Disney Experiences segment operating income up 31% over previous year

Two of my obscure favorites are Orange Bird and Oswald. I’d wear that merch proudly.

I feel like you don't really understand the Disney theme park machine.

I understand it, I bought a few things from DL 50th which had truly groundbreaking Merch, and my $85 cd and record set is now worth $500 plus.

And the $85 Orange Bird Hawaiian shirt is on my wish list.

I understand it in terms of merchandise, and per cap, and feeding the fanatics, but its diminishing returns in a truly special way if it's happening all the time.

Mainly, I just wish for the castle not to be dropped in gaudy decorations for at least part of the year.

If the returns are diminishing as much as you think, why do they keep doing it?

The same reason we have not seen a non-IP new ride since Everest in 2006.

Also why two huge ride buildings were built at Epcot and have sat empty since the 80's, yet half of Communicore got turned into a bar/convention center.

Promise this initially:

Build this:

Do whatever is easy, not groundbreaking, and sell the most merch and food with the least capital investment.

Is this maximizing profit, reinforcing valuable IP, and leading to record revenue yes.

Is this also reducing and harming the uniqueness and top-tier brand perception of the Disney Experience, yes.

Is there a reason something like 60% plus of the country has not been to WDW and wishes to, but doesn't

A. Many think can't afford it, or really can't

B. Trying to plan it, and not get gouged at every step is a lot of hassle, and work

C. Try explaining Genie+ and Lighting Lane to a normal person

Do I also think spending 125-200 million on Everest was too much, yes.

And yes this could be seen as whining and missing the old days of Worlds Fair Walt, Early Epcot, Early Eisner, etc, etc, but the Disney mystique in terms of theming and placemaking and execution has not been the same since the expansion of Asia. And while yes Galays Edge and Avatar are amazing to look at, they have two rides, a fancy restaurant, and little else.

Hell, the only division I think doing it right is the Cruise Line.

I think you approach everything from the view of a disgruntled enthusiast and not as someone running the business. The company is swimming in profit at the parks. Whatever your complaints are, they're clearly not having a negative impact on the business or its ability to keep attracting customers. All things considered, I think Disney does a remarkable job of balancing business with the creation of art.

Sharpel007:

Is there a reason something like 60% plus of the country has not been to WDW and wishes to, but doesn't

I call shenanigans. Show me the source for "60% of the country hasn't been to WDW but wants to go."

And even if you are right, that means that 2 in 5 Americans---132 million people---have set foot in the 43 square miles of Walt Disney World. That's a raging success by any metric. I'm not sure there is any other single thing anywhere in the US that 132 million people have done.

The closest thing that comes to mind is Great Smoky NP, which is the most-visited of the National Parks. Even if no one ever visited it twice, it would take ten years for it to pass 132M. And it is absolutely free.

https://www.statista.com/st...onal-park/

Brian Noble:

I call shenanigans. Show me the source for "60% of the country hasn't been to WDW but wants to go."

And even if you are right, that means that 2 in 5 Americans---132 million people---have set foot in the 43 square miles of Walt Disney World. That's a raging success by any metric. I'm not sure there is any other single thing anywhere in the US that 132 million people have done.

Not saying that Sharpel is correct but your math isn't right. If 60% of the country wants to go but hasn't been, then that doesn't necessarily mean that 40% of the country already has. There is a non-zero population who has no interest in ever stepping foot in the WDW resort.

I understand Sharpel's argument that the celebrations are overdone, but that's through the lens of an enthusiast and someone who doesn't buy merchandise at the parks. From a dollars and cents perspective Disney clearly knows what they are doing. They wouldn't have these offerings if there wasn't a profitable market for it.

Sharpel007:

Do whatever is easy, not groundbreaking, and sell the most merch and food with the least capital investment.

This is exactly how you run a business that has zero problems with attracting customers. Once you see a decline in customers, you fix one of those items you mentioned.

Mulfinator:
From a dollars and cents perspective Disney clearly knows what they are doing. They wouldn't have these offerings if there wasn't a profitable market for it.

This. If the current model is working, don't change it.

This reminds me of the fact revealed in that new season of Behind The Attraction. The haters hated that they put a Frozen ride in Norway, because it was "easy" and "leans into successful IP." The truth is that they decided to do the attraction before Frozen even hit theaters. All things considered, I'm surprised they risked that, not knowing how the movie would do.

And I challenge you to find a day that line isn't jam packed. There still aren't enough attractions at Epcot to make Genie+ worth it, in my opinion, but waiting for Frozen in the standby line may be the worst standby of any attraction.

Frankly, Maelstrom wasn't all that in terms of theming.

I think you approach everything from the view of a disgruntled enthusiast and not as someone running the business. The company is swimming in profit at the parks

Yes but pricing themselves slowly out of reach from their biggest base, and making the value equation and worth it experience less and less.

In fact, people who make less than $75,000 per year are self-reported to be the most interested in going to Disney, but those people definitely don’t make enough money to go to Disney, considering how per the website’s own estimates, it would take about three years of saving $200 a month to save for the cheapest version of a Disney vacation for a family of four.

Of nearly 1,100 respondents, those who made between $50,000 and $75,000 dollars a year were the most likely to report wanting to go to Disney, and those who earn less than that were the second most likely to report wanting to go to the most magical place on Earth. Meanwhile, wealthier people, firmly upper-middle-class earners and families were far, far less likely to say they would want to go to Disney.

Thousands of dollars for a family of four earning less than, or just barely, six figures is not a cheap vacation, and in fact, those results were echoed in Insider’s survey. According to them, 32 percent of people with kids said they’d like to go to Disney, but just can’t afford it.

I can't find the 60% percent article or headline, and this Business Insider survey is only 1500 people, but the math and logic make sense.

https://www.fatherly.com/news/disneyland-disneyworld-unaffordable-want-to-go

https://www.insider.com/disney-world-too-expensive-family-vacation-2021-5

This reminds me of the fact revealed in that new season of Behind The Attraction

Ratatouille, Frozen, and Three Cabbelerros are I think great introductions of IP into Epcot, and they finally seem to have figured out the value of Figment, but have yet to fix the Imagination pavilion. And the Studios truly needed Pixar and Star Wars, since its original IP slate Roger Rabbit and Dick Track were one and done.

All things considered, I think Disney does a remarkable job of balancing business with the creation of art.

I agree about 90% (The biggest whiff being the mediocre DVC additions). Hopefully whoever Iger finds to follow him up this time realizes this, and doesn't pull a Chapek and put finance and hotel people above Imagineering. And with the cancellation of the move to FL, and the next big investments post Epic Universe (and Universal now becoming serious about competing on all fronts) needing to be top tier we shall see. But Tokyo, Shanghai and HK are paying off, and Imagineering has really been able to push things at those parks.

Granted this is from self-professed Disney enthusiast, so the bitching is probably 35% higher...

Sharpel007:

Yes but pricing themselves slowly out of reach from their biggest base.

I didn't know Gonch was now in charge of the Parks & Resorts division.

Sharpel007:

Yes but pricing themselves slowly out of reach from their biggest base, and making the value equation and worth it experience less and less.

This is fundamentally not how it works. Volume of customers is only one lever to adjust to be profitable. Pricing and margin are other levers. Six Flags goes for volume and low pricing and margin. Disney already does insane volume, with no indication that it isn't enough, and they price high and keep a large margin. SIX has a market cap of $2B, DIS is $167B. Who is doing it right?

no indication that it isn't enough

Well the WDW results this summer and fall did show that a smidge, in terms of attendance but Wall St. demands nothing less than growth on growth. I do think the summer attendance drop was overblown in the press and if I were a D23 nut, creating and amplifying it seems less crowded, is dumb, because you can enjoy the park a lot more.

I know Disney has the best insight and control of any company on earth to control just about anything at the parks, to make any amount of money they need. This winter they pulled the hotel discount lever and returned meal plans, and didn't raise prices at all, unlike Cali.

Forgive me for thinking long term, but in let's say 15-20 years, if the ticket increases stay at the rate ramp they are on, wage increases in the US grow at their average paltry rate, and the middle class keeps shrinking, the parks will truly become exclusive.

Or they continue to raise until they see the dip in attendance they expected and adjust the price back down to a comfortable level. What's crazy is when they finally do drop the cost of admission, everyone will have a field day with how Disney has finally failed. When in reality they are just setting the admission to what it should have been the whole time.

And I also still don't buy into the whole "You have to be rich to go to Disney" BS. If you want the ultimate Disney dream vacation with every perk and on-site accommodations, sure you are going to have to fork over your mortgage. But when you treat Disney as a single park vacation, it's very easily doable for most families. I think the problem is most people feel the need to visit all 4 theme parks in order to have a Disney vacation. That to me is just insane. FOUR theme parks is always going to be expensive whether all four are Disney or a mix of Disney, Universal, Sea World, and Bush parks.

I don't believe that Disney is unattainable. In general, people like to complain about prices, especially when they go up. But if you compare other entertainment options Disney isn't really out of line. Take concerts as an example. I was interested in seeing A Perfect Circle and Primus next May. Nosebleed seats are $80 each, before fees, for a maybe 3 hour concert. Floor seats are well over $300. Disney includes entertainment, rides, and transportation for a full day.

When comparing other theme parks Disney is an outlier in price but the experience is much better. I would put Dollywood in a similar tier, although a step below. One day tickets there are $92. Outside of national parks tourist attractions are generally pricey. I used to think Disney was expensive and crowded until we took a trip to Gatlinburg / Pigeon Forge during spring break pre-Covid.

Concerts are very expensive too. Some of forget that they used to be affordable, just like Disney tickets.

And yet the venues always seem to be full...

...just like Disney.

Very true. I understand that. I also understand that people are willing to pay it. I guess I was just reminiscing about the old days when you didn't have to sell you soul to do something fun.