Understanding Why Disney's Magical Express Is Ending

[CaptainAmerica]

And with daily parking fees at the hotels now in place, Disney has a good reason to want people to drive.

You think Disney wants people driving? A guest without a car might not be captive like they used to be due to Uber, but they're still MORE captive than if someone has a rental car for their entire trip. I'm not convinced that the resort parking fee makes up for that. The parking fee has always struck me as primarily a disincentive to rent a car first, and a revenue generator second.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don't see why people renting a car wouldn't still use Disney internal transportation to get around the resort. The buses are far more convenient than driving yourself to one of the parks and getting in all the traffic plus having to pay the parking fees.

I have a car when I'm at Disney (because I drive there from Atlanta) and hardly ever use it -- mainly just to go to other resorts for occasional meals. Although I now have to pay the exorbitant resort parking costs (as @Sirwalterraleigh mentioned above with regards to the Boardwalk, when I was at POR last January the lot outside our building was never more than about 5% full), driving to the parks every day would double that expense.

You don't pay theme park parking AND resort parking. Resort guests park at the parks for free.

Unless you're staying somewhere with specialized transportation (monorail, Skyliner, boat, or walkable), you're almost always better off driving to the parks than taking a bus, with the exception of Magic Kingdom.

 

[Nubs70]

Think of all the diesel fumes WDW is eliminating by discontinuing MDE. The carbon footprint of WDW just went down.

 

[mattpeto]

With park reservations staying around for the short long-term (through 2023), it doesn't make any sense to have EMH. The parks with EMH would just fill up before the other parks, creating an artificial demand for a park that doesn't need to be there.

Could they do an evening EMH at certain parks as a throwback to the guests? Sure, but then you have a park-hopping demand problem. That's why I expect fireworks to return at multiple parks at once, or have a ticketed (even free) somehow at first.

Long story short, cutting EMH until we are way on the other side of the pandemic makes sense.

 

[jt04]

It bugs me.
This company became the best because they were great (maybe even the best) at putting us (the guest) first. In the past, they always seemed to consider ways to improve our experience’s.
Today, they have switched to focusing on ways to cut costs in order to make more money- at the expense of guest experience. I get it- it’s a business- but it used to be a business focused on us...
Wake up, Disney, remember what got you here!

Hoping the next D23 features some value enhancements such as upgrades to the internal transportation system. That would bring back some magic that has eroded.

It appears to me they are moving things around because they have a long term plan. Just my opinion though.

 

[flynnibus]

Because if you are oversubscribed, you need to increase supply or find a way to decrease demand.

Or... you can just let excess demand go unmet. Or... steer it elsewhere. This 'it had to be done due to excess demand' argument does not stand on its own as WHY THIS CHOICE. What that point does show is there is leeway for Disney to make changes that don't benefit the customer because there they have 'a hot product'. They can look at their demand as not being fragile.

Essentially, Disney doesn't care if it loses 1% of people b/c of the loss of DME since they have too many people anyway, so why not cut costs.

But this falls back to the 'punish everyone' vs dealing with the excess demand audience. What you're highlighting is a point that has nothing to do with 'needing to address excess the demand'.. You've made the point 'they can do whatever they want because they have excess demand'. These are fundamentally different reasonings. The latter is not dependent on the idea 'something must be done...' - no, it's a 'hey we can do this BECAUSE we can get away with it'

 

[flynnibus]

Think of all the diesel fumes WDW is eliminating by discontinuing MDE. The carbon footprint of WDW just went down.

Unless it's been replaced by transporters, it's the opposite. It has gone up because one bus has been replaced by 20+ car trips

 

[flynnibus]

You think Disney wants people driving? A guest without a car might not be captive like they used to be due to Uber, but they're still MORE captive than if someone has a rental car for their entire trip. I'm not convinced that the resort parking fee makes up for that. The parking fee has always struck me as primarily a disincentive to rent a car first, and a revenue generator second.

I'd be willing to bet it's a dissolution of a cohesive cross property initiative and individual divisions winning battles to monetize their own bits.

The real tell would be is who gets to spend the parking fees. Is it seen as general hotel revenue, or do they earmark it for infrastructure budgeting, etc.

 

[HarperRose]

Okay, but what's your point? These changes were announced more or less at the same time. DME won't change until EOY. There's something up between Diz and Mears.

Swan/Dolphin switched back in October (I was off on my "weeks" comment), and the DME announcement was two months ago.

I'm sure the "something up" is all about $$$$$. Disney wants more and Mears isn't willing to roll over and for that, I say good for them.

 

[BoarderPhreak]

Swan/Dolphin switched back in October (I was off on my "weeks" comment), and the DME announcement was two months ago.

I'm sure the "something up" is all about $$$$$. Disney wants more and Mears isn't willing to roll over and for that, I say good for them.

Yes, the resort transportation was the first visible change of whatever new arrangement they've got going on. DME won't happen until EOY, maybe because of contract obligations. As for the why, it's surely about the money. Isn't it always? Also worth noting that Minnie Vans are no more. I believe the lease was over on those, and was strictly a Disney thing (no Mears involvement).

 

[Skywise]

Unless it's been replaced by transporters, it's the opposite. It has gone up because one bus has been replaced by 20+ car trips

But it's off of "Disney's Carbon Footprint" books.

It's not their fault if Mears doesn't use electric buses and Avis won't rent electric cars! (Speaking of which - is Disney going to add electric chargers to their resort parking?)

 

[Bpmorley]

But it's off of "Disney's Carbon Footprint" books.

It's not their fault if Mears doesn't use electric buses and Avis won't rent electric cars! (Speaking of which - is Disney going to add electric chargers to their resort parking?)

They have them at the parks, I don't know why they aren't at resorts already.

 

[Kkar]

There were tons of Meers taxis available while we were there both at the airport and on property. Uber was really suffering in terms availability the entire 9 days we were there.

We just returned and had no problem getting an Uber. Dolphin Hotel to MCO request, only an 8 minute wait for a car.

 

[punkabella]

This makes me nervous as a mom to three kids under 5. With DME, I didn't have to consider car seats. I haven't gone too far down the trip planning rabbit hole, but now there's more thought to if I need to bring carseats/boosters for all three kids or if there is another bus option to use.

 

[orky8]

Or... you can just let excess demand go unmet. Or... steer it elsewhere. This 'it had to be done due to excess demand' argument does not stand on its own as WHY THIS CHOICE. What that point does show is there is leeway for Disney to make changes that don't benefit the customer because there they have 'a hot product'. They can look at their demand as not being fragile.



But this falls back to the 'punish everyone' vs dealing with the excess demand audience. What you're highlighting is a point that has nothing to do with 'needing to address excess the demand'.. You've made the point 'they can do whatever they want because they have excess demand'. These are fundamentally different reasonings. The latter is not dependent on the idea 'something must be done...' - no, it's a 'hey we can do this BECAUSE we can get away with it'

I'm not really going to debate you because fundamentally I don't disagree with you. They are doing this because they can get away with it. They have decided that degrading their product, if not the desired outcome, is certainly not an outcome to be feared because the cost savings are worth the potential decreased demand as demand was too high.

Bob Chapek and current Disney leaderships simply DOES NOT CARE about giving you the best experience possible. Their only focus is on the numbers -- what mathematical combination gives Disney the best profitability. Obviously DME is expensive, so then the question someone of that mindset will ask is whether it's worth it. Here, from Disney's calculus, cutting the costs of DME is a no brainer. The only reason to pay the expense of DME, from current Disney management's POV, is if it's a necessary expense to maintain demand. They have decided that if the diminished experience of no longer having DME results in some people no longer going to Disney, not only is that NOT a problem, from their POV, it's actually bonus side effect because it helps solve another problem they have -- too much demand.

Whether long term that's a good financial decision, I'm confident current leadership doesn't care. They never cared about the product anyway.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm not really going to debate you because fundamentally I don't disagree with you. They are doing this because they can get away with it. They have decided that degrading their product, if not the desired outcome, is certainly not an outcome to be feared because the cost savings are worth the potential decreased demand as demand was too high.

Bob Chapek and current Disney leaderships simply DOES NOT CARE about giving you the best experience possible. Their only focus is on the numbers -- what mathematical combination gives Disney the best profitability. Obviously DME is expensive, so then the question someone of that mindset will ask is whether it's worth it. Here, from Disney's calculus, cutting the costs of DME is a no brainer. The only reason to pay the expense of DME, from current Disney management's POV, is if it's a necessary expense to maintain demand. They have decided that if the diminished experience of no longer having DME results in some people no longer going to Disney, not only is that NOT a problem, from their POV, it's actually bonus side effect because it helps solve another problem they have -- too much demand.

Whether long term that's a good financial decision, I'm confident current leadership doesn't care. They never cared about the product anyway.

Yup.. and all the talk that 'they had to do this because there is excess demand' is all just hand waving. Excess demand is why they CAN do it, not WHY they did it.

 

[Jrb1979]

Yup.. and all the talk that 'they had to do this because there is excess demand' is all just hand waving. Excess demand is why they CAN do it, not WHY they did it.

Not only that, they now people are ok with it.

 

[spock8113]

It's relatively clear that Florida wants make up for more of the tourist dollar they lost thru 2021 and I can't help but think this was a shady back-room deal leveraged on Disney. Just the pollution alone from all the rental cars as opposed to one staying-on-site natural gas powered bus. Then there's the parking for these rental cars. This is just another in a long line of head-scratching poor decisions by "The formerly-known-as-Disney Corporation."
Not OK with it, at all. Another reason not to go, much less stay on property.

 

[JoeCamel]

It's relatively clear that Florida wants make up for more of the tourist dollar they lost thru 2021 and I can't help but think this was a shady back-room deal leveraged on Disney. Just the pollution alone from all the rental cars as opposed to one staying-on-site natural gas powered bus. Then there's the parking for these rental cars. This is just another in a long line of head-scratching poor decisions by "The formerly-known-as-Disney Corporation."
Not OK with it, at all. Another reason not to go, much less stay on property.

Florida just made it a law to tax internet sales, expected to bring in 1B+ a year. Not hurting for funds at this point - thanks Washington

 

[bcoachable]

I'm not really going to debate you because fundamentally I don't disagree with you. They are doing this because they can get away with it. They have decided that degrading their product, if not the desired outcome, is certainly not an outcome to be feared because the cost savings are worth the potential decreased demand as demand was too high.

Bob Chapek and current Disney leaderships simply DOES NOT CARE about giving you the best experience possible. Their only focus is on the numbers -- what mathematical combination gives Disney the best profitability. Obviously DME is expensive, so then the question someone of that mindset will ask is whether it's worth it. Here, from Disney's calculus, cutting the costs of DME is a no brainer. The only reason to pay the expense of DME, from current Disney management's POV, is if it's a necessary expense to maintain demand. They have decided that if the diminished experience of no longer having DME results in some people no longer going to Disney, not only is that NOT a problem, from their POV, it's actually bonus side effect because it helps solve another problem they have -- too much demand.

Whether long term that's a good financial decision, I'm confident current leadership doesn't care. They never cared about the product anyway.

That’s what I was saying!! Except I do think at one point they really did understand that giving the guest a great experience was the way to bring in the money. Tons of books, seminars and conferences from TWDC on how to do things their way- from the 80’s and 90’s....