Disney Parks have huge quarter, attendance up 10%, per-capita spending up 7%

RCMAC said:

Everyone has a good time and their spending might be relative, but they all managed to get there somehow.

But "getting there" is very different to different people...and that's at the heart of the discussion, I think.

Big difference between the family making the second trip of this year and the family that hasn't gone anywhere the past three or four years to make this one-time trip to WDW.

Jeff said:

So the people standing in an Amtrak station appear the same as those in an airport? I get your point, but the existence of exceptions does not outright invalidate generalizations.

No doubt the existence of exceptions doesn't outright invalidate generalizations. However, as the number of exceptions increases, the validity of the generalization is weakened. And at some point, a high number of exceptions does invalidate the generalization. Here, we are talking about the cars in the WDW parking lots, food people are eating and clothes they wear in the parks. And a limited number of observances of each. No idea how many exceptions there are in terms of validating the generalizations.

Brian Noble said:

In many ways, "a trip to Disney" is an American rite of passage.

This is ultimately the reason the articles get written. Not so much aimed at Disney but at US economy as a whole. Middle household incomes have largely been stagnate over the past 3-4 decades in real terms. And 30-40 years ago, the number of single earner households was greater than it is today. So its not just a Disney trip, its a lot of other things that are part of the proverbial American Dream that seemingly are out of reach. Houses. Cars. College. Etc.

I live a block away from one of the highest-end neighborhoods in Columbus. I'm also two blocks the other direction from one of the lowest. Can I tell who's from which end of the hood when I shop at the Giant Eagle? Sure I can. And I don't have to look at their carts for Porterhouse steaks, sparkling water, and Posh Puffs as opposed to Hamburger Helper, Mt. Dew, and Pampers. Or look in the lot to see if they're in their Lamborghini or if they took the bus. Rash generalizations that surely beg exceptions? Ok. But I'm just sayin.

And I personally know the McRich's with their two times a year stays at the Grand Floridian. I also know the Stufflebeans who saved up to take the kids to Kissimee's Days Inn for their once in a lifetime trip. Some people make a luxury habit of it and others don't care if they ever go back. They went once, and maybe they'll go back to camping for the rest of their lives. But both come home and tell their friends they had the time of their lives.

All I'm saying is there's nothing wrong with either one, and neither is Disney's fault. As to whether one should feel entitled to the trip or not, I come down on the side that says it's entirely possible for "most" everyone to go at least once in their lives. All you have to do is go there yourself to see its true.

We've gone from a society that it was understood that we had a right to PURSUE happiness...and now believes we have a right to BE happy. Pursue is a verb.

We all have a right to visit a National Park, State Park, beach, etc. Thus, admission to our parks is either free or inexpensive making it accessible to the masses.

I'd like to take a European vacation. I haven't. I'd like to go to the Super Bowl. I haven't. I'd like to have a four bedroom house on a mountain lake. I don't.

All I know is that every time I go to Disney it is pretty crowded. Even the "off season" is crowded with all of the running and sporting events they do now, not too mention the various "festivals".

How do you know you can tell? Do you follow them home to see where they live? Go inside their house to see if they may be house rich and cash poor? Ask for copies of income tax forms? Credit reports? Seems to me you are as likely to be right as you are wrong (or at least you will be wrong a large portion of the time).

In the end, I am totally fine with Disney charging whatever they want to charge. Some people won't be able to afford it. That's life. Nothing moral or immoral about it. And if that means 10 families provide all of their attendance, so be it. Same is true if its 330 million people.

Well... I'd like to say that I can tell the Giant Eagle shoppers that climb in the hooptie to head east of Parsons from the ones that stay in German Village. We live in an urban, mixed neighborhood and we all know each other to a degree.

And speaking of airports, while waiting at the gate to come home I was near (forever, it seemed) a family that I had to assume was there on a lick and a prayer. Clearly. Ratty clothes, kids out of control, crappy stroller, and shopping bags from Disney.
Now. Having said that. Could those people look at me and tell I spent the week at the lovely Clarion Inn and Suites (formerly the Days Inn) off of Major Blvd for 80 a night? Did they know I went to the park only one day, went to the State Fair, ate fast food and drank beer the rest of the time? No, because I smelled good, had nice luggage, and my best slip-on shoes. That's my hope, anyway. And true, for all I know those tacky people stayed on the monorail somewhere.

So, point taken and thank you. I surely don't want to appear as those I'm missing something or am being insensitive or incorrect in any way. It's just how I see it.

I'm pretty comfortable with the generalizations.

Well, I think it is possible to look at people and make some reasonable conclusions. If I'm on line at the grocery store behind a muscular guy buying horrifically healthy food, and an out of shape guy buying four frozen pizzas and three frozen lasagna entrees, I can make certain assumptions about each of them.

That said: at my box office job, it often turns out that the people who seem to be most concerned about price, seemingly trying to stretch every dollar to see the show, end up hailing from Kenilworth or Glencoe or Oak Brook -- the very most affluent suburbs of Chicago.

Here's an example. Take the resort (local) monorail for a lap or two and observe the general behavior, appearance and social dynamics of the guests exiting at the Contemporary, Poly and GF. Then ride the bus to one of the All-Star resorts. In general (key word is general), it's a different group of people. And that's ok. It's just an observation.

Not trying to negatively stereotype, not trying to label, not trying to offend or judge. It is just a casual observation, and of course there are always exceptions to both sides of the equation. That's not what we are discussing here. We are talking about generalizations. The meat of the bell curve.

This is why I think that WDW is busting at the seams right now. Somehow Disney figured out a way to appeal to folks from across a wide spectrum of resources, sophistication, needs/wants and economics who can enjoy a WDW vacation at a wide range of budget(s).

As a general matter, I think people are comfortable and/or support generalizations with which they agree. :) Though that says nothing about whether the generalization itself is actually valid and if so, to what degree. We don't have access to sufficient info to validate/invalidate the generalization that one can determine income/wealth by the car someone drives to WDW (if they drive one at all), food they eat in the park, clothes they wear in the parks and now how they act while in the parks/resorts.

Jeff said:

I'm pretty comfortable with the generalizations.

Heh. But make a generalization about ties vs tattoos in the workplace and we can watch your head explode. Fascinating.

That's because to me they're two different situations, but OK.