Originally Posted By leemac <<If it's unlikely that a new park (let alone a resort) will be built in the US, how is Disney going to continue to grow earnings in that division in the long run?>> Good question for sure. I probably need to think about it some more. I don't see Disney building either a third park in Anaheim or a sixth in Florida any time soon. There just isn't the business case for it. The only way the US parks are going to continue to grow is uplifts in ticket media and hotel pricing and cutting costs. Ultimately the future of WDP&R lies in Asia. Tapping that market (beyond Hong Kong) is key and doing it sooner rather than later. Disposable income is currently being used on consumables but that will change to a vacation structure in the not too distant future. <<So, if you were charged with making sure that earnings grew x% over the next 10, 20, or 30 years, how would you conceive that as even being possible?>> Not a job I would ever want. It is definitely the hardest division to grow organically. Everything becomes about costs when you are a mature business like WDP&R. I'd want Anne Sweeney's job at Media Networks right now. She is doing a great job over there and coupled with Stephen McPherson at ABC/Touchstone it is all looking very rosy.
Originally Posted By leemac <<or a sixth in Florida any time soon. >> Doh. Of course I mean fifth. Ahead of the curve there.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<That is a tough one to answer. The problem with the parks is that it is difficult to work out the economic benefit of making changes. Standalone products can be easily measured in profit & loss and cash flow. Tough to know what benefit Epcot would really get from a $100m investment. >> I agree. Now, I also believe the parks (and the bottom line) DO benefit greatly when the product is fresh ... when there are constantly new things to see and do ... and I am not speaking of E-Tickets ... smaller attractions ... updates ... new parades, shows and fireworks etc ...they all do make the parks more attractive for both new guests and returning guests and regulars and chronics like you and I. DAK's numbers are way up because of Everest, an attraction that didn't officially open until April. With Nemo seemingly headed for smash-hit status, you wanna bet thet DAK becomes WDW's third most-visited park in 2007? I do know that when attendance and spending was down at the start of this decade, the beancounters used everything from 9/11 and terrorism, recession and war as excuses ... yet when I would speak with people anecdotally, they would tell me that WDW was tired ... that there was nothing new there ... and from 1999 until late 2003 when PhilharMagic and Wishes debuted at MK ... they were right. <<That said I believe wholeheartedly that Disney should be in mobile telephony as a virtual network. Once the US finally catches up with the rest of the world and concepts like streaming TV and movies on your cell are more common it will be a great business to be in. Who would have thought five years ago that millions of people would have the capability of watching entertainment on a glorified Walkman? Incredible.>> I suppose. I'm not convinced, although I admit I am not a techo-geek. Why anyone would want to watch a TV show or movie on a screen the size of a postage stamp is beyond me. I know I won't. Hell, I don't even regularly watch anything online ... I have watched exactly ONE full TV show ... the last November episode of Lost as I was in Aruba ... online. I just don't see it as a big a future opportunity as you do. <<I always see Disney as an entertainment company first and foremost and a theme park operator second. I love the parks but they are nothing without good content and that is the domain of Studio Entertainment.>> Again, I think we're saying the same thing but it's coming out differently. A great man once said 'Content is king.' I agree and feel it always will be. Disney is first and foremost a content provider. That's exactly why I don't like the idea of Disney pushing into new distribution platforms headfirst without checking to see if there's significant water in the pool.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I think where we diverge on thinking is clear in this one sentence as I would always say "anything but another park". If I were responsible I would be hugely skeptical about building another Disney theme park in the US. I see no business rationale for it and I don't think the risk is worth taking. Concentrate on those parts of the business that are significantly more profitable and cash-flow positive.>> We don't even disagree of this, Lee. I don't believe Disney should be building any new parks in the USA. At least not for a decade at least. And then, I still doubt it (especially in Central Fla where they have hit the point of diminishing returns.) What I will say is that if Disney wants to, as a company throw billions of dollars away on bad business ventures like the many listed above, I would THEN and ONLY THEN, rather see them just build another park ... maybe something like Disney's America, which was a great concept and shouldn't have been dropped so quickly.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Obviously, I disagree wholeheartedly. But I'll take it all as a compliment as I know you intended >> <<I was particularly grouchy yesterday as I was stuck in the Bradley terminal at LAX waiting for a flight back to London. The temporary BA lounge was not very inviting. I still stand by my comments though although the vitriol may have been misplaced.>> I didn't take any offense to your comments. I am used to your UK charm by now And I do feel your pain ... LAX is always a mess, but I know the current work is making even moreso. IMHO, it is the worst major airport in the USA. I'll take Atlanta, NY LGA ... Houston ... anywhere ... over that place.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<That's certainly a big problem, isn't it? I think that one way that many businesses get themselves into trouble is to focus on what can be easily measured. Certainly, measurements should be taken and decisions justified, but it's very tempting to do things only that can be justified numerically (financially or otherwise), and it's not necessarily the case that the things are directly measurable in proportion to their importance. There are certain aspects of the operation where someone just has to know what the right thing to do is.>> That's my position, SuperDry ... you can't be a cutting edge creative dream factory if every dollar you spend/invest must be able to show a profit to the beancounters. That's impossible. It also is what's turned Disney into a follower instead of a trailblazer.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<I'm not sure what point you are making here Tom. In the UK (much like most countries I've visited) there is no notion of local or long-distance calling. Long distance is international, plain and simple.>> In the US we pay for a "block" of minutes which can be long distance (within the US) OR local. Considering that the US is the size of Europe thats a pretty big calling area. International calling cost extra. In our country technology offerings are driven by customer demand. Thats what happens in a Free Society. Especially a money driven Free Society. Most people just want a reliable phone they can talk on and don't care about the rest. 99% of the users are not intrested in streaming video or MP3 players built into the phone. Those who want data devices prefer handheld devices such as the Treo or simular hand held PDAs. The audio quality of your Europen standard GSM is inferior to current CDMA technology deployed by Verizon and Sprint. US providers such as Cingular who support GSM also lack reasonable data capabilities which are provided more effectively by EVDO through Cingular and Sprint. In the US it is the users personal choice of the provider who gives best coverage, features, and audio quality. In the US we have many choices of providers and those choices provide competitive pricing and competitive features. This is true in any market based culture. If there is demand for a service or if a provider can generate intrest for a service then that service WILL BE PROVIDED.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 < It is too early to tell about Disney Mobile but I'm told it is doing reasonably well. Again it also feeds content to other networks with ringtones, screensavers etc. < The test I do on this is with it's intended ( I believe ) market - and with a 12 year old in the house , all of whose friends have cellphones, not a one tied to Disney Mobile, most didn't even know about it. As an MVNO it needs to be available to all customers, not just one carrier, and still it is a narrow audience. I disagree with your assessment of why Mobile ESPN failed...being that people here are not media savvy enough. ESPN never proved to me and anyone I know that their premium service was worth the money. No different that ESPN's web site where subscribers have to pay for the premium INSIDE information / rumors - while sites like FOXSPORTS and CBSSPORTS on line carry virtually the same information and the news hits just as quickly for free. In order for ESPN mobile to have worked, going after a somewhat narrow audience, it had to be worth the money...not from what I saw.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>I don't see Disney building either a third park in Anaheim or a sixth in Florida any time soon.<< Where is the fifth disney park in Florida? I am only awared of 4 major ones, not counting the water parks.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <That said I believe wholeheartedly that Disney should be in mobile telephony as a virtual network. Once the US finally catches up with the rest of the world and concepts like streaming TV and movies on your cell are more common it will be a great business to be in. Who would have thought five years ago that millions of people would have the capability of watching entertainment on a glorified Walkman? Incredible. < while I agree to a point, how does a Disney keep up with being a leader in technology as quickly as it changes, when it is NOT their primary industry ? Looking at products now out for being able to link into your won satellite dish network with a portable unit with screens and soundmuch better than a mobile phone..I surely would not want to watch on my phone...nor do I want a larger phone to carry around all the time... Technology changes coming as rapidly as they are are leaving other tech companies in the dust in 90 - 180 day periods...how would they compete at that level ? That is why their major business has got to be content...it is where they excel and hold the cards. Unless they open a major division, with experienced players from the competitors, and fully invest, I do not see them as major players in the long haul at all, and more possible $ blood baths....I understand the lure of owning the content and being able to deliver...but I am not sure about that feasability. < Standalone products can be easily measured in profit & loss and cash flow. Tough to know what benefit Epcot would really get from a $100m investment< can also understand this...however do any of these improvements, and continual improvements in the parks ( vs. stagnancy) drive DVC purchases for instance, and to what extent. I would offer up that it plays a role in DVC purchases, and although it cannot be measured exactly ( even with direct surveys) , it is another factor in bringing cash flow into WDW for instance, and not the other locations yet sans DVC.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I think the eventual model that will work is selling Disney content through the traditional operators as add-ons to current service, much as ringtones are done today. Disney Mobile is interesting in that it has many family-friendly services, and perhaps there's a sustainable market for that. But I think to reach the broad market with content, they have to work with the carrier of the customer's choosing.< Bingo -- as a 20 + year Cingular ( Cell One ) subscriber, I would have no intentions of changing.....but since we already carry media packages for downloads / tm's etc to avoid huge bills - if the Disney package proved worth it, and was reasonable, sure I would thing about it. But to change carriers, and plans etc. - no thanks. Most of our friends also on Cingular so calls are free...
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Doh. Of course I mean fifth. Ahead of the curve there.>> I don't think so. I think you let something you know about slip out. Tell us what you know about that sixth park!!
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ Oops... of course I'm talking about a fifth park too. I just think you know what it is while you are claiming it is a future park you know nothing about. ;-)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I disagree with your assessment of why Mobile ESPN failed...being that people here are not media savvy enough. ESPN never proved to me and anyone I know that their premium service was worth the money. No different that ESPN's web site where subscribers have to pay for the premium INSIDE information / rumors - while sites like FOXSPORTS and CBSSPORTS on line carry virtually the same information and the news hits just as quickly for free.>> That's it in a nutshell. And that's what I've been told by folks in Bristol. There just wasn't a big enough market for what most people could get on ESPN.com and CBSSportsline.com and CNNSI.com for free or small fees It wasn't a technology issue. It was a no reason for being issue. And, BTW, when it didn't start off big, Disney threw all sorts of incentives at employees to get them signed up ... still didn't work. <<In order for ESPN mobile to have worked, going after a somewhat narrow audience, it had to be worth the money...not from what I saw.>> You understand correctly. And while I feel Disney Mobile has a better product to offer, I still doubt it has legs. Again, I see no compelling reason why parents and or kids will be jumping to but these and it has nothing to do with technology ... laser discs were way kewl too, but had no reason for being.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Kevin Yee has a new article out today, that shows some progress, and some more problems.... <a href="http://www.miceage.com/kevinyee/ky122806a.htm" target="_blank">http://www.miceage.com/kevinye e/ky122806a.htm</a> Ok, I understand not cleaning daily, but a very large cobweb that has been there for months??? And the Stroller Parking sign... UGH! And the generic trash cans.. For me that is "declining" by degrees, as that has been a signature for Disney Parks, having themed Trash Cans based on the location.....
Originally Posted By DLFAN1979 and lets be clear that MK, Epcot, and MGM are the ONLY Disney parks w/ UNTHEMED Trashcans which says alot.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Kevin Yee has a new article out today, that shows some progress, and some more problems.... <a href="http://www.miceage.com/kevinye" target="_blank">http://www.miceage.com/kevinye</a> e/ky122806a.htm>> Thought the column was very well done and brought many obvious things to light ... although I think there's a lot more trouble with the TTA than Kevin points out. But that wall near Space Mountain has been that bad for YEARS! And the bird waste has been a major problem for years ... one that could be dealt with by simple regular pressure cleaning ... what they used to do and now lie about still doing. <<Ok, I understand not cleaning daily, but a very large cobweb that has been there for months??? And the Stroller Parking sign... UGH!>> Darkbeer, you spend too much time at DL. Things at WDW go YEARS neglected and there isn't an Al Lutz type personality that will make things difficult for Team Disney. Yee is now trying, but I have my doubts as he misses a lot. He should go take some pictures of the doors in the laundry room at the Beach Club ... a $400 a night supposed 'deluxe' resort ... where the wood rot is so bad the doors will eventually have to be replaced ... likely when the holes are totally thru ... or he could take a look at the lights that rings the roof of the hotel that have been burned out in places since the late 1990s! Yes. It is that bad. And, frankly, in one day I could take someone like him around four parks and a dozen resorts and find so many things without ever really looking. That's what a decade of negelct and cost-cutting and amazingly bad management will get you. <<And the generic trash cans.. For me that is "declining" by degrees, as that has been a signature for Disney Parks, having themed Trash Cans based on the location.....>> Yes. And it's been brought up before here. It wound up in a spring 2004 story in the Orlando Sentinel called 'This Old Park' ... and in it Al Weiss lied thru his teeth about them switching cans out and having them on order etc ... that Disney detail is almost completely gone in the MK and many areas of WDW. But what do themed trash cans matter? Or unique costumes? Or guidemaps that have real DISNEY descriptions for attractions instead of 'roller coaster in the dark' ? Or how about themed merchandise in the proper areas? Like I've said here, I see a lot of positive things at WDW of late ... but I see them in the broad spectrum of the more largescale WalMarting (Yee calls it Declining by Degrees ... same thing) of the product.
