PDA

View Full Version : Disneyland's changing demos



merlinjones
10-07-2003, 09:56 AM
There is an interesting article on the theme park industry in today's LA Times (Disneyland - not DCA or DLR - is one of the few parks to show attendance growth last year, the others being Universal Hollywood and Islands of Adventure):

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-theme7oct07224418,1,5435866.story

Snips:

>>There are 80.5 million people in the 25-to-44-year-old segment, which represents a key demographic for the theme park industry. That group is expected to shrink by 2.4% over the next five years. During the same period, the 45-to-64-year-old category is projected to grow 14%.<<

In that light, it seems to me that, with these demographics coming, it's imperative to begin hitting two marks at Disneyland: one being newer, bigger E Ticket attractions for younger demos, the other being restoration of the Ultimate Walt Disneyland for baby boomers. After all, the key demos are shifting there already - - With each passing year the boomers are going to want the Disneyland of their youth - - the ultramod Tomorrowland, Skyway, Tahiatian Terrace, Tiki Room and Adventure Through Inner Space, etc. even more, as they seek to relive the joy of their youth and the Disneyland they remember best.

Ultimately, the money will be in doing just what Walt Disney did traditionally, reussue the hits of the past for new generations while adding forward thinking new thrills. They must still do both to succeed.


>>Some point the blame inward, saying the major operators have recently focused too much on the bottom line at the expense of investing in major new attractions year after year to keep visitors coming back. "I don't think the industry's woes are 100% 9/11 and the economy," said Ron Bension, former chairman and chief executive of the Universal Studios theme park group. "Fifty percent of it is self-inflicted wounds." <<

Amen, Ron

olegc
10-07-2003, 10:07 AM
IMHO the only way things change at DLR is if the major shareholders (not you and me but the institutions) go out of their way to point fingers at Eisner and the bean counters. Otherwise the execs will still do what's necessary to make the company look profitable. Yes, the demos are there - but if you also look Disney is using a national, NATIONAL, campaign for a single ride. they even had commercials with football guys on MOnday Night Football (their idea of synergy I guess).

That means that they are willing to cannabilize the visits of people from the majority of the country that may have wanted to go visit DLR to go to Florida. Why? More room to build, more hotels, more total control of on-property assets.

This may also be the first strike in the 50th anniversary of DLR being more of a Parks-division wide celebration. Which means WDW will get the lion's share of budget to do anything spectacular.

I have resigned myself to the fact that DLR will not shift until three things happen - 1) As I said, major investment houses need to call out Eisner publicly (like Merril Lynch did to Sun MIcrosystems) and 2) they're bored with fixing up other parks or creating new ones (Hong Kong) and/or 3) the entire staff of DLR TDA's building falls into a deep crevace and never comes back.

Which do you see as more plausible. Right now #3 looks like it's the only one that's most likely to happen.... :eek:

Oleg

merlinjones
10-07-2003, 03:36 PM
Sounds like its time to start petitioning the institutional investors, their websites and chatrooms with educated talk about the Disney Company, its future, its true business, its customers, its executives, its missed opportunities, its mistakes and its losing corporate culture.

Someone recently posted a few of the Big Investor organizations. Let's all look for that info.

stevemo
10-07-2003, 04:26 PM
I think that this has been Al's point of focus for the last few years. I don't think that his updates are written for us, the Disney geeks, are fully aware of the problems at Disney and see them every day/week/month. His articles have been directed at those who only have a superficial interaction with Disney, but who might have a say concerning how large sums of money may be invested. These folks may be stock market analists, fund managers, and others who's sole source of info may be based on Disney Co. propaganda. I have no doubt that these corporate investor types do not care at all about Walt's vision, or fun and creativity. One amusement park is as good as another. But Al's posts have been harping on the fact that the Disney Co.'s "New Direction" is hurting the long term health of the company, and therefore the investor's stock value. Perhaps one day one of these corporate wags will put two and two together and have a little chat with the Disney board.

merlinjones
10-07-2003, 05:10 PM
That's been my hope too. And I do think that some eyes have been opened... but more are needed.

Mr. Wiggins
10-07-2003, 07:59 PM
To me the current "battle of the hottest rides" sounds like movie marketers hyping their latest summer blockbusters. Which isn't to say a new ride can't be wonderful fun, a fantastic diversion, a red hot weenie. But long-term (shucks, you remember "long-term," don'tcha, Mikey?), no stand-alone ride can restore Disneyland as a whole to the public perception it once enjoyed as a world-class destination.

When Disneyland was Disney (pre-shark-jump), the myriad elements of the show -- physical layout, art direction, sound design, rides, live entertainment, food, merchandise - all interacted as elements in a well-executed movie. Guests were cast as players in an immersive Disney fantasy, never as customers in a generic amusement park. Devoid of distracting story elements (blowing trash, busted lights, smelly bathrooms, shuttered lands), the whole flowed together into an experience that was immensely greater than the sum of its parts.

Disneyland's suspension of disbelief was, and still struggles to be, the real product that the Park sells to the public. Call it immersion effect, warm bath, show, fantasy, magic -- it's the feeling that stays in folks' hearts after they leave, the thing that they look forward to on their next visit. Eisner's Disneyland apparatchiks are as far from it as the proverbial hawk from the moon. They are coasting on the infrastructure that Walt's team, and the generation up to and including Tony Baxter, created.

Plunking down a Tower of Terror, no matter how well executed, in the middle of DCA won't raise the bar on the resort as a whole, any more than dropping a spectacular set piece in the middle of an otherwise run-of-the-mill movie. That's the groupthink in action -- spend millions on a one-shot spectacle while allowing a thousand smaller knife wounds to bleed the stuff of fantasy from the infrastructure of Disneyland. As predicted several years ago, DCA has indeed become the "heroin monkey on Disneyland's back."

Disney needs a creative visionary/showman leading a creative team that is as well trained, focused and connected on a gut level to today's audience as Walt and his original team were in their day; working in partnership with an equally well trained business visionary -- an "uber-Lassiter-and-Jobs" if you will -- to restore Disneyland to what it was intended to be: a place where you leave the ordinary world behind and enter the worlds of yesterday, tomorrow, and fantasy.

wendybeth
10-07-2003, 08:44 PM
I agree with Merlinjones. The major investors probably don't care one bit about the erosion of Disneyland, as long as the company keeps those profits up. They may start to care if they can be made to realise that short term profits will be undone by the long term damage. Disney fans are faithful, but certainly not stupid. Mr. Wiggins observation about "blowing trash, busted lights, etc" was also right on. Perhaps we should organise an 'Adopt Disneyland' movement, sort of along the lines of the Adopt a Highway program?;) We could all converge upon the land with cleaning supplies and trash bags. Disney might even list us as an "event"...:cool:

merlinjones
10-08-2003, 12:23 PM
I came up with a similar scheme in online discussion sometime back - - that restorations and recreations of past Disneyland glories (limited scope things like Tiki Room restoration or return of Captain Hook's Ship/Skull Rock, Cascade Peak, mod Tomorrowland paintjob etc.) could be done as if public works projects, by donors who get their names worked into the revised attraction. I think if they chose the right things, this would be a boon. Much better than spending on a sidewalk stone.

redrhino
10-08-2003, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by Mr. Wiggins
Disney needs a creative visionary/showman leading a creative team that is as well trained, focused and connected on a gut level to today's audience as Walt and his original team were in their day; working in partnership with an equally well trained business visionary -- an "uber-Lassiter-and-Jobs" if you will -- to restore Disneyland to what it was intended to be: a place where you leave the ordinary world behind and enter the worlds of yesterday, tomorrow, and fantasy.

Hmmmm. I wonder if Jobs and Lassiter could be tempted into running Disney? Somehow I doubt it because it seems as if they are truly enjoying their current jobs, but what about a deal merging Disney Studios and Pixar that would result in high-profile positions within Disney for these two men of vision and conscience?

redrhino

wendybeth
10-08-2003, 04:20 PM
Merlinjones-

Does the buy a brick project (or whatever the heck they're calling it) actually direct the funds to a specific area (such as maintenance) or is it just pure profit? I'd like to think that a guest driven 'save the park' project would have the effect of humiliating the execs into doing the right thing, but I think I've probably just seen too many Disney movies....:| Now, negative PR is quite another thing. I think they would be horrified to have thousands of guests (APers?) swoop down on the park with the sole intention of cleaning the place up. :cool:

Mr. Wiggins
10-08-2003, 07:08 PM
What about a deal merging Disney Studios and Pixar that would result in high-profile positions within Disney for these two men of vision and conscience? [Lassiter and Jobs]
Great idea! But only if they promised to fire the executives and start over.

olegc
10-08-2003, 08:02 PM
To tie into all of this discussion Jay Rusolo just presented to the media and shareholders the "vision" for the next few years at the parks. Bottom line is they won't do any more "E"'s at the domestic parks. INstead the plan on increasing the value of the brand - with more entertainment, shows, and infrastructure improvements to make multi-day visits special. One bad note - the said the proliferation of annual passes has hurt increases in projected attendance (I am paraphrasing here)...

It's a long webcast - 2.5 hours - but interesting nonetheless...
#############
To access a re-play of presentations by Jay Rasulo & Jim Hunt
and Bob Iger & Tom Staggs
on October 8th, 2003, click here.
http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=DIS&script=1010&item_id=791400

This re-play is available until 5:00 p.m. October 15th, 2003.