Will these prices ever cap out?

"El Gran Magnifico"

Mr Flibble is Very Cross.
Premium Member
Part of me thinks Disney's endgame is to have 7500 people in a park on a given day, with each of those spending $1,000 for entry. I'm kidding of course, but maybe........
 

larryz

I'm Just A Tourist!
Premium Member
Anyone is welcome to enter the United States with the new USAP*.

Platinum, access to the US every day of the year. $2,000 per guest.

Gold, access to the US most days of the year. $1,500 per guest.

Silver, access to the US some days of the year. $1,000 per guest.

*Blockout dates may apply.
I already paid for my USAP, and have every year of my life since I started working... I get the American Citizen discount, too.
 

Mr Mindcrime

Well-Known Member
Oh please. I was there in 1957, and 1960 and mare after that. Don’t fool yourself. He sold as much merchandise throughout the park as he could. He even sold cells from his films on Main Street. I’ve got one in my living room that i’m looking right now that I got in 1960. He sold hats, mugs, Davy Crockett merchandise, anything he could. Walt was a tough determined business man who created an Uncle Walt persona that helped sell the park through his Disneyland show. If you want to learn about Walt the business do some research about that hard nosed negotiations he was in the middle of to build Disneyland (it wasn’t just Roy). And read about how he treated employees who tried to start a union. It will change your mind.

People have got to get over this myth of him just being a nice guy wanting to build a park for people’s enjoyment. That may have been part of it but the tough, determined businessman that learned a lesson from losing Oswald was a major component of who he was.
You are probably correct.

Even though I've been going to WDW since 1971, it just seems to me that the profit objective continues to be more obvious and more the main focus with every passing year. And I agree with UNCGolf that it's not just a Disney thing. I guess I'm to blame too because I like it when my 401(K) and Portfolio balances continue to grow. Maybe I am deluding myself into believing there was a more altruistic time in our world, long ago. Maybe not. I'm all for capitalism, at least compared to alternatives, but the "greed is good" mentality (thanks Gordon) is still difficult to swallow sometimes.

Thanks for the reality check.
 

eliza61nyc

Well-Known Member
You are probably correct.

Even though I've been going to WDW since 1971, it just seems to me that the profit objective continues to be more obvious and more the main focus with every passing year. And I agree with UNCGolf that it's not just a Disney thing. I guess I'm to blame too because I like it when my 401(K) and Portfolio balances continue to grow. Maybe I am deluding myself into believing there was a more altruistic time in our world, long ago. Maybe not. I'm all for capitalism, at least compared to alternatives, but the "greed is good" mentality (thanks Gordon) is still difficult to swallow sometimes.

Thanks for the reality check.
Also remember the age difference, lol remember the old adage of parents about how things change when it's your dough 😉
1971 almost 50 years ago you might not have been concerned about if Disney was getting greedy.
I don't mind Disney raising it's price because I do think the public will let them know real quick if they think it's too much. I'd rather that then some artificial regulations in order to make it "affordable".
 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Also remember the age difference, lol remember the old adage of parents about how things change when it's your dough 😉
1971 almost 50 years ago you might not have been concerned about if Disney was getting greedy.
I don't mind Disney raising it's price because I do think the public will let them know real quick if they think it's too much. I'd rather that then some artificial regulations in order to make it "affordable".

Granted, I haven't been on the boards very long but it seems to me that you champion these price hikes at every turn. I agree that until things change, them prices will rise. But to sit back and applaud it saying you don't mind? It's baffling. Almost like you want to give away more of your money.
 

eliza61nyc

Well-Known Member
Granted, I haven't been on the boards very long but it seems to me that you champion these price hikes at every turn. I agree that until things change, them prices will rise. But to sit back and applaud it saying you don't mind? It's baffling. Almost like you want to give away more of your money.
Not at all but I do believe in a business having the freedom to operate as it seems best. The reason why I don't mind is because I have confidence in the consumer. Consumers have a ton of power, if they don't like something or they don't feel they are getting their monies worth they will stop supporting a business. Think about how you shop. Do you remember when coke tried to reformulate their soda and market it as new coke?? What happened, the public said forget that and Coco cola quickly back peddled.

When the price point hits the wall, people will stop going.
Many people here already say they do that. I simply don't agree that any business has to price their product on any reason outside of supply and demand.

Basically I think I do with most people do, especially with non essential luxury items. I look at the price, I decide if it's worth it or not. But I definitely don't get real upset. I know at some point Disney will reach a breaking point with my budget, will I cry that they are pricing me out?? Nope. I'll move on

The original question was will prices every cap out?? So I'll ask you this, why should they??
 
Last edited:

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Disney’s a very special place for many people and many will do almost anything to get there and the Disney company taking advantage of it. I’d rather them hold out on the fancy gadgets in these rides and attractions we have lived so long without and still enjoyed the parks just as much maybe even more. I’m going to Epcot, the crowds at the Magic Kingdom aren’t worth it to me but it’s a shame that others have to give up on something they have loved for so long not to mention sold itself. it would be a shame if the parks turned into a getaway for the rich and rich only. For what I see it the board is milking the parks and stock until they bail leaving Disney bankrupt. Educate me if I’m wrong that’s how I see it I know nothing about the market but I really should.

Will these prices ever cap out? Short answer, No. Not at all defending Disney, but their costs of doing business keep going up, and as a public company their FIRST responsibility is to their shareholders, so the must keeping making more and more money and the only thing they can do is to pass the costs on to the customer.

Price increases are talked about every time there is a price increase. Same old thing. Will my family be priced out eventually, absolutely yes, but there will be millions of people still able to go to Disney parks long after my family is priced out.

The constants in life; death, taxes and price increases at Disney Parks 😀
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Will these prices ever cap out? Short answer, No. Not at all defending Disney, but their costs of doing business keep going up, and as a public company their FIRST responsibility is to their shareholders, so the must keeping making more and more money and the only thing they can do is to pass the costs on to the customer.

Yes, their first responsibility is to their shareholders, but that doesn't automatically mean they have to increase revenue every single quarter. I mentioned it in another post, but that's a relatively recent phenomenon based on shareholders wanting quick profits over long-term growth. I read recently that a few decades ago the average shareholder held stock for something like 8 years; now the average shareholder only holds stock for 8 months. Those people don't care if the company crashes and burns 5 years from now as long as they made a profit today.

It's actually a pretty bad situation for long-term stability, especially with a company like Disney. Even Bob Iger doesn't really need to worry or care about how the company will look 10 years from now (mainly because he's retiring soon) as long as he turns a profit the this quarter. The C-suite is incentivized to prioritize anything that will increase revenue in the short term regardless of what kind of effect it will have down the road. A company's fiduciary duty to the shareholders has nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue; you could actually make an argument that such prioritization is actually a violation of their fiduciary duty depending on long-term effects.
 

disneyflush

Well-Known Member
A company's fiduciary duty to the shareholders has nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue; you could actually make an argument that such prioritization is actually a violation of their fiduciary duty depending on long-term effects.

That sentence is some theoretical silly-string. Corporate fiduciary duty is a nebulous, cloudy area where absolutes go to die. Stating it has 'nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue' is just........no. The rest of the argument, though meant in good faith, just falls apart after that.

What negative long-term effects can be tied to increasing quarterly revenues that can't also be attributed to management/maintenance of the world's most popular 50 year-old theme park? Record attendance again means a record number of people can afford the product they are producing.
 

RustySpork

Oscar Mayer Memer
That sentence is some theoretical silly-string. Corporate fiduciary duty is a nebulous, cloudy area where absolutes go to die. Stating it has 'nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue' is just........no. The rest of the argument, though meant in good faith, just falls apart after that.

What negative long-term effects can be tied to increasing quarterly revenues that can't also be attributed to management/maintenance of the world's most popular 50 year-old theme park? Record attendance again means a record number of people can afford find a way to spend money on the product they are producing.

Fiduciary duty is simply a legally binding relationship and it can be defined in any way the board, shareholders, and leadership of that entity define it to be within legal boundaries. It absolutely does not have to require an increase in quarterly revenue.

Also ftfy.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
That sentence is some theoretical silly-string. Corporate fiduciary duty is a nebulous, cloudy area where absolutes go to die. Stating it has 'nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue' is just........no. The rest of the argument, though meant in good faith, just falls apart after that.

What negative long-term effects can be tied to increasing quarterly revenues that can't also be attributed to management/maintenance of the world's most popular 50 year-old theme park? Record attendance again means a record number of people can afford the product they are producing.

You realize you're agreeing with me, right? At least as to the first part about corporate fiduciary duty being a nebulous concept. When I say it has nothing to do with increasing quarterly revenue, I mean that when people say companies HAVE to increase their quarterly revenue, they are wrong and don't know what they are talking about.

Everything else I said had nothing to do with Disney specifically as a company; it has to do with corporate/shareholder culture in general. It was theoretical. I was never implying that increasing quarterly revenues automatically means there will be long-term negative effects.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom