A new MiceAge article--let the debate begin!

[Doodle Duck]

Mr. Wiggins....

That was the best post I have ever read on MP.

[LifelongAngelsFan]

Originally posted by cstephens
Well, I suppose we are supporting his point, but then, that particular point isn't going to be argued by anyone...

I've read several posts that are stating that $1,000 is too high and that they wouldn't pay that much. They would pay a little more though.

It seems that these posters are missing Kevin's point.

[tod]

Originally posted by LifelongAngelsFan
Those who are saying they wouldn't buy an AP for $1,000 are supporting Kevin's point.... His goal with this amount is dropping the number of AP holders from over 500,000 to under 10,000.

Kevin believes that such a reduction would actually increase profitability and improve the guest experience for everyone.

If I were an executive at TDA, I'd want to see strong demographics that support the notion of eliminating over 500,000 customers actually raises profit. This idea is counter-intuitive to me.

As a non-local, once-per-year customer, I'm skeptical that dramatically reducing attendance is in my best interest.

It isn't a matter of "eliminating over 500,000 customers": It's "eliminating over 500,000 customers who pay practically nothing to get in, using the facilities of the park and not kicking in their $47 per to do so."

If everybody paid $47 to get in every time, the Park would be making more money, and increased wear and tear on the Park would be matched with increased park income.

--T
Not real crazy about eliminating Annual Passports, but I know that it's best for The Park if they do this.

[scaeagles]

Wouldn't it make sense that DL execs would be tracking how often annuals are used? Don't they know how many times each of the 500,000 APs are used?

They HAVE to track the demographics of who has them and how often they come. My guess is that they also have some sort of software that cross references the names on the credit and/or bank card purchases made to their listing of who owns annuals so they have some sort of idea of how much an APer spends in the park when they go. I would figure they have also done some statistical sampling to figure out how much an APer spends in cash, too.

James P. Sullivan of Napa, CA has an AP. He comes to the park using his AP. Whenever his credit card is used, they match the data from his credit card transaction - the billing address on the credit card - to the info from his AP, so they know this is the same guy. Based on their statistical sampling, they know the average out of town APer spends $18.58 in cash for every $100 on their credit cards, so they know pretty close to what Mr. Sullivan spends on his visit.

They then use this data to determine what the optimal price is for their APs.

Here's what I think - all of the local APers get a huge gift from all the out of town APers that only use their APs for maybe 8-10 days a year at the park. Still a good deal for the tourists, and a good DL for DL as they get the tourists dollars in other areas, making a pretty good profit everytime one buys a $3 bottled water. The gift to the locals is a drastically reduced entrance price on their APs and they can go 23 times during a year for the cost of about $10 each time. And that without spending the money that an out of town tourist spends.

[LifelongAngelsFan]

Originally posted by tod
It isn't a matter of "eliminating over 500,000 customers": It's "eliminating over 500,000 customers who pay practically nothing to get in, using the facilities of the park and not kicking in their $47 per to do so."

If everybody paid $47 to get in every time, the Park would be making more money, and increased wear and tear on the Park would be matched with increased park income.

--T
Not real crazy about eliminating Annual Passports, but I know that it's best for The Park if they do this.

Yes, your point is in essence what Kevin is saying.

I'd want to see some concrete proof that the vast majority of AP holders don't spend money on food, parking, or merchandise while at the park. Since there are AP blackout dates, seems it isn't difficult to compare the per person revenue on dates with AP holders versus dates that don't.

[tod]

Originally posted by LifelongAngelsFan
Yes, your point is in essence what Kevin is saying.

I'd want to see some concrete proof that the vast majority of AP holders don't spend money on food, parking, or merchandise while at the park. Since there are AP blackout dates, seems it isn't difficult to compare the per person revenue on dates with AP holders versus dates that don't.

You won't get it. They keep attendance figures of all kinds secret, much less breakdowns. (Imagine what DCA attendance figures would be if you factor out annual Passholders.) And TDA might be able to get an accounting of how much the AP discount was on any given day (and therefore infer how much money was forked over by AP holders on a given day) but as far as figuring out who bought what, they don't have that information gathering in place. I usually just flash my AP and get my discount after a cursory face/picture check.

Somewhere back in August I documented a trip where my wife and kids and I spent an afternoon at the Resort, and all four of us combined contributed a big fat eight bucks into the Disney till, mostly into video games.

--T

[Wizard69]

It is true that the "Ugly Passholders" are ruining it for the rest of
the good annual passholders. I consider myself and my family (there are 18 of us who have annual passes) to be the good annual passholders. We don't complain when we don't get our way. If we forget to get the AP discount we don't make a big fuss
and forget about getting it for the current transaction. We keep to ourselves and just enjoy the park. Yes, we do have a sense of entitlement, but we don't feel that the cast members owe us anything. Actually alot of the cast members are our friends.

You are correct in that most annual passholders would be sad if they ended the AP program. I myself would be one of those people.

How many AP holders have declared they will no longer wait in Standby lines? They come to Disneyland all the time, and can afford to relax and not "try to get their money???s worth," so if they want to ride a big attraction, most often they will only use FASTPASS. If all the FASTPASSES are sold out for the day, many shrug. There???s always next time. In short, they feel entitled to skip the lines and still experience the ride.

Maybe we are the exception to the rule? We don't use the Fasspass system. If a ride is crowded, we will either wait in the line or just wait until it is less crowded. Usually, it is the latter. I used Fastpass this last friday once to ride HMH. The last time I used Fastpass, I can't even remember.

Side note: for the reasons listed above, FASTPASS would be a far more logical system if the FASTPASSES were not obtainable by Annual Passport holders (or if the
APs were only allowed a small daily maximum of FPs). AP holders don???t need to get their money???s worth each trip, so the line-skipping technology should be reserved for those who *do* need to get their money???s worth.

I agree with the above statement. AP's do not need to get Fastpasses because they can come whenever they want. Limiting the number of Fastpasses for APs is a good idea and would not affect myself or my family since we don't use it.

But I do ask that AP holders dispassionately and honestly consider whether they feel entitled to Disneyland. And then ask the next logical question: is that really a good thing? Disneyland is supposed to provide magic. A visit is supposed to be a special day, and a respite from the real world. Can these things happen
when people visit it once a month, and sometimes even once a week? Indeed, the once-a-year visits many of us enjoyed while growing up were arguably special precisely because they didn???t happen all the time. Entitlement has its drawbacks.

It's true. I get bored sometimes coming week after week. When I skip it for a month, I get withdraws. But, then it's more of a "fix" then a special day.

But there???s another angle to consider: Disney???s California Adventure. It???s no secret that we here at MiceAge consider DCA to be a pretty big flop: creatively,
thematically, and financially. I don???t think anyone can argue that DCA would be doing well if AP holders were not allowed into this park. Unlike Disneyland, DCA can???t seem to attract enough tourists on its own. So if I were in charge, I would continue to offer an AP for DCA only ??? maybe costing only $99. But I would not include even a single visit to Disneyland on this "DCA AP" ??? the idea is to get folks to pay the full admission costs over at Walt???s park at least once per year.

I don't think people would pay for a DCA only pass. Once again, my family and I are exception to the rule. We love DCA. However, I have been saying all along that they should sell a "discounted" Park Hopper pass for 2 days NOT just for the locals, but for ANYONE. This might get people more people into DCA. People who are here on visit just for the weekend and planning to go to Disneyland can go to both parks and not have to pay $47 for each park. They can experience both
parks that way. 4-5 day park hoppers are good for those who are from another state and "far away". The DLR needs a 2-day park hopper for those who are not "real far away" from Disneyland (i.e. Northern California, San Diego, Nevada) and visiting for the weekend as well as for locals. And not just on a promo basis, but on a permanent basis.

Kevin's financial analysis is pretty close. While I probably exceed the $300 a year average, the majority of my family does not. I would say about 60% spend at least $300 a year. Eliminating the lower pass levels might make Disney lose some of the
revenue. It would make the park less crowded, but it would be detrimental to Disney financially. If Disney were to raise the price of the AP to $500 or even $1000, I would not buy it. While I consider myself to be a "true believer" and major Disney fan, $500 or $1000 would be too high for me to buy an AP. Especially
with 3 members in my immediate family. At $500 each, that would mean $1500 outright or even if I split it up, $1500 a year. That's a big chunk of change to spend for a year.

[adriennek]

Originally posted by scaeagles
James P. Sullivan of Napa, CA has an AP. He comes to the park using his AP. Whenever his credit card is used, they match the data from his credit card transaction - the billing address on the credit card - to the info from his AP, so they know this is the same guy.

Did James move from Emeryville?

Actually, they could do this even easier than that... you know those AP discounts they give? Just scan the AP when they give the discount and- bingo- lots of data to sort and analyze...

Adrienne

[Mr. Wiggins]

>>A visit [to Disneyland] is supposed to be a special day, and a respite from the real world. Can these things happen when people visit it once a month, and sometimes even once a week? Indeed, the once-a-year visits many of us enjoyed while growing up were arguably special precisely because they didnt happen all the time.<<

>>It's true. I get bored sometimes coming week after week.<<
---------------------
It saddens me that what is reflected in this thread was predicted by many "Walt" types in Disney management as long ago as 1985. It was obvious even then that Michael Eisner was utterly tone-deaf to what made the Disney brand different, special and sustaining.

Aggressively dedicated to maximizing short-term profit, Eisner dismissed warnings that the Disney brand was uniquely vulnerable to overexposure. That hyper-saturating the marketplace would dilute the special qualities of the brand. Too much, too soon, and the brand would be perceived as ubiquitous -- its identity diffused, its desirability diminished.

The decision to flood an entire geographical region with cheap Annual Passports gushed from the same shallow well that disgorges Disney videos into every Wal-Mart, spews Mickeys onto every item of apparel, spouts animated sequels by the dozen and peppered every mall with Disney stores. As a business model it's either astonishingly brilliant or fabulously stupid, depending on how commercially carnivorous you are.

But then, no one ever accused Michael Eisner of not being a meat-eater.

[scaeagles]

Originally posted by adriennek
Actually, they could do this even easier than that... you know those AP discounts they give? Just scan the AP when they give the discount and- bingo- lots of data to sort and analyze...

That would be incomplete, I believe. Not all APs give discounts everywhere (a premium does, but a regular does not), and lots probably forget to use them for a discount anyway.

I believe they gather data about APers in ways we can't even imagine.

[Freerider127]

I think the AP price is perfectly fare because I go to the park alot and if I was going to spend 47$ everytime on admission I would not eat at nice places, I would not spend money on stuff like churros etc, and I would not spend money on souvenirs. I eat at nice places and by alot of churros and other food etc that makes up for the 47$.

[Bruce Bergman]

The AP prices they have now are fair, though they could raise them a little witout a massive fallout. But raise them a lot and people will drop their passes in droves, and DLR will take a big financial hit because of it - and more important, DCA is suddenly going to be quite obviously an attendance disaster, because a big part of their attendance is regional AP's who get in essentially for 'free'. You can't hide those empty walkways from a stock analyst.

It's true that there are a few people that get in on an AP and don't spend anything (they eat lunch before they arrive, and dinner after they get home). But many more do spend some serious money on meals and/or souveniers each time they visit, and some people only have lunch, ride one or two rides, see a show and go home.

They really need to start tracking people's utilization through the whole day to see what they ride, what they watch, and what they spend. They should be scanning tickets at each attraction, taking head-counts at every show, scanning AP's at every discount, scanning AP's at the parking tollbooths...

So when someone in the boardroom starts talking crazy like "Raise the Prices to $1,000 or even $10,000 a year" they have hard numbers they can point to for proof it's a very bad idea.

--<< Bruce >>--

[cstephens]

Originally posted by tod
It isn't a matter of "eliminating over 500,000 customers": It's "eliminating over 500,000 customers who pay practically nothing to get in, using the facilities of the park and not kicking in their $47 per to do so."

But not all APs fit your description. Perhaps you do (as you mentioned you and your family spending very little money on a particular visit), but I can match your anecdotal story with a few of my own where a large number of APs do spend quite a bit of money at the park, at least on food.

Originally posted by tod
If everybody paid $47 to get in every time, the Park would be making more money, and increased wear and tear on the Park would be matched with increased park income.

It has already been mentioned repeatedly that many people do not pay $47 per visit because they buy Southern California resident passes or multi-day passes. It's not just APs who don't spend on admission $47 for each visit.

Originally posted by Wizard69
AP's do not need to get Fastpasses because they can come whenever they want.

Again, this ignores the reality that not all APs can go to the park whenever they want to. Many APs are not locals.

[Wizard69]

Originally posted by Freerider127
I think the AP price is perfectly fare because I go to the park alot and if I was going to spend 47$ everytime on admission I would not eat at nice places, I would not spend money on stuff like churros etc, and I would not spend money on souvenirs. I eat at nice places and by alot of churros and other food etc that makes up for the 47$.

That goes for me too. I spend alot of money on food and souveniers every time I go to the park.

[Wizard69]

Originally posted by scaeagles
Here's what I think - all of the local APers get a huge gift from all the out of town APers that only use their APs for maybe 8-10 days a year at the park. Still a good deal for the tourists, and a good DL for DL as they get the tourists dollars in other areas, making a pretty good profit everytime one buys a $3 bottled water. The gift to the locals is a drastically reduced entrance price on their APs and they can go 23 times during a year for the cost of about $10 each time. And that without spending the money that an out of town tourist spends. [/B]

But alot of locals (myself included) spend quite a bit of money each time we go.

[cemeinke]

Yeah the AP demographics that Kevin cited don't match my personal experience, but he stated out-right that those of us who post on these boards are not the norm (though that wan't really explored much)

I know personnally we spend a huge amount at the resort, that we'd be spending elsewhere if we didn't have the AP bringing us back every week.

[Kevy Baby]

I can only speak for myself (as an AP'er), but I spend a LOT of money on art and other high-ticket items at DL: my wife makes sure of that detail

[ZipadeedooDave]

I read a piece by someone in MiceAge.com and it really bothered me. The individual that wrote this, while an annual passholder, was stating that he was 'anti - AP'. Seems sort of hypocritical if you ask me, but he stated some views on it and how he thought Disneyland should conclude the Annual Passholder option.

What is your view? I am so not in favor of this. My wife and many friends and I get great satisfaction from having Annual Passes....we use them frequently.

Because we don't have to actually pay everytime we go, we have more money for 'goodies' -- that being souvenirs, and Nicer meals....we attend Blue Bayou quite often....but if we had to shell out $96 just to get in, we'd rethink that idea.

What are your views? Should they stop Annual Passes? How could it be bad if they did? Again, this is piece I read was just an editorial from someone. Disney's not stated anything about this at all....so I don't want to alarm anyone.

What do you think???

[cemeinke]

I think you might want to check out this thread here

[Not Afraid]

Dave, try the search function. If you find an old, old thread on the topic, go ahead and create a new one. If you find a current thread in your search results, just go ahead and add to that one.

Just sharing a few tips that helped me get going oh so long ago.

[fairytalelover]

Originally posted by cemeinke
I think you might want to check out this thread here

I thought we were not supposed to do this to new people anymore.

Correct me if I am wrong, but very recently it was discussed that when a new person brings up a subject that was discussed a while ago ( and the AP thread was quite a while ago) that we shouldn't keep telling them to go back to the old thread and we should let them start a new one.

[olegc]

I emailed Kevin back and forth and rebutted on some of his points. He's done his homework and has good evidence for his points. However, I believe two main things are glarringly absent...

1) As mentioned previously before in the thread the number of attractions closed and lack of new attractions has contributed greatly to the lack of space in the walkways. Kevin even wrote an article on that topic as well (or was it someone on LP.com - I forget). This combination, with low cost APers and local's discount (not to mention ABC employees - have you ever seen the sign in sheet!?! Sheesh!) creates great havoc.

2) If there are 500,000 AP holders - what are the plans to maintain this annuity of dollars? Yes the maintenance cost is higher, yes the costs should go down if less people use the park - but without real numbers (which Disney won't release) I think it's extremely difficult to judge what the effect would be of removing the annual $$ you can put in the plus column on the Disney Books for APs.

IMHO I'd like to see the SoCal AP go away, or the Local's discount go away, but not both. Let's be fair. I can also get a discount through my employer ($31.00 instead of $47). Has anyone thought to include those people too? (not just my employer, all of them who get discounts).

there should be a 2 park "pass" for $199.00 no parking and minor discounts and them maybe the Premium is $299 or $350 with the discounts. They should try that first, then if there still is not an improvement then get drastic.

There are too many variables in play here to really come up with "One Grand Plan" and execute it accordingly. Unless you want to see people's heads roll again...

BTW - I own a 2 park premium (last four years), go to the park maybe once every six weeks, but attend most special events. I too am not the "typical" APer - but proud of who I am ;-).

Oleg

[ZipadeedooDave]

My wife and I live locally and we go quite often to Walt Disney's Magic Kingdom. In fact, we went on Friday, 10/10 for dinner and a few attractions....and then went again on Saturday 10/11 for dinner.

That is a luxury, and we pay for that. We don't feel that we are entitled to anything other than admission to Disneyland and DCA because we spent $450.00 for annual passports....of which we've both had for like 6 consecutive years.

Someone stated earlier that they really enjoy just 'kickin back' and not having to get on every single thing. I agree. If you look back at Walt's idea, he was creating an atmosphere! I enjoy that same atmosphere today....just sitting around, eating a snack and people watching is great fun for my wife and our friends alike.

I do not think they will ever 'do- away' with the Annual Passport. It would be unwise. I know myself that when my wife and I go, because we paid our 'dues' another time, we have more money other times to have nice dinner, get dessert, get souvenirs....even stay in the hotels....even though we are only like 20 minutes or so away from the resort.

They may raise the price some in later years, but I don't think they would just 'do-away' with it. It's not wise, and frankly, I think the locals are a big contributor to the economy of the Disneyland Resort.

[ZipadeedooDave]

I did go to that thread.
No offense is taken....I appreciate the coaching. Interesting info on this old thread...and probably the new one, if any 'newbies' see it.

Thank you for the help!

[cemeinke]

Originally posted by fairytalelover
I thought we were not supposed to do this to new people anymore.

Correct me if I am wrong, but very recently it was discussed that when a new person brings up a subject that was discussed a while ago ( and the AP thread was quite a while ago) that we shouldn't keep telling them to go back to the old thread and we should let them start a new one.

Eh, considering this was in response to the MiceAge article and a thread was started 4 days ago on the 9th, I thought it was recent enough to direct Zip over there, since it still seemed rather active.

No ill will intended, I figured a moderator might eventually combine the threads