Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "In fact EVERY park in SoCal is cheaper that Disney right now, Universal is $14 less, Knotts is $28 less and Magic Mountain is $20 less." It's true that Knott's is considerably less than DL, but MM and USH are only $4 less than DL/DCA when tickets are purchased at their respective gates. The experiences they offer is far less than Disney's too, I might add. A day is at MM is in no way comparable to a day at a Disney park.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I agree that its frustrating how companies do otherwise stupid things for short term profits, but if they don't then Wall St. will punish the stocks price. >>> You're exactly right. Sometimes people call corporations or their leaders "greedy" but it's closer to them being required to be this way by the way Wall St. works. This causes an unending number of problems with publicly-traded companies. My personal opinion is that one way to fix a lot of what's wrong is to reduce or completely eliminate taxation on dividends. This would encourage companies to pay out their earnings each quarter to shareholders instead of doing things like a stock buyback program to prop up the share price. This way, a company with a flat year would simply pay out the same amount of money in dividends as they did last year. Under the current scheme where dividends are not paid by most companies, a flat year causes the shareholders to get nothing (all other things being equal). This is what's driving the notion that there must be earnings growth each and every year regardless of how much money was made the previous year.
Originally Posted By TP2000 Great conversation here folks! I take it from debtee's grammar and wording that he/she is an Australian. Using the argument that Disneyland should not raise its ticket prices lest it make it unaffordable for some families, debtee would be able to use that argument to great effect in the pricing of transportation to and from North America. ;-) debtee, have you ever thought of marching into the QANTAS Airlines ticket office in downtown Sydney and request that they lower their round trip airfare to Los Angeles because you are taking your family to Disneyland? Tell them that its unfair that a trip to Disneyland costs so much and that it makes your family sad that you can not afford to go to Disneyland at the ticket prices QANTAS is charging. Maybe they'll reduce their airfares for you? And maybe if you tell them you are planning this trip for the grand opening of Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage, they'll upgrade you to Business Class for the discounted Coach Class airfare? QANTAS Airlines owes that to families visiting Disneyland, right? I mean, it's Disneyland for gosh sakes, and every family has a right to go to Disneyland. Should a family living in Sydney be punished by making it more expensive to get to Disneyland than it is for a family living in Fresno? That family in Sydney has just as much right to visit Disneyland as the family in Fresno, do they not? Hmm.... Okay, maybe they don't. Anyone see the plaque Walt Disney had installed at the exit of the Mr. Lincoln show when he opened that exhibit at Disneyland in June, 1965? It proclaims America's Fifth Freedom to be Freedom of Enterprise. And America's wonderful Free Enterprise System dictates that cost of a vacation to Disneyland. Disneyland is a luxury, not a right, regardless of where you live or how much you want to take your family there.
Originally Posted By a1stav "only $4 less than DL/DCA when tickets are purchased at their respective gates." So what? buy your tickets online. SixFlags and Universal are giving significant discounts for buying online Disney is not. Magic Mt. and Universal right now are giving a day of themepark enjoyment for a price that is quite a bit less then Disney. I bet that the percentage of people that pay gate price at MM could be counted on one hand. "I might add. A day is at MM is in no way comparable to a day at a Disney park." That's your opinion, I personally know many people who prefer Magic Mt. to Disneyland. Hans, I respect that you feel that Disney is justified in increasing prices this much. Many here have stated that we live in a free market, well I am bringing in Disney's closest competitors and comparing prices, that's all.
Originally Posted By a1stav "This may be the comparison for you, but I would think that very few consumers are making a multi-day destination vacation decision between DLR and USF, whether it be on price or otherwise." Maybe, maybe not, I don't know if most people think like me. I am a themepark nut, and center most of my trips around visiting parks. It cost me the same to fly to CA or FL and hotel costs are about the same (FL a little cheaper). I think there may be others that live inbetween both coasts and use things like themepark prices to influence their buying decisions, otherwise why would Universal offer these discounts to begin with?
Originally Posted By berol I checked the Costco deal, definitely just for socal residents (unless they skip the claimed ID checks at Disneyland.) I also found its price went up by ten bucks, $129 w/ first visit by Nov. 13, last visit by Nov. 16, 2007. There's also the Socal CityPass, but my Costco doesn't stock them. They're around $175 on costco.com.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I think there may be others that live inbetween both coasts and use things like themepark prices to influence their buying decisions, otherwise why would Universal offer these discounts to begin with? >>> ... to try to get people going to Florida to consider spending some (or all) days at USF instead of WDW.
Originally Posted By debtee < take it from debtee's grammar and wording that he/she is an Australian. Using the argument that Disneyland should not raise its ticket prices lest it make it unaffordable for some families, debtee would be able to use that argument to great effect in the pricing of transportation to and from North America. ;-)> TP2000 yes I'm Australian. I really think you must have misunderstood and not read my two posts correctly, as I was not using any arguement that Disney should not raise it's prices? I was saying the opposite??? Maybe you can come back and explain what planet you are on, as you lost me!
Originally Posted By CMM1 In a city where some baseball or hockey tickets cost over $75 dollars a game and are frequently sold out, in a county where 5 hour round of golf costs over $100 and it's hard to get one of those starting times, why wouldn't one of the premier amusement parks of that region (and of the world for that matter) not have a ticket price of some $60+? Sure, Disneyland Park is expensive but it was always expensive even back when it opened. In the day of the $0.55 McDonalds "All-American" (burger, fries and milkshake), $0.29 a gallon gas, $3.50 for the top price baseball ticket and $1.50 for a double feature movie ticket in the 1960's, Disneyland was some $7-$8 for a 10-ride ticket book with park admission. Given the amount of spendid attractions that you find at Disneyland, is it not worth a lot more than its local neighbors KBF or Sea World? Many people think so and thus you see Disney feeling they are capable of charging what they do and still expect a reasonable amount of customers.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Even after all this talk, ie. justifying higher prices .... I'm not seeing the average salary in America keeping up with the meteoric rise entertainment businesses continue to charge. Most specifically in the last 17-20 years. For Disney .... it's continually pushing to the point only higher middle income earners can bare ... and hardcore Disney fanatics who'll pay whatever necessary to get their Disney fix. I don't think some of us can be 100% objective on this subject. ~ $63 is A ALOT of money for one day in Disneyland .. no matter how anyone wants to slice it, cut it, whatever!
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Even after all this talk, ie. justifying higher prices .... I'm not seeing the average salary in America keeping up with the meteoric rise entertainment businesses continue to charge.<< This is true, but until the public decides that DL is overpriced and attendance falls, prices will continue to rise. >>$63 is A ALOT of money for one day in Disneyland .. no matter how anyone wants to slice it, cut it, whatever!<< Apparently millions of paying customers disagree. They perceive that it is worth it. I suspect that if addmission were raised to $90 a day, many might start disagreeing with the value proposition.
Originally Posted By CMM1 >>Apparently millions of paying customers disagree. They perceive that it is worth it. I suspect that if addmission were raised to $90 a day, many might start disagreeing with the value proposition.<< To the tune of nearly some 20 million visitors a year to DLR, right? After all of these years, I believe the Disney folks know exactly how to price their product without expecting a loss in attendance. And at DLR in particular, if they see attendance dropping a bit they can always put out some SoCal discount program that will have locals salivating at some kind of deal that normally doesn't exist (like the "twofer" program last year)
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>To the tune of nearly some 20 million visitors a year to DLR, right? After all of these years, I believe the Disney folks know exactly how to price their product without expecting a loss in attendance.<< That's why they have all those overpaid MBA's.
Originally Posted By gadzuux They might try adding a significant new attraction to get those potential customers salivating too. I don't think 'nemo subs' are going to be it. Sure it's ambitious, but it's a retread of an old attraction that will likely create at least as many problems as it solves. In discussing perceived value of the parks, new attractions should be an important part of the lure. But in this case it isn't. DLR made hay with the 50th anniversary, but now that it's over they've got nothing to crow about but a weak and vague marketing theme that won't excite anyone. They'd have a lot easier time justifying the pricing increases if they had something truly 'new' to point to. Instead it's just more of the same - "magic" and "nostalgia". I appreciate what ouimet and his team were able to accomplish in restoring much of the faded lustre to the park. But it's time for disneyland to get a brand new crowd-pleasing (and absorbing) attraction. In fact it's long overdue.
Originally Posted By a1stav "1.50 for a double feature movie ticket in the 1960's, Disneyland was some $7-$8 for a 10-ride ticket book with park admission." In 1966 a "A" list movie ticket (single feature) was $1.09 adjustid for inflation in 2005 that same ticket would be $6.39 In my town a movie ticket is $7.50, so in 1966 movies cost %15 less then today. In 1966 a Disneyland 15 ticket book with admission was $5.00 (equivalent to $29.29 in 2005) A 2005 Disneyland passport was $59.00 so in 1966 Disneyland cost half as much as in 2005.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>They might try adding a significant new attraction to get those potential customers salivating too.<< They could, but as long as DL is pretty much packed year round, why would they? Why spend 100 Million on a new Eticket if it won't provide a required rate of return on investment? Unlike WDW, which has thousands of empty hotel rooms to fill, DLR always seems to be maxed out. When we visit during either Fall or Spring, DL always seems to have healthy crowds, even during weekdays. Fridays and weekends seem to be packed year round. DCA on the other hand, does not offer the same value prop as DL, which is probably why it will receive the Lion's share of improvements in the coming years.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>In 1966 a Disneyland 15 ticket book with admission was $5.00 (equivalent to $29.29 in 2005) A 2005 Disneyland passport was $59.00 so in 1966 Disneyland cost half as much as in 2005.<< I think that this is somewhat of an Apples to Oranges comparison. For one thing, I would wager that the percentage of 1 day pass customers in DL on any given day is quite low. A very bug chunk are AP's. Most multiday visitors have multiple day parkhoppers, which are substantially cheaper per day than a 1 day pass. Also, those 15 ticket books had a bunch of cheapo A and B tickets in them. When I was a kid we always ran out of the good stuff (E's and D's) early in the day, and would buy more many more tickets, especially if we stayed late.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "In discussing perceived value of the parks, new attractions should be an important part of the lure." I *should* be, but as it has been pointed out, new attractions don't always equate to long-term increased attendance. In addition, the cost of building a new attraction can off set any gains in revenue from increased attendance. If increasing value and attendance were as simple as building big new rides I think we'd be seeing them pop up with more frequency.
