Originally Posted By CuriousConstance Oh I bet they were until they saw what the rides were actually going to be like. I about fell out of my seat from shock the first time I rode on Heimlich's Chew Chew Train. And that isn't very easy to do considering the ride crawls along at a speed making it nearly impossible to detect you're actually moving at all.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt >>Flik's was a knee-jerk reaction by Disney when people complained that DCA didn't have enough for little kids to do.<< "Exactly the point of the initial post." Right, however it did solve a problem - that there wasn't enough for young kids to do. Not everything that Disney does needs to be built with the mindset that it's going to last forever. Disney parks are always a work in progress.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Remember when Disneyland opened one of the attractions in Tomorrowland was bathrooms of tomorrow... IMO that's just 1 step above Fliks fun Fair...
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "IMO that's just 1 step above Fliks fun Fair.." I'd rate it lower than Flik's. At least Flik's is well themed and is entertaining for youngsters. Who goes to DL to learn about plumbing?
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance You know who does really like Flik's? My kids. And probabably the majority of kids do, which is what really matters, right?
Originally Posted By LP Watcher "Ok..... BUT if you are a shareholder, take Disney out of the equation, how long are you willing to let your investment lose money? 1 year, 5 years? And would you even be willing to invest money on a business losing money, with the HOPE it will start making money with only the promise of Quality." If you are an INVESTOR, then you leave your money in, let the company do what it does best, and hold your tongue during the occasional slump times. If you aren't satisfied with the way the company is going, LEAVE!!! Investors should NOT be considered owners. They should have NO influence on what a company does or does not do, outside of removing their financial support. But, if they remove their financial support due to short term downturns, then they aren't really INVESTORS, but rather market players who should just go out and get a job.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Sounds good. How much stock do YOU own? I own a fair amount via mutual funds. I'm not a "trader". I've invested in the same 6 funds for the past 4 years. But I can't hold on to it forever hoping for some return in the future. I need a return that is close to the market average for that type of fund. I'm 61... I can't wait for hopes and dreams to payoff 20 years from now. Very few people today can... we all found out a half dozen years ago how it can all go to crap in a minute. All you can count on is what you are getting NOW.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip P.S. We AREN'T loaning a company money. We are investing in an ownership interest. We legitimately as a group have as much to say about how the company is run as anyone else.
Originally Posted By EdisYoda And that, RoadTrip is the problem. It's because of these "short term investors" that DEMAND immediate returns on their investment. This turns into higher product/service costs, fewer employees, and fewer improvements. Things were fine before the dotcom boom when everyone was happy with their 5% return on investment. After people started getting 20%+ return, and then the bust happened, less then 20% isn't acceptable. Of course this isn't sustainable in the long term (may not even be reasonable in the short term). This is the second side of the double edged sword that is created by a stock market based economy.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip But when banks pay less than 1% interest on savings, what choice do you have? By the way... I'm not looking for 20%. If my funds as a group can maintain the long-term market average of 8% I'm more than happy.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>But when banks pay less than 1% interest on savings, what choice do you have?<< You can buy bonds.
Originally Posted By HRM Shareholders have an obligation to be knowledgeable about their investments, and shareholders do indeed have a say in how the business utilizes available resources. Investors have all kinds of time frames, be in short term less than 1 year, or long term of 5 or more years. If you read the Annual Reports, which are kind of fun to read if you like that stuff, Disney continually make long term capital investements. In regards to Disney Park attractions, Walt himself stated the Parl will be in constant flux, depending on the culture and interest of the times. Many popular attractions have been replaced, more will be replaced. Nothing wrong with "carnival rides" if a certain portion of the public enjoyss them, and wasn't part of Flik and Bugs Life movie Carnival themed. If you don't like it, there's other attractions for you to explore; just as many people complain about Small World atraction, others can't wait to ride.
Originally Posted By HRM Bonds aren't necessarily a good purchase now as there is talk about what the Fed might do. Today the Dow was down for the 3rd day in a row, under 1500. Disney was a laggart in today's market. Looks like a buying opportunity to me, if you can. Lately, investors have been moving from Dividends to cyclicals; again a buying opportunity for Disney - their dividends have consistently increase year after year. And yes I do have Bonds as well, HiYield Bonds - and I'm taking a bath, but again it's part of an overall portfolio (and maybe a buying opportunity) [but personally, I'm looking at Small Cap Value Mutual Funds] ...and holding on to my dividend producing Disney Stock.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Right, however it did solve a problem - that there wasn't enough for young kids to do. Not everything that Disney does needs to be built with the mindset that it's going to last forever. Disney parks are always a work in progress.<< Looking more closely to recent DLR history ... against Walt's years .... whatever they do build these days .. They do expect things to last for the longhaul. The co. does not like to go back and redo things. We see that in one example after another. I predict FFF will be there for the longhaul. And it's a pity. They could have built it with the same sensibilities with the original Fantasyland. Attractions just big enough, just long enough ... to entertain adults, as well as kids.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Looking more closely to recent DLR history ... against Walt's years .... " It's kind of hard to compare Dean. Walt Disney only lived for the first 12 years of DL's history - roughly the same amount of time that DCA has been open and much of the growth and change at that park is comparable to DL's first decade. I too wish that DL park was adding and changing the way that it was back then, but it's a mature park now and the growth focus will probably be outside the berm from now on.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>And yes I do have Bonds as well, HiYield Bonds - and I'm taking a bath, but again it's part of an overall portfolio (and maybe a buying opportunity)<< Only if you sell them. If you hold onto them until maturity you will get the full par value back, plus all the interest (which is much more than the bank is paying). True, if interest rates skyrocket, then you could find yourself locked into a poorly performing asset. That said, if you stick to shorter term bonds, that risk is minimal, as I believe that low interest rates are here to stay for a very long time.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Lately, investors have been moving from Dividends to cyclicals; again a buying opportunity for Disney - their dividends have consistently increase year after year.<< That is the allure of "value" stocks. They are supposed to be stable in value and return steady dividends. Of course, a bear market can ravage a value stock's price, and very quickly too.
