Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I will say this about Disney's stock price. Even with dividends, it has done squat for over 10 years. My shares have not gone up in value in a long time. So from a purely selfish standpoint I would welcome something that would make me some more money, then I could get off this blog and move to someplace nicer than a retirement place.<< How about this? This will make your stomach spin more than Mater's Junkyard Jamboree. Want to know what all of these cost cutting and prudent capital investment strategies have gotten us? What the price increases coupled with inferior, costly, additions have brought to the shareholders? The last stock split for Disney was in 1998. After the split the share price was at $37.00. 1998 = $37.00 Today = $39.50 Now look at S&P. Look at everybody's favorite company Apple. Look at what Pixar did for shareholders in that time prior to being absorbed. People wonder why folks like me are upset. Mr. Toad, sure. But these are the big fundamental reasons. Gross incompetence.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 In a decade you can't produce one new parade for MK when TDL probably has had a few dozen with all the seasonal offerings over the same period? Just an abject joke. <<So if Disney was to sell them do you really think it will make them better - meaning spending tons more money on new attractions? No way. If anyone buys them, they will cut it to the bone to make as much cash as possible.>> That's not true. I can tell you as sure as I am sitting here that if they are sold you will see a higher level of investment in the parks then you do now. Absolutely no doubt about that. Remember when Eisner can to Disney and saw all these great assets that were sitting around collecting dust or not being exploited? The Disney Parks and Resorts are very much like that now, only they require far less to make them sing.
Originally Posted By ChiMike And just to add to my post #781. When shareholders saw a whopping $2.50 in appreciation over 13 years, how much in salary, bonuses, grants, etc. did the executive team bring home?
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 << A friend in Imagineering told me that despite the fact that there is space for several World Showcase pavillions left, Disney has done studies that tell them that a new pavillion would not increase guest attendance enough to justify it. Even with a E-Ticket attraction.>> Disney commissions studies to justify decisions it has already made. Disney doesn't care about facts anymore than it cares about legit feedback from guests or having a dialogue with fans in Social Media circles. There is no way you can predict how many guests you lose, how much money it costs by putting out a stale, subpar product. Just like you can't calculate what the damage it can do to your BRAND. But, rest assured, it's one helluva big number ... << One of the benefits of a park-hopper ticket is that you can hop from park to park. One of the down sides of a park-hopper tickets is that you are going to park hop. If you buy a 4 day park-hopper ticket the reality is that you will probably visit all four parks whether you really want to or not. And the reality is that in the MK and EPCOT the addition of a new attraction will probably not extend your day at the park like it would at a DAK.>> Sometimes, you have to make decisions based upon more than what a spreadsheet tells you. You go with common sense and a gut feeling. It worked for Walt Disney. And, since he doesn't seem to matter much anymore, it worked for people from Steve Jobs to George Lucas to John Lasseter to Richard Branson and countless others. Quality works. It is an almost foolproof business model. Indeed, WDW is an incredible example of that as it has largely put out fetid (expletive deleted) product over the past decade and still is reaping the benefits from a foundation of unparalleled quality that was built by vision not by spreadsheet. Decisions made simply for a bottom line result are almost always disasters in the long term. You can't run a business by consistently stripping away all that makes it unique in the marketplace. People are dumber by the day, but they just aren't that stupid (look at all those MAGICal fanbois who have just awakened from a stupor and realize the old gal ain't what she used to be, ain't what she used to be). You don't run the 'supposed' #1 theme park on the planet and just not add anything major in a generation, while stripping away huge elements of what made it such an amazing place to begin with. I haven't been able to pin this down beyond rumor, so take it thusly ... but it makes soooo much sense. I've heard one, not the only, of the reasons why Iger first started looking into the idea of dumping P&R was because the DCA Extreme Makeover had just been greenlit and the funds approved when he got a report on his desk outlining what WDW would need in the decade ahead just to not fall into the swamps ... things like infrastructure, basic rehabs, replacements, a few new small scale attractions, a few larger ones (but nothing huge or EXTREME) and THAT number alone dwarfed the DCA one by MANY, MANY multiples. Again, that's leaving out anything HUGE ... like say a new Tomorrowland with two new E-Tickets and new facilities all around and a new land for DAK and a few new pavilions at EPCOT etc. In other words, Bob's numbers were based on doing pretty much what WDW did from 2000-2010 (not much of anything). I don't know if this is true, but for all of us who know what has happened at WDW it sure makes a lot of sense. WDW needs billions of dollars just to keep treading water. It's a city unto its self and it's a city that has been neglected like a middle child. All that 'tax money' you pay when you visit and spend has largely left Central Florida never to be seen again.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 >>Ok, so you are assuming that a spin-off would have full control over everything and not be under the Disney brand? Couldn't they put the spun-off entity under the same licensing structure they would want to impose on a third party buyer?<< <<The thing about a spin off is that it would dilute the value of Disney stock as assets would be transferred to the spin off. Disney shareholders would be issued new "Disney Parks" stock to reflect the transfer of asset ownership. But if they sold P&R for say 20 billion, depending on how much the parks have been depreciated over the years, it could actually increase the assets on the balance sheet. As to what Disney might use that cash for, I wouldn't be surprised if a stock buy back happened, which would push the stock price up, which is the only thing American CEOs care about anyway. >> A very spot on assessment. If Disney sells P&R, then it would be a very good thing to have Mickey and Pals in your portfolios!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Now... in this... what happens to the resorts? I mean, Disney loves running and building hotels. Easy profit, customers, and reliable stock money. Is it possible that they won't sell those and The Walt Disney Hotel Company can live on? >> The resorts ... and the cruise line ... and DVC ... and AbD (which almost any buyer would fold immediately as it is a Rasulo/Holz pet project that has been a total failure) would all go along for the ride. I don't see any scenario where say Disney sells all of its resorts except the monorail resorts and keeps DL and 1/4 of EPCOT and 1/8 of DLP etc ... That makes no sense. They either sell outright entirely, get an investor and sell a portion or spin them off entirely.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I see my "proposal" to paraphrase a topic of 700+ posts didn't work out Lets try it this way...... On a scale of 0 to 10 ... What is the likelihood the parks will be sold off?>> If the price is right ... a 10. I have no clue if they are close to that with anyone.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> I've heard one, not the only, of the reasons why Iger first started looking into the idea of dumping P&R was because the DCA Extreme Makeover had just been greenlit and the funds approved when he got a report on his desk outlining what WDW would need in the decade ahead just to not fall into the swamps ... things like infrastructure, basic rehabs, replacements, a few new small scale attractions, a few larger ones (but nothing huge or EXTREME) and THAT number alone dwarfed the DCA one by MANY, MANY multiples. << I'd be surprised if the cost DIDN'T give him sticker shock. By the end of the decade ahead, WDW will be 50 years old. DL was falling apart by that age, and it's not located in nearly as harsh an environment as WDW is. But, Spirit, why fret? WDW is better than it ever has been >> I don't know if this is true, but for all of us who know what has happened at WDW it sure makes a lot of sense. << It makes as much sense as me selling my magical toilet book for $300 per copy at a D23 convention (and we know I'd sell every last one of them!).
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 OK, something got left off post 782, but I can't recall what it was ... let's just take it as a shot against DVC, podcasting whores and Meg Crofton and be happy!
Originally Posted By ChiMike Leo, At a D23 event. Considering what those folks spend on membership, events, special limited edition merchandise, I am POSITIVE your exhaustive field guide and portrait on magical potties would sell out. Just make sure you flip Marty a few hundred to write the forward.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 >> I've heard one, not the only, of the reasons why Iger first started looking into the idea of dumping P&R was because the DCA Extreme Makeover had just been greenlit and the funds approved when he got a report on his desk outlining what WDW would need in the decade ahead just to not fall into the swamps ... things like infrastructure, basic rehabs, replacements, a few new small scale attractions, a few larger ones (but nothing huge or EXTREME) and THAT number alone dwarfed the DCA one by MANY, MANY multiples. << <<I'd be surprised if the cost DIDN'T give him sticker shock. By the end of the decade ahead, WDW will be 50 years old. DL was falling apart by that age, and it's not located in nearly as harsh an environment as WDW is. But, Spirit, why fret? WDW is better than it ever has been >> Clearly, we have a Tom Corless lover in da house ... or LP pond. WDW sure has never been better. We just be haters. We should go to Universal with our ghetto brethren and then the lines for Space Mountain will be shorter. ;-) And if WDW had been properly maintained and had a fair level of annual investment and reinvestment from 2000-2010, I'd bet he'd have been able to cut BILLIONS off that projected number. >> I don't know if this is true, but for all of us who know what has happened at WDW it sure makes a lot of sense. << <<It makes as much sense as me selling my magical toilet book for $300 per copy at a D23 convention (and we know I'd sell every last one of them!).>> All you need to do is get a deal with a podcaster or blogger and I'm sure you could sell through them. I guess Doobie feels your content is too lowbrow for LP (he's right!) But you could do a special bound/boxed LE set where you include a tiny amount of the old Pixie Dust pink anthrax soap in a special MAGICal Potties Pin and sell the book for twice that!
Originally Posted By leobloom Not Tony? Imagineer to the starry-eyed fanboys? Nah, Marty's probably cheaper to hire -- and plus he can provide anecdotes about Walt's toilet brainstorming sessions at WED. (You know, like the Tiki Room restaurant would've had toilet stalls with birds perched over your head -- what a sight gag!)
Originally Posted By ChiMike Leo - For sure. Hard to pass up a forward penned by the legendary scribe himself. Could all be yours for less than room at one of the former monorail resorts.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> All you need to do is get a deal with a podcaster or blogger and I'm sure you could sell through them. I guess Doobie feels your content is too lowbrow for LP (he's right!) << Well, look at Mr. Doobie's hoity-toity LP! Come here for highbrow discussions of theme parks. >> But you could do a special bound/boxed LE set where you include a tiny amount of the old Pixie Dust pink anthrax soap in a special MAGICal Potties Pin and sell the book for twice that! << Great idea! In the spirit of the great Disney podcasters and bloggers who have paved the way for me, I'll profit off of your intellectual property without giving you any cut of the profits.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>The resorts ... and the cruise line ... and DVC ... and AbD (which almost any buyer would fold immediately as it is a Rasulo/Holz pet project that has been a total failure) would all go along for the ride. I don't see any scenario where say Disney sells all of its resorts except the monorail resorts and keeps DL and 1/4 of EPCOT and 1/8 of DLP etc ... That makes no sense. They either sell outright entirely, get an investor and sell a portion or spin them off entirely<<<< Well, this is odd, then, seeing they've actually investing in these entities. So, they invest in these entities and make them quite stellar, and then drop them? Meanwhile, the parks are left to rot. This is not making sense...
Originally Posted By ReelJustice <<I've heard one, not the only, of the reasons why Iger first started looking into the idea of dumping P&R was because the DCA Extreme Makeover had just been greenlit and the funds approved when he got a report on his desk outlining what WDW would need in the decade ahead just to not fall into the swamps ... things like infrastructure, basic rehabs, replacements, a few new small scale attractions, a few larger ones (but nothing huge or EXTREME) and THAT number alone dwarfed the DCA one by MANY, MANY multiples.>> Deeply troubling, and preventable if they had just reinvested a fraction of the money they've made...
