Reality Check

[daber]

Many of the threads here complain about what is wrong with Disney. And I don't have on rose colored glasses and can see the legitimacy for most of the comments concerning the recent "upgrades". As an AP I have been to Dinorama and hate it, have seen Pop Century (Hester's and Chesters hotel-o-rama) from the road, etc.

However, last weekend I went to Six Flags over Georgia and got a dose of reality.
1. $10 to park the car ("But Disney doesn't charge that much"). Their cost reduction measure was to get rid of the tram cars, so you had to walk to the entrance plaza!
2. After paying the entrance fee, found many attractions were "additional charges" ("If I paid to get into the park, why is it $6 to go into the haunted house?" Or more to do the virtual reality theater?, etc.)
3. They had something called Q-bot which is like Fastpass. You rent a device that you insert into the sign near the ride and it gives you a time to comeback and avoid the line. It cost $10 per person +$10 equipment rental....so for a family of 4 that's an additional $50)

Yes, I enjoyed my ride on the new Superman rollercoaster, a truly unique experience with your whole body attached to the rail and going thru the loop starting at the top of the loop,
but I now appreciate the Disney magic a whole lot more. Disney is the standard and head and shoulders above the competition despite the current problems (IMHO).

 

[hopemax]

Here's my dose of reality.

Haven't been online lately because I just got back from a 2 week vacation in the southwest, and that experience has gotten me even a little less down on Disney.

Price of a year long annual park pass for my husband and I and anyone who happens to be riding in the car with us: $50

Pin prices (yeah, I'm a pin collector have been for 13 years): $3.95, the pewter one was $4.95

Zion Lodge prices: Hotel $108, Cabin $117, Suite $136. Kids are free. Winter rates are $30 cheaper AND includes breakfast.

Food prices: My DH and I could eat on $10 at the lodge cafe (Burgers, fries, sandwiches, pizza) and it was tasty, fresh food!

The scenery was spectacular, even Disney Imagineers can't hold a candle to mother nature. It had been 10 years since I had been to the parks and a lot has changed, they have new facilities, shuttle service around the canyons.

We also spent 3 nights at the Paris Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas. We had a small suite with a king bed for $89, and we got free tickets up the Eiffel Tower. Their buffets are priced the same as Disney's but the food was much better than I've had at most of Disney's locations.

I keep hearing that Disney may be slipping , but it's the same story everywhere, but from my trip that just wasn't true. Disney may always be better than Six Flags, but my vacation choice has never been between Disney and another amusement park destination. It's been between Disney and seeing the USA, and Disney used to eak out a win.

Now, I remember why people who shake their heads in disbelief at people who annually spend $2K-$5K on trips to Disney. It's not necessary for a wonderful vacation. WDW will look more or less the same every 3 or 5 years as it does every year. But from Disney's balance sheet perspective, people increasing their time between visits have a negative effect that I think they'd rather avoid.

 

[All Aboard]

daber, first welcome to the rumors and news board. I hope you don't get the impression that we are WDW haters over here. We are not. Even our harshest critics love the place and spend large amounts of time and money there. We all have varying levels of opinion about the direction things are going right now. We all want it to be its best.

Your points are well taken. Six Flags stinks. Not a good comparison, though. It's like telling your wife, "at least I don't beat you like so-and-so." It's not enough being better than Six Flags, it's about being as good as WDW always has been. I'm a moderate on this board, one of the few people who rides in car #2. I hope you stick around, we'd love for you to join our conversations.

 

[hopemax]

Listen, if Disney is going to have compete against visits to national parks or other national beauties, well, that's just not possible.

Do you really believe Disney HASN'T been doing that for the last 45+ years?

Most people have limited funds and deciding how to spend the money means a lot of things that don't have a lot in common get compared to each other on a regular basis. That's why I think it's silly to stop the "Is Disney a good value" comparisons at other theme parks or even other entertainment places like Las Vegas. It leaves out a whole lot of other places that American families are having to choose between, however "unfair" those comparisons may seem.

the only similar about going to Disney World vs. enjoying the natural beauties of God's green earth is that both are types of vacation

Bingo. Vacations competing against vacations for the limited discretionary dollars of American families. How much more similar do they need to be? Going to see the USA means I, and many other families, can't afford to see Disney. And as strange as it sounds (or maybe it's simply a sign of how far Disney has already fallen if other Disney fans see the choice as ludicrous) Disney vs the USA...Disney used to win. It was that good.

 

[Werner Weiss]

Originally posted by thedscoop
... Listen, if Disney is going to have compete against visits to national parks or other national beauties, well, that's just not possible.

But that's exactly what Disney does!

Think about it.

You really can't say that Disney as competing against other theme parks in the same way that Proctor & Gamble competes against other laundry detergent makers. You need to buy a certain amount of laundry detergent each year. You might buy Tide. You might buy another brand. Or you might buy whatever is on sale.

Disney, on the other hand, competes for the vacation dollar. When you pick a vacation destination, WDW is one choice. Other choices include National Parks, beaches, cities, cruises, foreign destinations, all-inclusive resorts, or even staying home and doing things around town.

If you choose not to go to Disneyland or Walt Disney World, it doesn't mean you have to go to a Six Flags park or Cedar Fair park.

WDW is very successful -- and will continue to be as long as WDW is attractive to repeat visitors. If people choose not to go back because "there's nothing new" or "it costs too much" or "they're letting the place slide" or "they're trying to live off their past reputation," then WDW will cease to be successful. Unfortunately, that's now a risk.

And the Summer crowds at popular National Parks will increase.

 

[wdwguide]

Despite the obvious differences, amusement parks and conservation parks are places for which the fundamental rules of park management apply equally.
Disney is not in direct competition with most conservation parks since WDW caters exclusively to guests recreating at the modern end of the ROS, whereas National Parks usually offer a full range of recreational opportunities with an emphasis on the intermediate levels (with the exception of the more remote places, which tend to be of exclusive interest to those preferring primitive conditions).
There is, however, a large portion of the population that is flexible in their styles of participation, meaning they are willing to recreate outside their normal ROS level if there is a sufficient incentive for them to do so. A common trigger for this behavior is perceived relative deprivation, which for people who believe that Walt Disney World has lost value when compared to an alternative destination, may mean that they will switch to the alternative even if the absolute recreational value of WDW is still higher than that of the alternative. It's all a question of the units of pleasure derived per dollar spent withing the recreationist's financial limits and frame of reference.

Now, for those who recreate exclusively at the modern level and are inflexible, they may chose an alternative developed destination over Walt Disney World, but they are highly unlikely to substitute a National Park as a vacation destination no matter how much value Walt Disney World loses in their mind.

 

[raidermatt]

I'll grant that WDW is at least on some level in competition with every other vacation destination. And, I'll grant that if WDW doesn't continue to add new attractions or replace old ones, they will lose guests to various other destinations.

However, I will not grant that there are very many who now would choose a National Park over WDW because they don't believe WDW is adding as many new things as it used to. There have been three parks built in the last 20 years, and numerous resorts. Our personal likes and dislikes aside, Dinorama is new, JIYI is being redone, and Space and Philharmagic open next year. The changes at the DLResort over the last 5 years are even more dramatic.

So those who are truly seeking something different at WDW or DL are still finding those things at a rate that is no slower than in the past.

Lamenting a lack of changes is off-base. Not liking the changes is a different story.

 

[Planogirl]

We have travelled almost exclusively to WDW for many years now. I'm not counting long weekends to close by destinations such as San Antonio and the Ozarks. I always felt completely satisfied by our many trips to WDW and kept telling myself that we would get to the rest of the world "someday".

For us someday has arrived to some extent. I personally still love WDW with all my heart but I'm finding enough there to disturb me that I'm ready to check out the other places at least part of the time. I'm definitely cheating on our trip to California this year by including DL in our plans but we're finally going west! And now I'm toying with the possibility of trying Hawaii and Las Vegas next year. Beyond that is Europe I hope. All of these places do compete with WDW in our world because our money and even more importantly, our time is quite limited.

We'll still go to WDW but probably not as often. Has the lustre worn off for us? Some of it has IMO but I will wait patiently for it to return. But meanwhile, we get to enjoy new experiences which is one of the best parts of travel IMO.

Just my perception.

 

[raidermatt]

Just my perception.

And an absolutely valid one. My only point (there is one, you ask?!?!?), is that you're not the first Disney guests to decrease their visits as they reach different points in their life, and you won't be the last.

The question is if the reason is actually due to a decrease in Disney quality or is it due to changing tastes and desires?

Certainly you have your opinion, but only the overall numbers will reveal whether this is a true problem for Disney, or just the same patterns they have known for years.

 

[mikek]

Originally posted by thedscoop

So, its not surprising that many families after, let's say 5 trips in maybe 8 years, are deciding to explore other options. Gosh, I sure hope that happens. There is way too much out there to make every vacation completely Disney-centric. Heck, that's why I have read that non-Disney DVC options (within the DVC program) are becoming increasingly popular. People bought into DVC in mid 1990s and have done Disney for many of their vacations since then. As great and broad as WDW is, it's scope is minute compared to all the many other things people should see and do across our country.

So, yes, vacation time is limited and, therefore, on some level, vacation locations compete. However, WDW's success will never be dependant on the same families always going to WDW. That's much different that repeat visitors. Disney's goal should be to constantly attract "new repeat" visitors. Expecting any resort to satisfy a vacationers needs every year, year after year is simply not reasonable.

I seriously doubt (and actually hope not) that people would go to WDW every year for 8-10-15 straight years (locals aside and maybe day-trippers). There is simply too much else to do outside the hallowed walls of Lake Buena Vista.

I think the idea that Disney should be able to keep guests vacation time ad infinitum is a completely unrealistic standard. Go out and enjoy the rest of the country folks...after a few years of that...who knows, maybe you'll get the WDW itch again. If not, well good for you, there's alot out there to see and only one life during which to see it!

The rest of this thread aside...

I think you should stumble on over to the dvc bvoard for a day or too and see how you're perceptions might change as to repeat visitors. I dont doubt that the non DVC options probably increase in usage over time, but there certainly is a significant group that vacations at WDW pretty much non-stop, many several times a year. DVC is the best deal economically if you use the DVC options exclusively. I would imagine that a large percentage of the owners ran the numbers and came to that conclusion before purchasing. I would imagine that people who stay in deluxe resorts or who plunk down the change for DVC would TYPICALLY have plenty of money and therefore enough vacation time that one or two trips to WDW a year needn't be their only vacations- so those folks can see all the rest of the great things our country and the rest of the world has to offer. I would imagine since those folks would appear to have more disposable cash, that they are the ones disney would most covet. Also there's plenty of studies out there that say getting a customer to repeat busiiness is like one tenth the cost of getting a new customer.

Again, not sure what that means to the rest of this thread, but figured it was relevant...

 

[daannzzz]

I am not going to WDW this year ( gulp). I am doing a Southwest trip as well with stops in Santa Fe, Monutment valley, Grand Canyon and Las Vegas non of which I have seen before except Vegas. I am not avoiding WDW because of quality issues or cut backs, though I do think they have some major problems on the decisions they have made lately. I am going somwhere else because it is a big world out there and I want to see other things. I am reading these boards and getting "homesick" for WDW but refuse to backout of my new plans.
Next year I will return to WDW or skip it for a trip to Japan and TDS.

 

[Testtrack321]

I have visited Disney 5 straight years and still haven't finnished it yet. More rides, more palces to go more people to go with.

My problem is the comparing of Disney and a National Park. They don't even compare in any way. They don't have rides or worry about live entertainment. They don't need huge security. Disney is totally differnent experence and dosn't have the same needs.

 

[Planogirl]

I seriously doubt (and actually hope not) that people would go to WDW every year for 8-10-15 straight years (locals aside and maybe day-trippers).

We did and that's why this thread is so interesting to me. In 11 years we went 10 times as I recall, missing just one year because of financial difficulties. Maybe we do need a break.

I am also dealing with a kid who's getting older and is setting his sights on more "exciting places" (his words not mine). I think it's quite interesting to wonder if we are evolving (for now anyway) into a family of different interests and whether Disney has at least helped to bump us along in other directions.

My husband attended one of Disney's seminars many years ago. He was told that Disney placed great value on their repeat visitors and that one of their primary goals was to continually increase the numbers in this group. Disney was a lot different in those days though what with Epcot newly opened and it would be interesting to know if they still feel this way.