What is Next for Disney for 2013-2019?

[Tegan pilots a chicken]

I think the fact that UO is becoming legitimate competition for WDW will turn out to be a good thing for Disney in the long run because eventually they will have to make some changes to try and reclaim their market share.

What's sad is that they could spend $1-2 billion on WDW right now and pretty much blow UO and everyone else in Florida out of the water completely.

I am holding out on hope because I still reflect back on what Marty Sklar said at the EPCOT 30th celebration. He eluded to some future developments that we should all be excited about. (And he was obviously addressing the core audience). So I do have some hope left.

 

[Jakester]

Just holding hope they will be sooner than later

 

[lazyboy97o]

Plus they have four parks that are completely different

And yet the creative lead for three of those parks would not be able to tell you those differences.

 

[Rodan75]

What's sad is that they could spend $1-2 billion on WDW right now and pretty much blow UO and everyone else in Florida out of the water completely.

I think it is good for Florida and Orlando that UO is succeeding, that SeaWorld and BG finally seem stable again and that smaller parks like Legoland are doing well.

 

[menamechris]

I think it is good for Florida and Orlando that UO is succeeding, that SeaWorld and BG finally seem stable again and that smaller parks like Legoland are doing well.

What's not good for Orlando is that WDW hasn't been doing their part to help increase that tourism pie for the last decade or so. Universal, and now even Sea World and Busch Gardens, have been doing most of the work in keeping Orlando buzz worthy to tourists...

 

[OFTeric]

I am a lover of Orlando before everything else. Before any fandom of a Brand, I want Orlando/Central Florida to succeed. I have been thrilled, and ecstatic to see the Universal Orlando, and SeaWorld/Busch Gardens/Legoland etc making incredible improvements.

But what is troubling is when people visit the WDW resort and come out of it talking about how dated it is, and how boring a lot of the attractions are. Those might not be my views, but there is a trend.

Walt Disney World needs to pull it's weight in the experience department and not just the marketing department.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

Good point, I wasn't thinking about how rundown the UO parks were becoming before HP. I've always loved IOA but USF was hopeless for a really long time.

I still think that UO may not get the ROI they are expecting. For all of the negativity spewed at Disney, they are sitting out of this arms race for a reason.

If Potterland becomes (or already is) a "must-see" thing in Orlando, then they've got guranteed visitation from now until the next 15 to 20 years, if not longer. Plus, folks who come to see Potter might realize that Uni has these other attractions, and thus free advertising for the rest of the park.

At any rate, I don't think there is any doubt whatsoever that Uni/Comcast will recoup the investment. Even if all of Potterland 1 and 2 costs $600 million, then if you have an extra 3 million guests over 15 years, that's an extra 45 million people, and if they make Uni $100 bucks a piece, then that is 4.5 billion right there. It's like investing 6 bucks now to make 45 bucks in 15 years, that's a lot better than inflation and most investment portfolios. If the guests bring in more than $100 per person, like maybe $150 per person in revenue, then that is *ten times* the investment back.

Carsland costed maybe $600 million? It will bring in maybe an extra 4 million guests a year? On average maybe 3 million a year over the next ten years? That's an easy $3-4 billion for Disney over the next ten years. Stuff that Walt Disney designed and constructed is still helping Disney make the approximately $200 million or so that DLR was making pre-Carsland. It's all about longterm investment.

Fans complain about lack of rides, but it's also lack of good common business sense that has lead to flat growth at WDW.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

For all of the negativity spewed at Disney, they are sitting out of this arms race for a reason.

Disney as a whole is most certainly not sitting out . . .

Shanghai costs about $4.7 billion, of which a good chunk is investment capital fronted by Disney as the company will own 43% of this resort, which is different from Tokyo Disneyland. So Disney is fronting about $2 billion right now to build Shanghai Disneyland. Some of the insiders say that Disney has the money to spend on WDW despite Shanghai Disneyland, but the brass also answers to shareholders.

They just finished last summer adding Carsland and BVS.

Like it or not, they spent hundreds of millions on FLE, and 7DMT is still being built.

They just opened Grizzly Gulch in Hong Kong, and will open Mystic Manor.

Over the last 3 years, and over the next 3 years Disney has spent/will spend about 4.5 billion on new attractions and theme parks, and that's not considering if/when Avatarland/WDW Carsland gets built.

It seems that the noticeable misfire post-DCA 1.0 is FLE as per Al Lutz satisfaction is not what the company wants.

 

[drew81]

I have been going to UNi's parks annually in FL. I must have somehow still been high on the Disney Dust because I never noticed them being run down, at least not when compared with WDW's parks.

And, yes, Disney is sitting out because they believe that MM+ will place them alone in their own little 'blue ocean' and they no longer need to compete by actually ... ya know ... building stuff. That 'tude can be a death spiral for a BRAND.

Another reason why I didn't renew my WDW annual pass and bought one for Sea World instead.

 

[Rodan75]

Disney as a whole is most certainly not sitting out . . .

Shanghai costs about $4.7 billion, of which a good chunk is investment capital fronted by Disney as the company will own 43% of this resort, which is different from Tokyo Disneyland. So Disney is fronting about $2 billion right now to build Shanghai Disneyland. Some of the insiders say that Disney has the money to spend on WDW despite Shanghai Disneyland, but the brass also answers to shareholders.

100% agree. But then Disney needs to do more domestically to encourage folks to visit the international parks as well.

 

[George]

100% agree. But then Disney needs to do more domestically to encourage folks to visit the international parks as well.

Good point. Very few people would know that TDS is fantastic. Us Disney message boarders are a very small group in the Universal scheme of things.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I have been going to UNi's parks annually in FL. I must have somehow still been high on the Disney Dust because I never noticed them being run down, at least not when compared with WDW's parks.

And, yes, Disney is sitting out because they believe that MM+ will place them alone in their own little 'blue ocean' and they no longer need to compete by actually ... ya know ... building stuff. That 'tude can be a death spiral for a BRAND.

Fast Pass didn't stay a Disney exclusive forever as Universal started their own version, same thing with NextGen. Blue ocean doesn't mean that the competition *never* catches up, just that you have a honeymoon period in which to make the $$. Disney did have a 'blue ocean' in terms of high quality theme parks, now Universal is getting into the game.

Obviously, Disney has built, and will build tons of new stuff. $4.5 billion, give or take, from 2011 to 2015-6 not counting Avatarland if it gets built, or WDW Carsland, if it gets built.

Does complaining about WDW's lack of great new stuff have to involve completely overlooking current projects elsewhere and promulgating a smokescreen involving a misperception of 'blue ocean'?

Use the Googlizer to look-up both 'blue ocean' and to discover projects that Disney has recently completed and is in the process of completing, because either you're terribly misinformed or you don't mind bending the truth to try to make a point.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

100% agree. But then Disney needs to do more domestically to encourage folks to visit the international parks as well.

Here's a bad scenario for WDW fans: Disney is obviously building in emerging markets, in China, and in established markets with few theme park options, Hong Kong Disneyland.

What if Potterland is so good that Burbank figures that WDW can *never* compete with Universal Orlando over the next 15-20 years (in terms of growing the customer base significantly), and that their best bet in Orlando is to shore-up niche areas like princess meet and greets, instead of doing something big and bold?

If so, Disney might continue to spend at international parks, maybe buy Paris Disneyland outright, and start planning on Disneyland Brazil . . . might be a while before WDW sees a major E-Ticket.

 

[danlb_2000]

Here's a bad scenario for WDW fans: Disney is obviously building in emerging markets, in China, and in established markets with few theme park options, Hong Kong Disneyland.

What if Potterland is so good that Burbank figures that WDW can *never* compete with Universal Orlando over the next 15-20 years (in terms of growing the customer base significantly), and that their best bet in Orlando is to shore-up niche areas like princess meet and greets, instead of doing something big and bold?

If so, Disney might continue to spend at international parks, maybe buy Paris Disneyland outright, and start planning on Disneyland Brazil . . . might be a while before WDW sees a major E-Ticket.

I think this is a real possible scenario, although no necessarily a result of Potter. I would think a destination like WDW would eventually reach a point where everyone who is interested in visiting already is, so it would get to a point where it was impossible or at least financially impractical to significantly increase attendance any further. We saw IOA attendance jump 30% when Potter opened, but I don't think it would be possible for Disney to build anything that would get 30% more people to come to WDW that hadn't already planned to come.

 

[GoofGoof]

I think this is a real possible scenario, although no necessarily a result of Potter. I would think a destination like WDW would eventually reach a point where everyone who is interested in visiting already is, so it would get to a point where it was impossible or at least financially impractical to significantly increase attendance any further. We saw IOA attendance jump 30% when Potter opened, but I don't think it would be possible for Disney to build anything that would get 30% more people to come to WDW that hadn't already planned to come.

This is the big problem or dilemma for WDW. IOA is still a day trip. People don't go to Orlando for a week and only visit the Universal parks. They have lots of day visitors. DCA is the same way. Give people a reason to visit with new attractions and attendance goes up. For WDW if you build Carsland at DHS how many "new" guests do you draw vs canabalizing exisitng guests from the other 3 parks. With most people on multi-day passes the cost of a 5 day and a 7 day pass is immaterial. The only guaranteed major economic upsides are merchandise and food sales.

Actually, I would be curious to know how many additional guests visit WDW now because of Potterland? Someone who may have said, I am going to skip WDW this year since there is nothing new may have ended up going back Orlando to see Potter. Most guests don't care that MK is a Disney park and IOA is owned by Comcast (lots don't even realize this). A park is a park and you go where you think you will have the most fun. If people are on the standard 1 week vacation they may spend a few days visiting the boy wizard, but then 4 or 5 at WDW plus they might stay at a WDW resort to do this. The question is how many of the WDW guest lost day trippers to Universal are offset by guests who would not have been in Orlando at all if not for the boy wizard? In a way WDW is taking a page out of the old Universal play book. Let the competition spend gobs of cash to attract tourists and then just grab a piece of the pie without spending a dime. Of course for us as fans of both parks this is not a positive plan. An attraction arms race is best since we get lots of new toys.

 

[RandomPrincess]

This is the big problem or dilemma for WDW. IOA is still a day trip. People don't go to Orlando for a week and only visit the Universal parks. They have lots of day visitors. DCA is the same way. Give people a reason to visit with new attractions and attendance goes up. For WDW if you build Carsland at DHS how many "new" guests do you draw vs canabalizing exisitng guests from the other 3 parks. With most people on multi-day passes the cost of a 5 day and a 7 day pass is immaterial. The only guaranteed major economic upsides are merchandise and food sales.

I agree for us US/IOA is an add on to our WDW trip but we had not been to US/IOA since 2004. this past trip we skipped DHS and spent that day at IOA to check out Harry Potter. When Harry Potter 2.0 opens we are planing to go back to US/IOA for at least 2 days to check out ALL their new attractions. We will also be staying onsite to take advantage of their Free Express Pass. So Disney will be losing 2 days and 2 nights from us. I know other people who are doing the same type of trips. The only reason we aren't doing this the next trip is because we are waiting for my kids to get a little bigger (2 & 4 right now). I'm really excited with all the new rides planed for USF. It looks like they have some great things coming!

I'm a little excited for 7 Dwarfs it looks like fun. I think Disney's big mistake with New Fantasyland was opening it is stages. If they had opened it with everything complete it would have been a bigger deal. You would have had dueling Dumbo, new Meet and Greets (princess and Minnie etc), JOTLM, Belle's Village and 7 Dwarfs.

I also think the commercials for New Fantasyland are boring. The 7 Dwarfs would have added a little thrill to the commercial even as a big Disney fan the commercials do nothing to make me book a trip now!

 

[GoofGoof]

I agree for us US/IOA is an add on to our WDW trip but we had not been to US/IOA since 2004. this past trip we skipped DHS and spent that day at IOA to check out Harry Potter. When Harry Potter 2.0 opens we are planing to go back to US/IOA for at least 2 days to check out ALL their new attractions. We will also be staying onsite to take advantage of their Free Express Pass. So Disney will be losing 2 days and 2 nights from us. I know other people who are doing the same type of trips. The only reason we aren't doing this the next trip is because we are waiting for my kids to get a little bigger (2 & 4 right now). I'm really excited with all the new rides planed for USF. It looks like they have some great things coming!

I'm a little excited for 7 Dwarfs it looks like fun. I think Disney's big mistake with New Fantasyland was opening it is stages. If they had opened it with everything complete it would have been a bigger deal. You would have had dueling Dumbo, new Meet and Greets (princess and Minnie etc), JOTLM, Belle's Village and 7 Dwarfs.

I also think the commercials for New Fantasyland are boring. The 7 Dwarfs would have added a little thrill to the commercial even as a big Disney fan the commercials do nothing to make me book a trip now!

You hit on a real threat to WDW. If Universal makes a big effort to build more resorts then they could threaten room occupancy at WDW. I don't think the rooms that exist now or even the proposed new resorts will tip the scales, but if Universal ends up with say 10,000 rooms that could be a pretty big threat. People could choose to stay at Universal and visit WDW from there rather than the other way around. Disney uses things like DME and free dining packages to keep people on property, but if Universal reached economies of scale with number of rooms they could start matching these offers.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

I think this is a real possible scenario, although no necessarily a result of Potter. I would think a destination like WDW would eventually reach a point where everyone who is interested in visiting already is, so it would get to a point where it was impossible or at least financially impractical to significantly increase attendance any further. We saw IOA attendance jump 30% when Potter opened, but I don't think it would be possible for Disney to build anything that would get 30% more people to come to WDW that hadn't already planned to come.

Irregardless of whether that point has been reached (with the current slate of attractions), what matters is whether TDO/Burbank has any ambition to grow/maintain guest levels.

Currently, WDW was banking on a 1% increase per year over the next decade. Modest growth, but if they don't add attractions, they might not get even this and attendance may decline. For example, MK doesn't have enough rides, plain and simple. FastPass+ may only exacerbate the problem among average guests who leave the property for Potterland just due to aggravation factors.

WDW does make significant $$$ for the company, if attendance, and more importantly spending, are down, then I would guess that they have to compete with Uni for guests by building new attractions/lands/parks.

 

[alphac2005]

This is the big problem or dilemma for WDW. IOA is still a day trip. People don't go to Orlando for a week and only visit the Universal parks. They have lots of day visitors. DCA is the same way. Give people a reason to visit with new attractions and attendance goes up. For WDW if you build Carsland at DHS how many "new" guests do you draw vs canabalizing exisitng guests from the other 3 parks. With most people on multi-day passes the cost of a 5 day and a 7 day pass is immaterial. The only guaranteed major economic upsides are merchandise and food sales.

We went to ORL last month and spent 5 days and 4 nights at Loews on property and exclusively visited IOA and USO, so that's not the case. I know of many others that have done the same and some have done the combination of Universal & SeaWorld over a week all the while skipping over Disney.

At this point, based upon the lack of attractions, modernization, etc., only one Disney park would qualify as more than a day trip.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

Actually, I would be curious to know how many additional guests visit WDW now because of Potterland?

In the past, it was assumed that any additional business in Orlando was good for all theme parks, including WDW, because more visitors to the area means more potential customers.

Looks like Potterland changed that as attendance and spending at WDW are flat. Some first time visitors to Potterland also log a day at WDW, but I think what we are seeing now is that families are spending a day at IOA, or maybe 2 considering US, and thus it is cutting into WDW's attendance, and more importantly, folks are saving up to buy Potter wands and other merch, and not on that plush Pooh.

Its kinda sad for WDW given that they have built all of those hotels, but when Potter 2 opens, I see a good chunk of families staying onsite at Universal, and splitting their time between WDW and Universal.

At some point, when they were considering IOA/Potterland, some Uni executives probably walked around WDW, realized the place was raking in the cash without new offerings, and knew that they could compete with Disney. They were right.