenged though, there is no question in the past that Tom's coverage has been presented as that of his own - and not as a review written for another site.



People get excluded all the time.. even traditional media. Companies do not treat all as equals and it's just part of the game. The thing isn't if people get comps or not - its do they have the backbone to stay objective and put their gravey train at risk. If you are small, Disney doesn't owe you anything and if you are highly critical, you are less likely to be invited. If you are big, and still highly critical, if you can be 'replaced' you won't be invited out either. Disney isn't going to enter into any 'love/hate' relationships they don't have to.

How do I report a violation?

And just in case anyone thinks Spirit is too hard on Disney, check out this article. This guy is hard core, its almost as if...Nah, couldn't be...

http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals...enture-retrospective-06201217,0,6371327.story

 

[Pioneer Hall]

Please keep the conversation on the Disney topics and not specific individuals. Thanks.

 

[COProgressFan]

That would be nice, but the cash infusion has never been WDW's problem. They're getting a billion dollar investment, but it's in NextGen, not the parks.

Cash infusion is a huge problem at WDW....Nextgen is primarily a data mining, behind the scenes thing, and it does nothing to the actual physical assets of the park that guests can experience. In it's current state, WDW needs literally a few billion to not only fix infrastructure but return the parks to offer the level of experiences they use to have.

 

[WDW1974]

I do remember it being there to about 2010, and then it was gone. I used to take advantage of it a lot, but it went away and the one apologetic CM reply I got a few times was "Some people don't want to sit that close to strangers". Not sure if that's the real reason it was removed at DCA, but I guess it makes sense if you had too many creepers in the Single Rider Line.

You know, I think I actually was told the same thing when I was there in January ... but just thought 'they can't really be serious' ... you sit closer to people on buses/monorails etc.

The whole point of a Single Rider Queue is that you WILL be placed with strangers. ... You're going to be just as close to a stranger on RSRs as you would be on TSMM.

 

[WDW1974]

I believe Len actually addresses that in one of their front-end chapters, where they answer FAQ. I don't have my copy handy, but he mentions that fewer than X% (perhaps 10, or even less) of the guests at WDW on any given day are using the Unofficial Guide and/or Touring Plans and/or Lines.

Thus, you are right that the impact is small, but offers a great advantage to those of us who use them. If everyone toured intelligently, neither FP nor FP+ would even be a concern.

I don't want to criticize the product without knowing more about it, but I will say I don't get why fans would need the service (if I'm understanding this correctly) because most fans know (or you'd think they would) how to tour smartly (i.e. almost any time with extended hours you can ride more at the MK between say 10 p.m. and 1 a.m. than you can from opening to 7 p.m., and obviously with almost no waits).

But most people don't tour smartly (or live smartly for that matter) so everyone wants to ride Space Mountain at noon. Well, then you might wait!

 

[cbconglom]

Hey 74 u read Ricky's(insidethemagic) tweet's today? Couldn't believe he actually went as far as to almost say he was dissapointed in wdw and it's current projects compared to DL

 

[Tom]

I don't want to criticize the product without knowing more about it, but I will say I don't get why fans would need the service (if I'm understanding this correctly) because most fans know (or you'd think they would) how to tour smartly (i.e. almost any time with extended hours you can ride more at the MK between say 10 p.m. and 1 a.m. than you can from opening to 7 p.m., and obviously with almost no waits).

But most people don't tour smartly (or live smartly for that matter) so everyone wants to ride Space Mountain at noon. Well, then you might wait!

Their book and system succeeds for that very reason - nobody thinks. It literally amazes me when we're in the parks and see families gathered around a park map in the middle of a walkway saying, "Ok, we just did Pirates of the Caribbean, what do you want to do next? Where are we on here? Oh, here we are. Let's ride that Jungle Cruise."

My argument to your first point would be that, while one can easily tour the entire park in a day, using a statistically designed touring plan helps you tour smartly and efficiently, thus allowing you to enjoy more free time and less time standing in line.

I'll admit that we don't actually carry a touring plan with us any longer, because we've been enough, and studied the plans enough, that we know exactly what to see and do at any given moment. But we're in a VERY tiny minority. The majority of the day guests at WDW barely thought about packing sunscreen for their summer vacation in Florida.....let alone knowing which park is open early on a given day, or that you can't put off TSMM until the afternoon.

 

[WDW1974]

I really don't have this fear of Social Media Group like WDW1974 does...

I don't have any fear of Social Media. I have a strong distaste for it. Much like I have the idea of 'citizen journalists' ... this isn't like scooping ice cream on Main Street, everyone can't do it nor should they.

And the proliferation of fan sites as well as Facebook and Twitter means people don't have to engage in conversations with others they may disagree with. The Twitverse is an echo chamber ... might as well call it FOX News or MSNBC because you know you aren't going to get real news, you're going to hear what you want to hear before tuning in (so what if it's made up or exaggerated?)

I don't know how many folks this site alone has lost over the past few years to either the Twitverse/FB or their own blogs/Disney Lifestyle sites. At the risk of being a MAGICal shill, which I most definitely am NOT, I don't think that's a good thing. People need to be exposed to other views and perspectives, everyone isn't the same and one size does not fit all.

But if you hide in the Twitverse, no chance of you having to actually defend a viewpoint or a comment.

Why? Simple... the type of information people desire will ALWAYS drive new outlets regardless of what the company wants. The company can try to shape media all the want, but if the media doesn't offer what the reader/viewer wants, the audience will seek out other outlets. Apple is a great example. They can nurture outlets like Walt Mossberg all they want.. and not want any coverage of pre-release stuff. Yet fans wanted those rumors and pre-release, and even when Apple would try to flex it's muscle to shutdown sites.. they would continue to grow and mature. Even a company as aggressive as Apple could not control the media completely.

In the Disney-sphere.. I love places like Inside the Magic because they have such great coverage of Disney additions with good video. If that takes some insider access with Disney... that's fine by me. Why? Because I don't goto inside the magic for the dirty side of Disney. I don't need, nor desire, one single source of Disney information.

I haven't really spent much time on Inside the Magic because I simply have a very limited amount of time to devote to Disney while online and I can't justify the time in going from site to site.

And it is a very rare thing that I read something on any site that is important to me that I wasn't already aware of in some form. Small things like say LTT closing earlier or a kiddie fountain opening at MK, sure. But the big things I'm usually in the loop of prior and simply pop in here to comment on them if I can.

Disney catering to the social media world is a good thing. There will be greater information and access out there because of it. The fear that this will kill off those that aren't spewing Pixie Dust is just unfounded. Will some be 'corrupted' and stop being critical of the company for fear of getting kicked off the wagon? Sure.. but what they fail to cover will be picked up by someone else. The demand will cause supplies to come forward. It always has, and always will. Companies can influence, but not control what is out there.

I don't agree. I think there's greater chatter on more channels. But that's much like cable TV ... is it really better to have 180 channels? I still can't find anything to watch!

I also think the goal isn't to kill off sites that are more balanced and not all Pixie Dust, all the time. Check out the YouTube of Disney Social Media talkng head Duncan Wardle where he crows that for every negative comment in the online world that Disney gets 18 positive ones. That's what Disney cares about. Even here on MAGIC, how many threads are really negative (realistic?) about Disney? I don't ever read the planning boards or the DVC boards or even the dining board (I should cause I like food!), but I doubt many threads are negative.

But it is safe to assume that a site won't be invited to Disney junkets if they're harping on the problems at WDW.
There are folks/sites out there that honestly can never say a bad thing about Disney, which I don't care how much of a fan you are is still crazy.

I don't listen to any of these Disney podcasts... I've yet to hear any that aren't simple rehashes of what they've already published, aren't painfully dull and the hosts don't give you the creeps. Podcasts that simply read you the news.. are boring.

I know some podcasters now. I like them. I think they're very nice folks and quite intelligent. I still think they're living out some fantasy to be morning drive hosts on top 40 radio. ... I just can't listen. I don't see a need for podcasts. I just don't.

 

[TP2000]

You know, I think I actually was told the same thing when I was there in January ... but just thought 'they can't really be serious' ... you sit closer to people on buses/monorails etc.

The whole point of a Single Rider Queue is that you WILL be placed with strangers. ... You're going to be just as close to a stranger on RSRs as you would be on TSMM.

I've been thinking about this... It could be due to the ride vehicle and seats of Midway Mania. The Midway Mania single rider line would put a stranger on a bench seat next to another stranger, and then send them into the ride together where no other person could really see if something creepy started to happen. It would be similar to putting a single rider next to someone in a Haunted Mansion doombuggy, or a Little Mermaid clamshell. The lack of visibility between cars is the same on Midway Mania as it is to Haunted Mansion. And if something creepy started to happen, there's nothing any of the other riders could do about it as they are locked in the vehicle.

Unlike Radiator Springs Racers, which seats six in two rows of three. You would place a single rider with a party of two, and there would be a higher comfort level there for everyone because the single rider is outnumbered by the other parties in the row/vehicle who already know each other.

Now of course 99.9% of people at DCA are perfectly nice and civil. But there is that chance something weird could happen, or it might have been starting to attract weirdos after a year or two for all we know.

I bet it's because of the bench seating in a vehicle that is quite private and secured.

 

[WDW1974]

As predicted, I found out about this thread thanks to an email from another user. Even though I don't think I've done anything wrong, it was a great way to ruin my final 30 minutes at Disneyland that I would have otherwise spent gazing at the Carthay Circle fountain. Such is life, I guess.

I just spent 10 minutes on a thoughtful response that was a bit long only to have my computer get its first blue screen deal. Maybe the Pixie Dust gods were just looking out for ya, Tom.

This will likely be shorter, but I hope it makes sense and resonates as much.

I will say I'm sorry if anything I said personally hurt you, that wasn't my intention at all. I'm sure I'm the one being painted as being the evil vile Disney and Tom Bashing Spirit in this. I didn't bring your name up to begin with, but I certainly questioned things regarding you being there after.

But I'll also say if you only had 30 bad minutes (one for every RSRs ride?), then you got nothing to complain about. I got food poisoning and should have been hospitalized at the DCA 1.0 opening!

Oh, I'll also say I think that your experience shows why Social Media and being connected 24/7 is a bad thing. You really didn't need to 'deal' with this until you got home. It isn't that important.

I was credentialed (just me, not my wife--although she was allowed to attend the June 14th event) after the author of the Unofficial Guide to Disneyland (which, as others have noted, is found online at touringplans.com) provided me with the book's media spot at the events. I don't write the book, but I think it's unbiased (if anything, it skews negative).

Don't know the book. Heard of it, but never read it. I only read those type of books when given to me for free since I don't need a guide to any Disney park in the world. That's not a judgment on it, just a statement of fact.

I would question things like were you the only rep of the book there? Did Disney pay for you to be there? Did you get free lodging? Did you wind up with free swag? etc.

Those are the same questions I'd have for anyone else who went. They aren't unfair at all.

I haven't read through this entire thread (just the posts I've found by searching for my own name), but I will address a few things...

My wife and I do travel frequently, and some people here (and elsewhere) have questioned how we do that given my occupation and our age. When we don't travel, I typically work 6-7 days a week. When we do, I'm gone for (at most) 3 days. Honestly, though, I could probably be gone for a full month and not have it impact my work much as long as I prepared appropriately. I mostly write briefs, and I always have 30-60 day time frames for that. I rarely meet clients and I rarely step foot in a courtroom. My work piles up when I'm not at the office, but it's typically nothing urgent. None of this is really relevant, but inquiring minds seem to want to know. (You can likely find published opinions in cases that I have briefed by Googling my name.) Aside from some others in my office who make fun of me for "going to see Donald Duck" so often instead of heading to more 'sophisticated' travel destinations, I don't think anyone really cares.

I may have fed that discussion, but I don't really care about your legal pursuits. I care about Disney and Social Media ... and traditional media.

I wouldn't ask you anything I wouldn't ask of someone like Jason Garcia of the Orlando Sentinel, who I don't believe was there. If you have a media lanyard on, then certain questions like those above are fair game for you.

(BTW, Garcia has been very weak this year ... not many stories of substance at all. Way too many that read like they came from press releases!)

I know many bloggers/Disney Lifestyle site owners don't seem to get that being treated as media isn't just freebies and special access ... and you certainly can be questioned about that.

Some advice, you shouldn't be defensive about it. That's what happens when you are media.

As to the substance of this conversation, I was blown away by Cars Land and Buena Vista Street, but neither were without their imperfections. RSR already has some show quality issues (although it's the best Disney attraction (of the ones I've experienced) since at least Tower of Terror), the Cozy Cones are incredibly inefficient, and the otherwise exceptional Carthay Lounge has issues with service that I wouldn't expect from a place that purports to be of a high caliber. I also still think the park has plenty of improvements to make, but it has leapfrogged many of the other US Disney parks (to me) with the changes it has made. These are just a few things that instantly come to mind. I'm sure there are other issues although, admittedly, I was largely very impressed with the new offerings at DCA. It actually made me think even less about Walt Disney World and wonder why the scope of the expansion there isn't greater and more immediate (2014 for the Mine Train...really?!).

That is very inline with what I have heard from friends who were there. I can't wait to experience DCA 2.0 myself. But I also was a fan of DCA 1.0 too (really!)

If anyone chooses to deem my opinion "not credible" because Disney credentialed a book (and by extension, me), so be it.

I don't believe anyone in MAGICland was questioning your cred at all. People were wondering why you were there as media and what exactly Disney gave you and others. Again, you may not like it, but that is fair.

 

[WDW1974]

Now that I've had a pot of coffee and a pile of work to ingore, I can talk about this.I think your points are solid enough not to use hyperbole. I very much respect your opinion and the type of information you bring to the table, but I categorically loath the manner in which you deliver it and you have lost any respect you gain from your actual opinion ten fold. With that said, the respect of an internet stranger doesn't buy much.

No, it doesn't. But I do care if people that matter at Disney (and beyond) respect my opinions -- and, most of the time, they do.

I really think that people who have style issues with me either are using that as an excuse so they don't have to admit that most of the time I make a lot of sense or they simply don't understand things like nuance, sarcasm and humor.

I have no idea whether you fit into one of those categories.

Fair enough. We've been going back and forth for almost 4 years and I haven't once threatened your life or attempted to obtain personal information. I think I've earned a pass on your paranoid meter.

True enough. That's why we are speaking. I also don't believe you are a troll (unlike some of my other critics here). But some online folks are scary. Plain and simple. And I've been part of the Disney online community (in one form or another) since the 1990s.

In the context that the WDW fan base needs to become more like the DLR fan base in it's involvement is true. Beyond that for the sole purposes of this discussion we can leave them out.

You are going to skewer me for this and keep in mind I don't agree, I'm just pointing out the obvious.

There is no reason financially to change at this point. That's why I think (and would have expected by this point) for the DVC group to forms its own group. I've enumerated before why I think this hasn't happened. There has to be a financial impact to WDW for there to be change, not explained by other offerings. I don't think we can count on Potter 2.0 to jump start TDO into movement. They seem like they would just wait to weather the storm.

Well, I'm sure you saw my post on DVCers and why they haven't done much. I don't know if you commented on it, so I'll reserve further comment myself except to say I am VERY disappointed that the DVC community, by and large, seems to be full of addicts who think WDW has never been better.

ANd if Potter 2.0 doesn't get Disney's attention and push them into some real action, I really think nothing will.

I appreciate the rest of this post, but given how long our messages are I wanted to just focus on the discussion points. In "real life", I completely understand that. Online is a completely different world. I think we both understand that. I'm going to move on because I don't want this to focus on you, lest others accuse me of distracting from the points of the converstation.

Combined? Probably not. As someone who embraces technology that I see as beneficial rather quickly and I like to think appropriately (I have a twitter account, but I don't post), I can understand that for such a niche market of information the major media outlets wouldn't get the feedback that Disney wants (in amount not in quality, that's a different topic).

I don't still understand one very important factor regarding Disney Lifestyle sites and the company and that is how they actually help the bottom line when they are so focused on preaching to the choir? How do they build the business? No one plans their first WDW vacation because they came to WDWMAGIC or Mouseplanet, so how do they think it's rational that a smaller blog/site will actually reach new eyes?

I guess that's more a question for Duncan or Shell or even Thomas Smith.

Also, I think it is a valid point to be made that many people (for better or worse) are relying less on mainstream media for a variety of reason.

I'll just use me for an example. The local paper is delivered to my Kindle daily. I use a news aggregator that fetches the top stories from all the major news outlets. Without fail, based on the title I can tell which site or paper the article came from and what the slant is going to be. You can't just read news. You have to put work into it. For major stories that interest me I don't mind, but for fluff pieces? I don't have time for that.

WDW is a fluff piece. I can't read the NYT review of the DCL Fantasy, because I now need to read three articles about the same thing in the presidential election to make sure I'm getting the whole story.

Also, if news outlets are going to be bias in reporting of major issues, how can I trust them on little things?

So yeah, for me, it is the best way to disseminate information about the theme parks.

I don't think you'll see a NYT review of the DCL Fantasy, but you may see a piece comparing cruise lines or a story on new ships in general. Of course, listening to a Disney podcast, you may get sold on DCL because they act like there are not other options.

I think what is underestimated though, is the general public's ability to see through BS. I stopped listening to a podcast a few years ago because of the syrupy sweetness of the reviews. I don't really read the reviews of WDW restaurants on another site anymore because they at their most critical deliver a backhanded compliment.

In both cases though, it doesn't diminish that they can be good sources of information that won't get picked up anywhere. I didn't get my awesome reservation during F&W last year for a special 6-course meal at Jiko's by reading the WSJ.

When everything is good all the time, even an average person can pick up that something isn't right. Kind of like the Matrix. The first one failed because everything was too happy. The second was better because it was more "real".

I don't like Keanu Reeves, so we can move on!

But if the point was real media doesn't focus on the minitiuae of a WDW visit like Lifestyle sites do, I naturally agree.

And I don't eat at Jiko anymore because I don't feel their pricepoints are realistic in 2012 Orlando.

Again, I appreciate the comment, but I'm not going to respond as I want to move away from your particular style and focus on the fan community at large.

Your tone is fine (dang it, there I go again) because it carries, by your own admission, a gravitas of personal relationships. Other who take the same tact I'm afraid more often than not clearly come across as speaking about something of which they know nothing about.[/quotes]

People can judge for themselves whether someone knows what they are talking about. I can't stand the tone of a certain TV talking head, but I greatly respect her because her info is almost always dead on.

I think it's pretty clear to people reading me that I know my stuff. If it isn't, then being nicer in my tone isn't going to change anything.

You said yourself right here that it is a game and a game isn't played if there aren't winners and losers and right now, externally the D&G crowd is losing.

I'm still trying to figure out who/what the D&G crowd is ...

I'll let you get your thoughts together to continue. I hope you had a happy Father's Day (my kid forgot!).

I'd have more if this hadn't of turned into yet another side show because people have fair questions for a forum member. But I will ...

 

[WDW1974]

I'm not sure why the mods are allowing personal attacks on members. Tom's personal life is really no one's business. Unless you're his boss what does it matter to you how many vacation days he uses?

Questioning someone who is accredited media at a Disney media event is not 'a personal attack' ... I don't think Tom really believes he was attacked either. More likely one of my 'fans' here decided to tick him off (and apparently prevent him from an additional 30 minutes of MAGICal fountain gazing) by interrupting his trip and telling him that people were attacking him.

I agree that how many vacation days he takes is no one's business, although it is interesting considering his profession and age.

But questioning whether Disney paid him to be there (no, not cash ... I feel like I have to spell everything out sometimes) and paid for his expenses and gave him gifts is NOT attacking. It's very fair. And as a lawyer and social media savvy guy, I'd expect Tom to agree with that.

 

[WDW1974]

It's a shame that you let it interfere with your time at DL, even for a short time. Personally, I take anything '74 and his groupies say about you and others who have limited access due to fan sites / publications as pure jealousy! They only wish they could trade places. I also think it's a shame the mods turn a blind eye to '74 and his personal attacks on others, whether specific people as in your case, or ad homs he lobs at the general public he thinks is below him, or his continual political jabs.

Ah, the troll returns from under his/her rock.

I am many things, but jealous of Tom wouldn't be one. I have attended many Disney events from 1990 until a few years back. I was invited to attend at least three of late (including WoC's debut as a VIP) but either didn't choose to or weren't able. If I had wanted to be there, then I would have been there.

I've also been to three park openings as well -- and will be in Shanghai! I've also been to WDS film premieres and all sorts of events that are slightly of more import than this event in Anaheim, even though I'm sure it was fun and well done.

Now, I consider this post a personal attack on me, but I am a big boy and can handle trolls and won't be bothered reporting it. And the mods pay close attention to me, probably because there's a vocal minority of folks who would like nothing better than to shut me up.

 

[misterID]

Cash infusion is a huge problem at WDW....Nextgen is primarily a data mining, behind the scenes thing, and it does nothing to the actual physical assets of the park that guests can experience. In it's current state, WDW needs literally a few billion to not only fix infrastructure but return the parks to offer the level of experiences they use to have.

That's not what I mean. They didn't need carsland to be a hit, or for DCA to break attendance records to be able to put any cash into WDW. They could have at several times, but chose not to. Again, that's why I brought up NextGen... they can invest a billion dollars in that, but not the WDW parks themselves.

 

[wannab@dis]

Ah, the troll returns from under his/her rock.

I am many things, but jealous of Tom wouldn't be one. I have attended many Disney events from 1990 until a few years back. I was invited to attend at least three of late (including WoC's debut as a VIP) but either didn't choose to or weren't able. If I had wanted to be there, then I would have been there.

I've also been to three park openings as well -- and will be in Shanghai! I've also been to WDS film premieres and all sorts of events that are slightly of more import than this event in Anaheim, even though I'm sure it was fun and well done.

Now, I consider this post a personal attack on me, but I am a big boy and can handle trolls and won't be bothered reporting it. And the mods pay close attention to me, probably because there's a vocal minority of folks who would like nothing better than to shut me up.

My post was personal attack? Are you kidding? LOL. You did a nice job of trying to turn that reply to spotlight you. Of course, it was simply another 'look at me, I'm important' posts, but sorry, I could care less what events you went to or who you claim to know.

Calling someone you disagree with a troll is simply an acknowledgement of a weak argument. You know you use ad homs all the time, you call into question other's motives or intelligence, and you generally talk down to anyone not in your little echo chamber. No, the mods don't pay close attention to you. If they did, a lot more of your posts would be edited down or deleted than the few that are.

It's really a shame that you completely destroy any small contributions you could make with your style of posting.

 

[JustChillinBro]

Not that I am quite sure what WDW1974 wants, but I wonder what ticket pricing would look like if it came to fruition, assuming Disney wanted to make the same amount of profit (and really, they would want to make more because they are investing more). A few billion invested would have to be made back and then some, obviously. Cars Land put Disneyland APs up $150. I would guess a billion into each of the Disney World theme parks would put WDW APs in the range of $800 overnight and then everything else would be more expensive as well.

 

[Lee]

Not that I am quite sure what WDW1974 wants, but I wonder what ticket pricing would look like if it came to fruition, assuming Disney wanted to make the same amount of profit (and really, they would want to make more because they are investing more). A few billion invested would have to be made back and then some, obviously. Cars Land put Disneyland APs up $150. I would guess a billion into each of the Disney World theme parks would put WDW APs in the range of $800 overnight and then everything else would be more expensive as well.

No.
Additions to a park, such as Carsland or FLE actually have no serious impact on ticket prices. The cost of these additions is expected to be largely recouped by the higher attendance, merch and food sales, etc. that they generate.

By the same token, ticket prices often (too often?) increase when there are no new offerings at all.

They raise the prices because they can, not because they have to.

 

[HMF]

Can you imagine if the Orlando Sentinel wrote something like this about WDW?
http://www.latimes.com/travel/deals...enture-retrospective-06201217,0,6371327.story
This is why progress happens at Disneyland, folks.

 

[JustChillinBro]

There is such thing as a bottom line as I am certain you are aware. If the Walt Disney Company was going to drop five billion on Walt Disney World, they would have to recoup that cost. Iger/Rasulo are on the record in one of their prior conference calls saying they don't invest unless they expect double digit returns.