WSJ: Even Disney Is Worried About The High Cost Of A Disney Vacation (gift link)

[DisneyHead123]

Definitely a hard thing to quantity or now and everyone's experience is different. We were just there last week and had some great interactions and got a little pixie dust from one CM so it definitely still happens.

Also probably a situation where things get spread around online and then some people "demand" pixie dust and they have to back off in some cases and things get ruined due to how some guests act - but I still think WDW has overall excellent customer service

One thing I definitely noticed the last time I was there was that CMs seemed all around pretty attentive and personable (I mean people we spoke to for at least a moment or two). It was an across the board change. It’s not that people were ever unpleasant but in the years following Covid it was more common for CMs to seem flustered and confused (understandable since I’m sure half of them were new.)

 

[Agent H]

No thanks, doctor wants me to cut back to just one pack a day.

He hath risen!

 

[el_super]

Parks need that kind of excess slack capacity, though. It's not good if every single attraction has a 45-60 minute wait for a variety of reasons.

Capacity that goes unused, is not capacity at all.

I think the budgets are a problem for their attraction development as a whole, but it's hard to make a case for people to get excited for smaller tier spinner/theater attractions. People know that they are lesser experiences and are just filler and when the "cost" to visit them is the same as visiting a major attraction (in time) it really hurts the comparison between them.

It makes more sense, if you're chasing value, to wait 40 minutes for a big attraction, than to spend 20 minutes waiting for a 20 minute theater show.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

It makes more sense, if you're chasing value, to wait 40 minutes for a big attraction, than to spend 20 minutes waiting for a 20 minute theater show.

Only if you see the theatre show as a lesser experience.

 

[Touchdown]

As I filed my taxes this week, the other accounting chore I completed this week was shredding everything but my actual tax return from 2017. During which I found receipts from stays at WDW in 2017. It was eyepopping to see the prices be nearly 30% more expensive for the same room 7 years later (4.3% annual inflation.) Thats just not sustainable long term without upgrading the experience.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

As I filed my taxes this week, the other accounting chore I completed this week was shredding everything but my actual tax return from 2017. During which I found receipts from stays at WDW in 2017. It was eyepopping to see the prices be nearly 30% more expensive for the same room 7 years later (4.3% annual inflation.) Thats just not sustainable long term without upgrading the experience.

but $1 in 2017 is worth $1.30 today so adjusted for inflation that is the same cost

 

[Touchdown]

but $1 in 2017 is worth $1.30 today so adjusted for inflation that is the same cost

19.6% not 30% based on CPI. Disney increased costs 33% more.

 

[surfsupdon]

As I filed my taxes this week, the other accounting chore I completed this week was shredding everything but my actual tax return from 2017. During which I found receipts from stays at WDW in 2017. It was eyepopping to see the prices be nearly 30% more expensive for the same room 7 years later (4.3% annual inflation.) Thats just not sustainable long term without upgrading the experience.

Upgrading the experience?? Downgrading!!

Most rooms don't have housekeeping.
Most lack room service.
Many resorts lost boat and bike rentals, some lost arcades.
Most Resorts lost yoga, painting, runs, recreation options.
All lost free MBs.
If you are a long term true fan you see how streamlined and simplified the landscaping has become. Less flowers, more greens.
Ability of cast to assist in real time is far less (outsourced to call centers etc)

 

[TheMaxRebo]

19.6% not 30% based on CPI. Disney increased costs 33% more.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

As a younger person, I often kinda wish I could experince the mythical “WDW in the 90s/back then” that everyone talks about. Alot of stuff looks cool. Though I’m sure it had its problems like wdw has now. Nostalgia is a funny thing for us fans. We probably see the past better than it was.

Though I do accept my fate of eventually being doomed to berate how WDW was “better back in my day” with no genie+, river, the rides, ect, and how “chapek and iger” muddled with everything. Its inevitable. Especially as an Epcot person.

It wasn’t a Myth

We can go into all the details…but if you hang around here enough the picture is painted over and over again

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

but $1 in 2017 is worth $1.30 today so adjusted for inflation that is the same cost

Have you not the noticed the visceral, tribal reactions to that type of increase?

It’s not going well. Like…at all.

And you conveniently forgot the once in a century event where the western world decided to “buy they’re way out of” by printing money.

Kinda important in your calculation

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Oh I don’t think many people were ever confused about what they are.

Then let the thousands of posters know who justify those costs as “making sense” each and every day on forums such as this?

They’re not hard to find.

If you pay the same for 5 hours at night what you for 9 hours during the day…who’s zooming who?

No matter how much you “love the pool”

You are getting less product

 

[Chi84]

Then let the thousands of posters know who justify those costs as “making sense” each and every day on forums such as this?

They’re not hard to find.

If you pay the same for 5 hours at night what you for 9 hours during the day…who’s zooming who?

No matter how much you “love the pool”

You are getting less product

What if you don’t want to go to the park for 9 hours during the day but would rather go for 5 hours at night even if it costs the same? Yes, 9 is more than 5 but if you aren’t going to be in the park for 9 hours anyway, why not go at night?

You’re trying to standardize individual choices. People are different and like different things.

I can honestly say that I’m not the right person to engage in these types of hypotheticals because I’ve been told I’m an outlier in how I vacation at WDW. I also don’t care much about Disney’s business or how long the parks are going to survive.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

What if you don’t want to go to the park for 9 hours during the day but would rather go for 5 hours at night even if it costs the same? Yes, 9 is more than 5 but if you aren’t going to be in the park for 9 hours anyway, why not go at night?

You’re trying to standardize individual choices. People are different and like different things.

I can honestly say that I’m not the right person to engage in these types of hypotheticals because I’ve been told I’m an outlier in how I vacation at WDW. I also don’t care much about Disney’s business or how long the parks are going to survive.

I don’t have to “standardize” choices…

It’s rather empirical…”more”…or “less”

And if you recall…the entire concept was rejected when they started it. It failed and they went back underground. Because it’s absurd.

Then the customers just couldn’t hold it. So we get $150 as a block price. Notice what Happened to the holiday prices? Funny how they tripled and ended up on the same thing?


Hmmm…


There are no “individuals” in Disney parks…it’s all mass model.

Hate to point that out. But that’s why it worked for so long…and why they’re getting so much hell as they attempt to overcharge the masses now.

At the end of the day…it’s a product. Capitalism

 

[Chi84]

I don’t have to “standardize” choices…

It’s rather empirical…”more”…or “less”

And if you recall…the entire concept was rejected when they started it. It failed and they went back underground. Because it’s absurd.

Then the customers just couldn’t hold it. So we get $150 as a block price. Notice what Happened to the holiday prices? Funny how they tripled and ended up on the same thing?


Hmmm…


There are no “individuals” in Disney parks…it’s all mass model.

Hate to point that out. But that’s why it worked for so long…and why they’re getting so much hell as they attempt to overcharge the masses now.

At the end of the day…it’s a product. Capitalism

It really depends on your perspective. People visit WDW and make their decisions as individuals. They buy what they want and can afford and reject what they do not. That's capitalism. What follows in terms of consequences to Disney's business is the result of the free market.

For some reason, even though I repeatedly point out that I don't care about Disney's sustainability as a business, you keep bringing it up in response to my comments. I'm not sure why. I understand your concerns; I'm just not passionate about them.

If their prices and offerings are absurd and don't make sense to the people visiting, they will be rejected.

 

[Disstevefan1]

As I filed my taxes this week, the other accounting chore I completed this week was shredding everything but my actual tax return from 2017. During which I found receipts from stays at WDW in 2017. It was eyepopping to see the prices be nearly 30% more expensive for the same room 7 years later (4.3% annual inflation.) Thats just not sustainable long term without upgrading the experience.

I totally agree with your post but the problem is that for decades on these boards we have been saying the constant increase in prices on everything while reducing offerings was un sustainable.

The new visitors to Disneyparks are just accepting what we are currently getting, its only the returning guests who are (rightly so) feeling the loss in value.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I totally agree with your post but the problem is that for decades on these boards we have been saying the constant increase in prices on everything while reducing offerings was un sustainable.

The new visitors to Disneyparks are just accepting what we are currently getting, its only the returning guests who are (rightly so) feeling the loss in value.

And I also think many people still find value in it and enjoy it - even if the value is lower than in the past

We vacations lots of places but always seem to return to WDW as it still works the best for our family and has something for everyone

Now, in the past perhaps we felt we were paying $100 and got $200 worth of "value" and now maybe paying $140 and getting $175 in value - definitely a loss of value but still good return for us

If it gets to the point we feel we are paying $209 and into getting $150 in value we will stop going - and j am sure some people are already there.

But just because something isn't as good as the past doesn't mean I automatically is terrible to everyone

 

[Disstevefan1]

How important to Disney are "returning guests" to Disneyparks?

Is there real data on this? I have heard like 75 percent of visitors are returning guests but that seems too high to be true?

I would love to see the real data.

 

[Chi84]

And I also think many people still find value in it and enjoy it - even if the value is lower than in the past

We vacations lots of places but always seem to return to WDW as it still works the best for our family and has something for everyone

Now, in the past perhaps we felt we were paying $100 and got $200 worth of "value" and now maybe paying $140 and getting $175 in value - definitely a loss of value but still good return for us

If it gets to the point we feel we are paying $209 and into getting $150 in value we will stop going - and j am sure some people are already there.

But just because something isn't as good as the past doesn't mean I automatically is terrible to everyone

I love the specificity of your numbers

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I love the specificity of your numbers

Just trying to have examples but basically trying to show that just because something isn't *as* good of a value doesn't mean people don't now find sufficient value in it - while still acknowledging the reduced value