Bob Iger Wants Big Theme Park Expansions
Disney’s first 2023 earnings call was jam-packed with news about restructuring, cost-cutting, and the future of streaming services. Unsurprising, since those are topics CEO Bob Iger signaled he’d address upon returning. However, he also expressed optimism about Walt Disney World and Disneyland, briefly outlining expansion ideas.
This also isn’t a surprise, as the Parks & Resorts–more specifically, Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and Disney Cruise Line–were once again a bright spot for Disney. The Disney Parks, Experiences and Products (DPEP or Parks & Resorts) segment saw a 21% increase in revenue to $8.7 billion during the most recent quarter, as compared to $7.2 billion in the prior-year quarter, and segment operating income increased 25% to $3.1 billion.
Removing consumer products from that total, the domestic and international parks accounted for over $7 billion in revenue, up 27%, and over $2 billion in income. Narrowing that further to just the domestic parks and the numbers are roughly the same: $6 billion in revenue and (still) over $2 billion in income. That means Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and DCL are doing the heavy lifting for the segment.
It’s thus unsurprising that Iger chose to conclude the call on a positive note for Walt Disney World and Disneyland fans, addressing the untapped potential of the parks. Even though we added this as a late update to our original earnings call post, we felt it was worth revisiting for those who missed it–and to add new details and greater context.
While discussing the future of Disney’s Parks & Resorts, Iger stated that he’s “very, very bullish.” Exciting sentiment, until followed up with: “Demand for the parks is extraordinary now. We can lean into the demand easily by letting more people in, and by more aggressively pricing.” Suddenly, not so exciting. More of the Chapek approach of continuously milking the cash cow. But wait, there’s more.
Iger continued: “We don’t think either would be smart. If we let more people in it’s going to reduce the guest experience, and that is certainly not what we want. In fact, if you look at our results this past holiday season, we actually reduced capacity, improved the guest experience, and were able to maintain profitability.”
This follows an earlier statement during the call from CFO Christine McCarthy that the company deliberately reduced capacity during the holiday season by 20% as compared to 2019. Those of you who visited Walt Disney World or Disneyland and encountered heavy crowds may not believe this–as it was still very busy–but both the wait time data and our on-the-ground experience on both coasts back it up. An interesting aside, but that’s not really the point of this post.
“Lastly, we have learned that when we invest in increasing capacity, with Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge being a good example of that and Pandora a great example of that, we can grow our business,” Iger continued after further discussing how Disney would continue to manage the capacity they have. (Not good news for Annual Passholders who hate the reservation system, but we’ve said time and time again that reservations for APs are not going anywhere anytime soon–if ever.)
Iger indicated that if you look at the results when Pandora – The World of Avatar was built in Disney’s Animal Kingdom, the year-to-year growth numbers in terms of the number of people who visited were “stunning.” He went on to infer that Disney is going to bring Avatar to Disneyland for the same reason, and that he was investigating other such opportunities. “I talked to Josh D’Amaro about that this morning. Carefully look at all the great franchises of the company, and see where we can invest in them in the parks to increase capacity, while preserving guest satisfaction.”
This conclusion to the call is the key, and there’s a lot to unpack, so let’s get started. First, Pandora – The World of Avatar is worth looking at as a case study. Across the board, Walt Disney World attendance increased almost every single year from 2007 to 2019, so it wasn’t just growth at DAK.
With that said, Animal Kingdom far outperformed in percentage terms, jumping from 9.5 million to 14 million–with almost all of that coming post-Pandora. If you look at the spike in the two years after that land opened, it’s really remarkable. That one land essentially turned around Animal Kingdom. It didn’t just go from a half day to full day park–it went from one people weren’t visiting at all to a priority.
Disney’s Hollywood Studios was on a similar course after the opening of Toy Story Land. If what we witnessed on the ground in the first 2.5 months of 2020 was any indication, the impact of Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge (or more specifically, Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance) would have been similar. Of course, that didn’t continue to play out as planned, and DHS is still hobbled by reduced capacity as compared to pre-closure. The point is that high-profile park expansions are major drivers of attendance.
What qualifies as an expansion is nebulous. In the cases of the Avatar and Star Wars lands, technically something was being replaced–it wasn’t a “pure” expansion. However, those things (Camp Minnie-Mickey and the Backlot) were underutilized capacity that had almost no drawing power. There’s a reason why the Streets of America was the perfect spot for the Osborne Lights–and why relocating them would’ve proven nearly impossible–the out of the way area didn’t have anything to draw crowds.
This is different from reimagining or even building a single new attraction. Mission Breakout is widely viewed as a surprising success story for Disney California Adventure, and even we can concede that the result is a fun and better-than-expected attraction. But it took a popular attraction and made it more popular. The impact on park attendance was not nearly as pronounced.
When looking through theme park visitors statistics, the same can probably be said for Frozen Ever After, Star Tours: The Adventures Continue, and other additions that weren’t expansions. (It’s impossible to assess anything added since 2020 as the data is either skewed due to capacity reductions or not yet available. It’s my belief that the EPCOT overhaul has moved the needle for that park, but I don’t have corroborating stats.)
While Iger is the one who articulated this perspective on the first earnings call of 2023, it’s hardly a new idea. For one thing, Iger was at the helm when Pandora – The World of Avatar, Toy Story Land, and Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge were greenlit and opened. He would’ve seen the visitor data for at least the first two projects, and already had that expansion approach vindicated.
Years before that, he established the blueprint for such a strategy with the overhaul and expansion of Disney California Adventure, arguably the biggest success story of all. That 2012 transformation, along with New Fantasyland, was likely the catalyst for the most recent wave of development that is now wrapping up.
Although our focus is Walt Disney World, similar announcements came under Iger for the other parks. Hong Kong Disneyland is already double the park it was when it opened, with Arendelle: The World of Frozen being another blockbuster expansion initiated under Iger. Same goes for the Walt Disney Studios Park in Paris, which totally sucked until expansion plans were set in motion under Iger. It still sucks, but it’s heading in the right direction and will have its own Arendelle in another couple years.
Then there’s what Parks Chairman Josh D’Amaro teased at the most recent D23 Expo. He was joined on-stage by Imagineer Chris Beatty and Chief Creative Officer of Walt Disney Animation Studios Jennifer Lee to discuss early concept explorations. They started with Dinoland USA at Animal Kingdom, and potential expansion opportunities including a Zootopia Metropolis and Moana Mini-Land.
Then they turned to Magic Kingdom, where it was apparent this was much more ‘blue sky’ in nature. That presentation looked at Magic Kingdom Expansion Possibilities “Beyond Big Thunder” and showcased possible Coco, Encanto & Villains lands. While there was initial excitement among fans, that quickly soured. The positive sentiment gave way for skepticism about these possible plans, especially in light of Disney’s not-so-stellar track record in building things that were “firmly” confirmed at past D23 Expos.
Back in our D23 post-mortem, I presented my case for being optimistic about the panel and future of Parks & Resorts, and reading between the lines despite all of this: “Walt Disney World continues to outperform, and investors have begun to take notice of its success. This coupled with Wall Street souring on streaming (at least a bit) means Disney may finally start to bet bigger on its theme park business. Given that, a big slate of announcements at the 2022 D23 Expo was a possibility.”
“From my perspective, that’s almost certainly why we saw the early expansion plans for Animal Kingdom and Magic Kingdom. A realization by the company that Wall Street is increasingly skeptical of the streaming business, but all-in on theme parks. Given that this is a relatively recent development, the company hasn’t had a chance to finalize plans. Still, they want us–and more importantly to them, Wall Street–to know that big investments are on the horizon.”
If you go back and read that article today or think back to the D23 Expo in light of the surrounding circumstances at the time and consider what has happened since, I think that’s even more plausible. Wall Street was already souring on streaming subscriber growth, but that Parks & Resorts panel was before the quarterly earnings call that revealed $1.5 billion in losses on streaming. (As a reminder, financials are reported a couple of months after their quarters conclude–meaning that the D23 Expo fell within that particularly poor quarter.)
Those results proved to be Chapek’s undoing, setting in motion the return of Bob Iger, the dismantling of Disney Media and Entertainment Distribution, and a promise to be more responsible with runaway spending on streaming.
Equally as significant, this came before investors became vocal about the performance of Parks & Resorts. Although he’s called off the proxy battle, one of the cornerstones of Nelson Peltz’s “Restore the Magic” campaign was that the domestic theme parks were “over-earning” to subsidize losses elsewhere. He contended that margins had been pushed too far, too fast in a manner that was unsustainable. Peltz wanted to see more responsible growth at Disney’s domestic parks.
He’s not alone. If you’ve read or listened to analysts following the most recent two earnings calls (again occurring after that D23 Expo), “what about parks?” is a constant refrain. The sentiment is that Walt Disney World and Disneyland are doing really well, proving surprisingly resilient, and one of the company’s few bright spots. The message Wall Street is sending is that investment in theme parks is smart and safe, and the appropriate course of action.
Honestly, this is frustrating. Disney already learned this exact lesson after the Great Recession–hence the last development boom. The whole reason Disney focused on streaming subscriber growth was because that was Wall Street’s key metric for media company success at the time. Now they’re changing the ‘rules’ mid-game and acting like they just discovered the popularity of theme parks. As if all of the colossal expansion plans of the last decade occurred by luck or accident. But I digress.
The good news is that everyone seems to be on the same page. Wall Street is more bullish about Disney’s theme parks than streaming services. Bob Iger and Josh D’Amaro want to build capacity-expanding additions to the parks. Walt Disney World and Disneyland fans are obviously on board. Heck, I think even Bob Chapek was in favor of this…and we don’t exactly throw around praise for that umbrella aficionado here!
If everyone is on the same page and expansion is on the horizon for Walt Disney World and Disneyland, why haven’t we heard official announcements? Is it just a matter of Imagineering putting the finishing touches on plans and concept art? This brings us to the bad news…
Earlier in the earnings call, Iger discussed the company’s restructuring and cost-cutting initiatives. To that point, Disney will be cutting $5.5 billion in costs, made up of $3 billion from reductions in content and the remaining $2.5 billion from non-content cuts. As part of that, the company is reducing its workforce by 7,000.
There are a couple main reasons for this. The first is the debt Disney took on with the 20th Century Fox acquisition and at the start of the pandemic. The second is streaming losses, which increased for the quarter by $0.5 billion to $1.1 billion. This is the third consecutive quarter that streaming has racked up over $1 billion in losses.
Note that this is not a failure of Disney+ or due to unpopularity (quite the opposite is true). Streaming losing money its first several years was always the plan. Disney+ launched with a ‘growth at all costs’ user acquisition strategy to capture market share, which was kicked into higher gear by Chapek until Wall Street changed the metric of success. As before, Disney+ is on a path to profitability, but not until late 2024.
As a result of this, CFO Christine McCarthy indicated that fiscal 2023 capital expenditures at Parks & Resorts will total proximally $6 billion, which is lower than the prior guidance of $6.7 billion. Interestingly, this is not primarily due to decreases in CapEx at the domestic parks, but rather, due to “timing shifts.”
It’s difficult to determine where Disney Parks & Resorts could save $700 million as a result of “timing shifts.” My best guesses are delays in Arendelle at Walt Disney Studios Park, Polynesian DVC Tower, and whatever the heck is going on with Disney Cruise Line and Lighthouse Point.
Everything else is either too far along or necessary (knock on wood). It’s hard to see the EPCOT overhaul paused at this point, but then again, I would’ve said the same thing in Spring 2020. Delaying Tiana’s Bayou Adventure seems equally unlikely, as does postponing other projects nearing completion. The savings could also be on CapEx projects that were slated to begin this fiscal year, but now will not.
Ultimately, it might seem difficult to reconcile Bob Iger’s bullishness on big expansion at Walt Disney World and Disneyland with the aforementioned near-term cost-cutting. As was the case after the odd panel at the D23 Expo, we totally understand fan skepticism, pessimism, and downright dismissiveness. Actions speak louder than words, and it might be hard to take at face value Bob Iger’s claim that he’s “very, very bullish” on building new capacity when he’s cutting budgets. That’s fair.
However, it’s quite easy to reconcile. Just look at the timeline for Pandora – World of Avatar, or any of the other aforementioned new lands. Pandora is the most extreme example, being announced years before construction ever began. Other additions have had similarly slow turnaround times. I probably don’t need to belabor this point…you’ve all seen how long it took Disney to build TRON Lightcycle Run. My guess is that the next development cycle will play out in this same fashion. Suffice to say, whatever is announced this year won’t impact CapEx numbers until 2024 or 2025.
As for the timing of announcements, they could occur whenever, but one entry on the calendar stands out to me: Destination D23 will be held September 8–10, 2023 in Contemporary Resort at Walt Disney World. This event celebrates Disney100, and would be the perfect opportunity for big news. And not just because of its location or the fact that it’s the only major event scheduled.
Timing-wise, Destination D23 is near the end of the current fiscal year, and start of the next one–the year by which Disney+ is (supposedly) going to attain profitability. It’s also near the anniversary of Walt Disney World and EPCOT’s opening (October 1), which isn’t particularly meaningful on its own given the lack of milestone, but would be a logical date for the Florida parks to start celebrating 100 Years of Wonder.
Given all of that, my guess is that we get a slow tease of news later this summer about the new nighttime spectacular at EPCOT and that Walt Disney World will celebrate the company’s 100th Anniversary starting this fall. Then, during Destination D23, specifics are shared (drones! decorations! dreamlights! merchandise! more!) about Disney100 at Walt Disney World, which will serve as a bridge to the opening of Tiana’s Bayou Adventure (expect to also see video of that–hopefully of impressive new Audio Animatronics that put some criticism to rest).
Most significantly, I’d expect an official announcement of Animal Kingdom expansion, and possibly another vague tease of something coming Beyond Big Thunder in Magic Kingdom. Disneyland is more of a wildcard, with Fantasyland or Tomorrowland expansion being possibilities (as well as the previously announced Marvel E-Ticket and Avatar “Experience”). Don’t get too excited yet, as the timeline for the first new lands opening is likely 4+ years out, but I firmly believe that they’re coming to both ‘kingdoms’ in Walt Disney World.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
YOUR THOUGHTS
What is your reaction to Bob Iger saying he’s “very, very bullish” about park expansion at Walt Disney World and Disneyland? Think this can be reconciled with the near-term cost-cutting, or would you rather not build anticipation for something several years out, or that may never come to fruition? What potential plans have you most and least excited? Anything you’re hoping does not end up coming to fruition? Do you agree or disagree with our assessments? Any questions we can help you answer? Hearing your feedback–even when you disagree with us–is both interesting to us and helpful to other readers, so please share your thoughts below in the comments!
I just wish they would start doing original park IP again. I hate that all the new rides and lands are things we see in movies and tv shows. I love that Haunted Mansion and Space Mountain are just made for those parks. We need more of that
What an understatement! Especially the newer, lame product that is simply not classic Disney quality. Had enough of the pseudo-live action remakes. Jungle Cruise was original and entertaining, whereas others were not.
Yet more examples of how dumb and shortsighted it was to stop construction during the virus mania and closure. Sure, saving money was a concept but they wasted a massive opportunity to complete long-term deferred maintenance on existing attractions and systems and push new construction to completion without having to worry about guests in the parks, noise, etc. If they’d done the right thing and pushed this, we wouldn’t be having or hearing complaints of the headline attractions being down frequently, and then they could’ve still waited to open say Tron for the anniversary, etc but the WDWRR would’ve been open to soak up guests and help with crowding at MK instead being down for a completely unacceptable time that it was. Yeah it would’ve looked bad to some to keep spending money that was already earmarked for those projects at the time with little revenue coming in because of the closure, but it would’ve been seen as genius now. Very, very poor decision making…
Does anyone know if I join D23 would I have a shot at going to the September event in WDW? I’ll actually be there already that week, and it might be worth adjusting slightly but how would I know if I can actually get a ticket?? Does it sell out super fast?
Thanks!
I agree that the Florida parks need physical space expansion or an additional park.
I don’t necessarily think the only way to physically expand is expensive attractions. Why not expand the park to create enjoyable, memorable spaces with nice restaurants, comfortable seating and beautiful green space in themed environments? Adding some authenticity to the footprint could really help guest experience. Examples of this could be an area in a new Arendelle with real ice sculpture gardens. Or a whimsical forest in fairy tale/villain areas. A REAL self-paced walkthrough Castle, villian’s lair or casita. These could also make use of “secret” underground areas accessible to guests for themeing. Exploration is fun for an older audience and also comforting to get away from the crowd for little ones. This is something that Epcot World Showcase offers which tends to be a favorite area of many long-term guests. Thoughts?
They should build a Star Wars/Marvel Park. No more “Lands” with 2 rides that take 5 years to build.
When once taking a WDW tour I learn that Disneys current status in land buidling is the they have 1/3 of the area built, 1/3 in a building holding status, and 1/3 the will never build. The problem with going to the crowded parks is there are TOO MANY resorts housing people along with daily local attendance. I would hope Disney would build another Park and NO MORE resorts.
So, a little off topic here, but does Destination D23 physically bring in large numbers of people? I know it’s not as big as the Anaheim one, but does Destination D23 affect crowds very much on those 3 days? Does anyone have experience with this?
Thank you.
Updating rides & attractions is (mostly/generally) a good thing. The result is increased demand and maybe a bit of capacity building.
Creating (net) new rides, attractions and Lands is a better thing – and will always increase capacity.
But I disagree with the sentiment that adding more capacity to an existing Park is always a good thing.
More people in Magic Kingdom would mean more people on Main Street for fireworks and parades (etc.). Think about major cities around the world – streets & roads were rarely built for current populations. Similarly, the hub system at Magic Kingdom has reached capacity. Said differently – adding attractions beyond Big Thunder risks making the crowd component of the guest experience worse.
The similar hub system at Animal Kingdom limits how much more capacity should be built there. The streets in Hollywood Studio have similar constraints as to how many more people should be in the Park at a given moment in time. EPCOT is our least favorite Park (sorry) and is the one place E-ticket capacity is most needed.
However, a new Park would reduce crowd size within the current Parks. Arguably, a new Park would also increase guest spending because families could stay the additional night for the additional Park (longer stays reduces housekeeping & front desk costs).
Further, it appears nearly universal (pun intended) on Disney blogs that we are excited about Epic. A new ride here or there at Disney is not going to prevent my family from skipping/shortening our future Disney stays. Disney needs a new Park to get us to stay as long as we used to, not a new ride.
I totally agree, a new 5th park would help bring more guests, help with crowd size in remaining parks. Bring a new experience level to Disney world.
New rides are great but a new park to visit would be the best option in my opinion.
Wild idea – transform one of the water parks into Moana. I feel like the water parks have been a bit neglected in terms of changes and developments, so I’m hoping for more growth there too. I love Blizzard Beach and Typhoon Lagoon, but I wouldn’t mind a bit of theming or new developments!
Brilliant idea !
That is a great idea! The water parks haven’t seen any significant updates in years, and re-theming one of them to Moana makes a lot of sense (to me, at least, which doesn’t mean anything to Disney).
Very happy to see the comment about not packing the parks more or just increasing prices forever. These kinds of things gain short-term profits but hurt in the long-term. Adding capacity makes a lot of sense, whether it actually happens or not.
expansions and new experiences for visitors is an appealing idea. Build back the brand first, please.
I dont mean to be rude, but isn’t that what this effort is trying to accomplish?
No point in rehashing what I wanted to do streaming-wise, but I hope capex wasn’t cut in order to fund streaming back when streaming was tech. If Chapek announced back then he was taking on more debt, he would have been seen as a tech guru super genius by Wall Street. (Since I don’t know who to blame for the recent lack “big park expansions,” the only things I know like about Chapek were his ability to respond correctly when Wall Street thought streaming was tech, and the big boat deal.)
I will say that a 10% cut in 2023 capex spending probably could be achieved simply by stretching schedules and moving 4th quarter 2023 activities to 1st quarter 2024, but if the rest of Disney is managed like WDW, a lot of completion dates will be moving farther into the future.
Is Chapek in black and white because he’s in the past, or the bad guy?
“Is Chapek in black and white because he’s in the past, or the bad guy?”
Dramatic effect.
When it comes to this topic, I actually think Chapek “got done dirty” by Wall Street. The debt was already there from Fox and COVID. They wanted subscriber growth at all costs, so he announced a ton of content at the 2020 Investor Day. That accelerated the growth of Disney+ and, I think, will be vindicated as the correct strategy in the long-term. Then, they turned on him for D+ losing too much money…which is precisely what they wanted.
I hate how Chapek handled the parks (my primary area of interest with Disney), but I think he was largely correct in spending more to grow streaming. Paramount+ and Peacock don’t stand a chance, and Disney+ is already in a dominant position. It was not a foregone conclusion that the streaming war would play out this way.
I love how much thought Tom puts into Umbrella Chapek. He knew we knew he just wouldn’t randomly post a black and white Umbrella Chapek without any thought behind it. It would be great if Disney opened a villains land and Umbrella Chapek was one of the villains. He could have his own ride and it would be terrible and it could be a $50 ILL. Everyone would want to ride it. I would ride it. I bet that is the expansion Iger is thinking about.
The Chapek ride. You climb to the top then it’s all downhill.
The only ride where Disney pays YOU to get off.
So we all agree that some version of Zootopia is coming to Animal Kingdom, right? It’s already been teased, if they are cloning attractions from China then a lot of the R&D is already done and paid for, AND the company just announced that a (presumably theatrical) sequel is in the works. Also its tough to imagine a better thematic fit for an Animal Kingdom expansion. I fully expect it to be officially announced by the end of 2023 and would love for them to actually get it open by late 2025/2026 (that may be wishful thinking but I can dream!)
Given all the skepticism in response to the D23 panel, we definitely do not “all agree” on that. I do, though. 🙂
Iger’s return does complicate things a bit. In early November, I would’ve put the percentage chance of Moana slightly higher. Now, I’m tempted to put them about even.
Wasn’t there also talk of a potential Moana attraction in the Magic Kingdom plans? I feel like that’s where she shows up. I actually *like* Moana better as a film, but Zootopia seems like a better candidate to sustain a unified land (and is still a very good film).
Two items:
1) Zootopia is probably more doable from a theme park immersive land concept, but I think people WAY overestimate the popularity of that franchise.. at least in the States audience. Moana could be done right with a Frontierland type footprint (high capacity water ride, small roller coaster / dark ride based on the crab scene, kiddie ride sucker upper with some sort of Maui theme). But this leads me to my second point which is…
2) The big expansion for Magic Kingdom is a combined “Latin America kingdom” based on Encanto, Coco, and other properties focused on a Latino/a audience, still the fastest growing demographic in the US. There’s a high profile Zorro reboot scheduled for Disney+, there’s a wealth of historical Disney nostalgia with Saludos Amigos/Walt in South America that could be mined, maybe even Emperor’s New Groove needs a refresh- all these things would bring a fresh area to Magic Kingdom with new IP, be stylistically consistent, and maybe even tamp down the constant “When is Brazil/Columbia/Argentina coming to Epcot?” discussion.
People WAY, WAY overestimate the popularity of Princess and the Frog too, but… Hell, a re-theming of Splash to Moana would’ve made a lot more sense than how they are ruining it now. At least there are mountains on the islands…
Who is he going to get to work there? The soon to be laid off park workers???
The average salary of those being laid off is ~$107,000. Between that and Josh D’Amaro saying the layoffs won’t impact frontline Cast Members at Walt Disney World, it’s pretty safe to say those layoffs are disproportionately white collar office workers.
Exactly. People forget about all the white collar workers. Random House has recently taken over distribution from Disney Publishing. My guess is the publishing sector will be hit further.
Interesting. I do think the savvy move business-wise is *not* to expand for a while. Rationale goes:
– Regular (annual+) visitors do not need additional motivation or new stuff to visit the parks, their custom is assured
– A friend of mine who closely follows Disney developments (but is… um… Normal) hasn’t visited since 2014. This group has a ton of stuff encouraging their next visit and a further new thing doesn’t remove the needle.
So I would expect long term development cycles of major new additions every 3/4 years (and minor stuff annually to throw bones to losers like the people who read this blog 😉 ). That is in line with what otherwise well-maintained resorts like TDL receive. I think the recent glut of additions was more corrective than precedent, and bullish could absolutely form a 3/4 year interval.
I don’t necessarily disagree with some of your sentiment, but here are a couple of counterpoints: 1) Magic Kingdom needs more capacity to satisfy organic demand while preserving the guest experience; 2) Animal Kingdom adding lands increases attendance without cannibalizing the other parks.
I think this is essentially what Iger is getting at, and is the business case for further expansions at these two parks. Similar arguments can be made at DLR, too.
I love the idea of expansions rather than “retheming” or “reimagining” currently existing lands and attractions. I realize that this is easier at WDW which has a ton of space, but I think DL has been creative in their use of space to add new areas without taking anything away, such as Runaway Railway and Galaxy’s Edge. At WDW, I really appreciated how the expansion of the France pavilion at Epcot was handled. The beloved front of the pavilion was unaffected, and it was just expanded backwards. To me this is the way to bring in new lands and attractions.
And this is also the way to increase revenue, NOT jamming the parks full of people and nickel and dining guests as much as you can!
One question. I’m an AP holder and I don’t quite understand why otherAP holders dislike the res system. if you’re staying on the grounds and change your mind that morning the CM’s can usually change the Park for you. I understand that often during major holidays a Park might fill up but shouldn’t you know where you want to be on July 4th or Christmas week or New Years Eve? My biggest problem, since corrected thank you, was that crazy you MUST go to your 1st Park to enter another Park edict.
The only way to increase profits is with more things to do because capacity has reached its limit. Guesrs may be willing to wait 2 hours but nobody is happy doing that. WDW has the room and a 5th and 6th gate would bring in more folks while hopefully keeping wait times acceptable with the added bonus that. vacationers spend the whole week at Disney with no time left for anyplace else. This is great news if they follow through and remain focused on those goals. Unfortunately there are some strong ill winds coming Disney+ way and they could be huge distractions.
Here’s where I “get” to be the pessimist: there’s almost no chance that Iger being “very, very bullish” on theme parks will translate to a 5th gate at Walt Disney World. We have analysis from last summer that’s virtually unchanged: https://www.disneytouristblog.com/no-fifth-park-disney-world/
Expanding the existing parks is the best of both worlds approach. Optimistic as I might be about major expansion in the medium term, I don’t expect to see another park at Walt Disney World in my lifetime.
Yes I remember reading that blog and I can’t disagree but I can dream. Plus I don’t think I’m wrong about how wonderful more gates would be BUT obviously its easier to build more at the 4 gates. My concern is would they really want to lower wait times to the point that Genie + and pay per ride is unnecessary? That’s mana from Heaven
#teamdrew. I have to agree and be a Debbie Downer. Show me the money. I’m expecting to be wowed and excited for Epic Universe and mildly depressed and disappointed with WDW — and we’re DVC and APs!
I hope you’re right and I am wrong, but until then . . . . meh. Show me, Bob.
I’m not an optimist by nature, and you know this stuff way better than I do, but I have a hard time buying into the bullishness of the park expansion. My skepticism stems from what has happened when projects seems to take for-ev-er (e.g. EPCOT overhaul). The world changes dramatically and quickly these days. Even if Disney greenlights some large projects, will they stay fully committed after Iger leaves, if there is a downturn in the economy, if the cost of financing continues to rise, if they see a dip in profitability after Epic Universe opens, they do a post mortem on Galactic Starcruiser and/or Harmonius and see all that red ink, or whatever other seismic event happens that we can’t predict? I’d love to be wrong, but the recent history seems to suggest there are going to be curveballs, and whatever ends up happening will be scaled back and/or not happen at all.
Can’t fault you for the pessimism–the last few years don’t instill much confidence.
However, I think the years before those do, and the upcoming cycle should look similar to that. If the timeline is 2024 and beyond, I don’t think we’re looking at a rising rates/cost environment, but rather, the opposite. I think the biggest ‘danger’ of Epic Universe is that it pulls away from Disney’s hotel business, which is bad for the bottom line but should have little bearing on in-park CapEx. Not only that, but they have demographics on their side and Orlando continues to cement itself as an international tourist destination.
With EU opening in a few years WDW is going to lose out on a lot of what would be repeat visits as many families who visit (and even enjoy!) WDW will come to see it as a little kids’ park and will opt for Universal when they take another look at a Central FL vacation 3-4 years later. The capex and IP tie-ins are absolutely necessary to staunch this.