Disney World Taking Up to $300 Million Loss on Star Wars Galactic Starcruiser
Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser will permanently close in Fall 2023, and with that, they will write off up to $300 million. This covers a new interview with Josh D’Amaro about the tax implications, plus more commentary about the decision, the timing of the closure, and more.
In case you missed it, the final voyage for Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser will take place September 28-30, 2023. This makes it one of the first cuts to be made and revealed before Disney’s new fiscal year starts on October 1, 2023. (Usually, these cost-cuts are announced a few weeks before the new fiscal year starts, but with the nature of Starcruiser, more advance notice was necessary.)
Walt Disney World has also eliminated discounts for the final few months of Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser, removing the 30% off deals that were available for APs and Disney Visa Cardholders. This makes sense, as the final voyage sold out over the weekend, and it undoubtedly isn’t the only date that will book up as fans scramble to experience Starcruiser for the first time or say their fond farewells to the starship Halcyon.
The latest update comes from the 2023 JPMorgan Global Technology, Media & Communications Conference. During this event, Disney Parks Chairman Josh D’Amaro was interviewed by JPMorgan analyst Phil Cusick. During that wide-ranging session, D’Amaro said a lot, most of which was not noteworthy. He spoke again about expansion plans and about “aggressive” investments in the international parks, among other things.
One of his more interesting comments was a claim that the standoff with Governor DeSantis has not impacted Disney’s business results. This isn’t really a surprise to us. We’ve said repeatedly that average Americans are not heavily invested in culture wars; that’s more the domain of the chronically connected.
With that said, it’s also fair to point out that Walt Disney World has seen booming business due to pent-up demand, which has helped mask the negative consequences from all decisions they’ve made in the last few years. (We’ve also repeatedly pointed out that guest satisfaction took a big hit starting in Fall 2021.) But I digress.
Cusick also asked D’Amaro about Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser, and how investors should think about the impact of that decision.
D’Amaro started his response by lavishing praise upon Starcruiser, calling it “stunning” and saying how Cast Members did an “exceptional job” in bringing it to life. He added that “Imagineers did an incredible job pulling it together and guests give it very high ratings.”
Despite that, D’Amaro conceded that Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser “did not perform exactly how we wanted it to perform, so we decided that we’re going to sunset this in September.” D’Amaro added that it was “a never-before-seen type of experience, and I think it’s raised the bar from a creativity perspective on where we can go next.”
D’Amaro then turned to the financial impact of the Starcruiser’s closure and said, “I don’t think we’ve talked about this before, but in both Q3 and Q4 as we accelerate depreciation on that Starcruiser, we should expect about $100-150 million acceleration in depreciation.”
Cusick clarified that D’Amaro meant depreciation of $100 to $150 million in each of the quarters, rather than total. D’Amaro indicated that was “correct.” This signals that Walt Disney World expects to take a loss of between $200 million and $300 million on Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser between now and the end of this fiscal year.
Turning to commentary, I’ll admit that I find the Starcruiser saga endlessly fascinating. Perhaps you disagree, viewing its closure as an inevitability that is altogether unsurprising. Honestly, same…but that is precisely why I find this so interesting!
From literally the day that this concept was announced, the Star Wars “hotel” was met a ton of fan skepticism. It’s not an exaggeration to say that each new detail released pre-opening reduced interest rather than expanded the interested audience. Everyone knew it was going to be astronomically expensive from the outset, but the clearer it became that this wasn’t a hotel, the more it lost fans of both Walt Disney World and Star Wars.
Documentaries will someday be made and books will be written about “what went wrong” with Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. At least from a business perspective, the short answer is everything.
You might see this as vindication or an obvious outcome and not be as interested in the saga, but that’s precisely the point and why this subject is so fascinating. If you look back through our old posts about Starcruiser, they almost read as prescient now. This is not to pat ourselves on the back–we were far from the only ones sharing such sentiment. Many, many commentators saw this coming a parsec away.
This is something we touched upon over the weekend in Cleaning Up Chapek’s Costly Catastrophes, but how did so many people on the outside see this coming, but not the company itself? There is no DTB market research division (yet!) and the long-term viability of this Starcruiser is something we’ve questioned since before it even opened.
(As we’ve said for years, fans overestimate the degree to which Walt Disney World leverages data and analytics. On top of that, much of their market research exists to confirm decisions they’ve already made. Starcruiser will be used as Exhibit A in support of that going forward.)
The saga of Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser is like a slow-motion trainwreck. Worse, actually. The more apt analogy would be the starting out on an unfinished railroad, everyone knowing that the track is incomplete, and the train chugging along anyway until going over a cliff. The risks here were knowable and known from day one, and not having a backup plan is just…incredible.
This actually reminds me a lot of Lightyear. Once the hype of the initial announcement wore off, each new detail raised more questions than it answered. That movie made the ‘bold’ decision to use a different performer and animation style, while abandoning the rest of the characters, adding a narrative conceit that made no sense and wasn’t explained by marketing, etc. It was a story that literally no one asked for, and the whole thing had big “bootleg Buzz” vibes. It was like they didn’t understand what made the original Toy Story franchise a success.
In both cases, there was an excessive amount of hubris on display by Disney. I guess that’s what happens when your phoned-in live action remakes generate billions at the box office despite being awful, and when seemingly every theme park decision–including price increases–only drives demand higher.
Over the last couple of years, I’ve heard some wild numbers thrown around about the “true cost” of Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. I always assumed there was hyperbole at play, as some of those numbers would have meant that the breakeven point on the 100-room experience would be decades into the future.
Well, $300 million is one such number. That amounts to at least $3 million per room in profit. Do you know how many thousands of voyages would’ve been necessary for Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser to not lose money?
Keep in mind that this is profit, not revenue–so you cannot simply point to the high voyage rates for Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. As we’ve shared repeatedly, the operating expenses for Starcruiser were also astronomical due to its equity entertainment and cast-to-guest ratio. Staffing alone was a huge cost, but that’s not it. Starcruiser had far more ‘moving parts’ than a standard hotel, so maintenance and upkeep also would’ve been significant costs.
It’s also probable that $300 million does not represent the entire cost of Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. I want to preface the following by saying that I’m about the furthest thing possible from an accountant, so my knowledge of depreciation and amortization rules is remedial–to put it very charitably. (In other words, what follows could be mildly inaccurate or worse–I welcome actual CPAs to correct any or all of it.)
For one thing, this is not the first year that Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser has been operational. Presumably, Walt Disney World would’ve depreciated a portion of the asset in the last fiscal year, since the ‘resort’ opened in March 2022. My assumption is that they would’ve depreciated Starcruiser consistent with other fixed assets on a straight line basis across a decade or 20 year useful life. That means ~$15 to $30 million has already been depreciated.
With Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser, there are a couple different types of assets. One is the physical infrastructure–basically the building–that will be abandoned. In addition to that, there’s the tangible technology that was produced via Imagineering R&D. Things like that fancy new lightsaber, the Yoda effect (trying not to spoil it), and other showpieces.
To the extent possible, I would hazard a guess that the second bucket of costs will be rolled into the first for the sake of accelerating deprecation. For example, everything affixed to the atrium of the Halcyon that won’t be repurposed elsewhere is going to be depreciated this fiscal year.
I’ve heard anecdotes about some of these assets being particularly problematic, going way over budget, and Imagineering wanting nothing to do with them in the future as a result. If there’s no intention to reuse certain set pieces and props, it’s probably pretty easy to bundle that into the building and depreciate it all at once.
But what about the lightsaber and other more ‘portable’ effects that could find a home in Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge or a future dinner show? It may not be possible or make sense to accelerate depreciation on all of that this fiscal year if there’s an intention to repurpose it.
Regardless of the exact numbers, it stands to reason that the actual price tag for Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser was well above $300 million–probably in the neighborhood of $400 to $500 million. Not all of that is strictly “wasted” money, as the underlying technology, props, and pieces will find homes elsewhere in Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge or beyond. (There’s an old adage that no good idea dies in Imagineering–and it’s true!)
As a slight aside, fully accelerating the depreciation also reinforces the notion that Walt Disney World does not have any current plans to repurpose the building itself. Although accelerating the asset’s depreciation doesn’t necessarily preclude that in the longer run, it also doesn’t comport with conventional accounting practices to do so now with a plan in mind for its future.
It’s unlikely that Disney will throw good money after bad with further investments in the Halcyon building, meaning that it probably will not be repurposed any time soon. As we’ve said before, the most likely scenario is pulling a page from the Pop Century Legendary Years playbook–letting it sit there for a decade and possibly revisiting it down the road. Even that seems improbable given its unique style. It was custom-built for this and only this.
The timing is also really fascinating here. Walt Disney World had dipped its toes into the water of discounting Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. Walt Disney World had offered 50% off discounts for Cast Members, as well as 30% off discounts for Annual Passholders and Disney Visa Cardholders. There was also a special offer for $700 off Deluxe Resort stays booked as part of a Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser vacation package.
These discounts were available for almost all voyages between now and mid-September 2023. Even after releasing those deals, Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser had not been filling up all voyages–and had cut some as a result. Despite this, no discounts had been released to the general public (yet).
Less than one month ago at Star Wars Celebration, Imagineers Scott Trowbridge and Ann Morrow teased updates coming to Starcruiser. They spoke of bringing new stories to life, evolving the experience, and more. Some of this sounded like fluff or perhaps wishful thinking on their part, but those were definitely not the words and tone of people who thought Starcruiser’s future was in jeopardy.
Even during the most recent earnings call a couple weeks ago, CEO Bob Iger and CFO Christine McCarthy did not indicate or imply that Walt Disney World would see accelerated amortization this fiscal year. While such a disclosure would not have been required, it would’ve been the “perfect” thing to tease–at least, from an investor perspective–as an offset to the slower forward bookings McCarthy mentioned.
From the outside looking in (and with incomplete info), this suggests to me that the decision to close Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser was an abrupt one. My guess would be that the team in Burbank looked at Starcruiser’s performance even after offering discounts, and concluded that it was beyond the point of no return. That it would’ve operated at a loss with general public discounts, and there was no easy pivot that would’ve made it economically viable. Better to cut losses than throw more money into a doomed concept.
In all likelihood, the decision was made quickly and decisively by Burbank, without much warning to Walt Disney World. Some of this is supported by details that have trickled out in the days since the news broke. It’s also generally supported by the circumstances and what Walt Disney World tried to steady the ship–and what they didn’t.
If the goal were to maximize revenue and profits on Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser in the near-term, it seems likely that the announcement would’ve been made more methodically, with a greater amount of lead-time. For one thing, they had only opened voyages through the end of this calendar year. They could’ve kept those on the books and announced that Starcruiser was closing at the end of the calendar year.
That alone would’ve prevented Walt Disney World from having to offer 50% off discounts for displaced guests who booked between October and December, and had to be rebooked. For another thing, it would’ve created a sense of urgency for everyone else. With an end date established, Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser will most likely sell out its remaining voyages between now and September. The same would’ve probably been true if that end date were December 31, 2023. Heck, a farewell season with a telegraphed end date would’ve probably made Starcruiser viable through mid-2024. And that’s without discounts.
It would thus seem like Disney just wanted to wash their hands of Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser, take the write-offs this fiscal year, and move on. For whatever reason, those were more advantageous than letting it have a proper “farewell” season and trying to capture as much revenue that way. (Stated differently, taking a $300 million loss was deemed better than continuing to operate Starcruiser into the next fiscal year.)
At least, that’s my gut reaction based on the totality of the news and rumors about Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser. I’m anxiously awaiting future developments in this saga–and will share them here so long as there’s reader interest. I’m truly curious about how things went off the rails so quickly and irreparably.
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
Thoughts on Walt Disney World permanently closing Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser and taking a $300 million write off? What would you have preferred the company invest $300 to $500 million (assuming additional R&D costs not in the depreciation) on at Walt Disney World? (Just think, we could’ve had a new envelope-pushing Journey into Imagination at EPCOT or Cars Land at DHS!) Think the company will convert it to a regular resort, reopen it as something else, or abandon the building forever? Expect some of the tech to move over to Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge? 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!
Does Disney have to keep only experiences that make money? Aren’t game changing experiences sometimes worth the loss?
Costco loses $40million a year on Rotisserie Chicken. And millions more on $1.50 hotdogs. And they have no plans to change this Member appreciated tradition.
Disney could have viewed the Starcruiser in same light. A game changing highly rated experience that sets them apart. Even if they lose $$ on it.
Yes, although Costco does that as a choice to keep members happy and foot traffic high. I think the term you’re looking for is “loss leader.”
The question is what value would Disney gain by keeping an experience that apparently was not exactly bringing in foot traffic or creating goodwill with the base?
New monorails, updated Spaceship Earth, a new imagination ride, a few “Old Technology” dark rides in Galaxy’s Edge, Animal Kingdom, and Epcot, expand the Skyliner, a new night time parade in the MK, update the Contemporary. These are just a few things that a group of AP holders or DVC owners would come up with in an hour long brainstorming session and they would seem like no brainers. I’ve been very perplexed on how this current team of executives spend hundreds of millions on one attraction or build a new land with only 2 rides, some which a paying park guest could not even ride without winning a virtual queue lottery.. How could they make the light Sabre building, Ogas and the light Sabre store so small? And now they’re probably spending a hundred million or more retheming Splash Mountain when it just needed to be refurbished. ok. Done.
You actually expected operational logic from people who don’t experience the parks the way we mortals do?
I’m endlessly fascinated by this take that the Starcruiser was doomed from the start and everyone knew it.
Here’s the thing: I work in an industry where I provide transformative solutions. And one of the things about transformative solutions is that a lot of people just really lack the ability to imagine the utility or impact of things that are sufficiently far beyond the boundaries of the “known”. For instance, I’m old enough to remember when lots of people thought the iPhone was going to be a dud. They just couldn’t understand why they would want it, until they saw it. This kind of transformative stuff is the whole basis of Blue Ocean strategy.
Now, all that said, you do have to get it right, and to deliver a transformative project you need not only the vision of how to make it but also how to market it, etc., etc. But the fact is that Starcruiser was a transformative offering. Yes, it failed. But I’m not as convinced as everyone else seems to be that its failure was a foregone conclusion. Even after the fact, I’m not 100% sure that it couldn’t have succeeded.
To clarify, I don’t think it was doomed from day one and everyone knew it.
Rather, it was met with skepticism from day one, and that only worsened with each subsequent ‘reveal’ about Starcruiser.
I love that Disney bet big on Starcruiser, giving Imagineers the creative latitude to produce an envelope-pushing or transformative project. (Although I would’ve gladly sacrificed a bit of that if it meant a concept with more mainstream appeal.) But I also think that by the time opening day rolled around, Starcruiser was enough of a known quantity that there were already credible/educated predictions about its viability. How quickly it flamed out and how little Disney did to course correct suggests, to me at least, that it couldn’t have succeeded. At least, not without material changes.
In your initial review of Starcruiser you left out anything that would spoil the experience for those who planned to go – once it closes would be great if you could write a full review so us folks who didn’t go could get the full details!
I’ll consider it–probably in the form of a ‘Things from Starcruiser that Could be Reimagined for Galaxy’s Edge’ post rather than a full review or trip report. We put a ton of work into past posts about our experiences aboard Starcruiser, and there was very little reader interest in those. And that was while it was still open!
I was thinking the same thing! I was never going to be a passenger, but once it is closed, I would love to hear more about the experience and story on board the Halycron!
First, let me say I’m not a Star Wars fan, I’m definitely more of the Star Trek fandom group. But with that said, I think that they could use that area for themed dinners, and maybe lower the cost of the rooms? I think that there is an audience for that if the price point were lower and I don’t see why they can’t make it a special dining area?
I often wonder too, about the Harmonious barges that they removed from Epcot recently. How much did all that cost? It seems like they spend a lot of money on things and then pull the plug? Don’t they do it any surveys?
I will never understand why the Harmonious barges weren’t mobile! I know the show wasn’t a home run, but a *lot* of the hate seemed to be about how ugly the barges were during the day. If they were something that were brought out 30 minutes before showtime and put away at the end of the night, I honestly think Harmonious would have been better received and run long enough for Disney to actually see a return on investment.
What they should have done is read the fantasy fiction books, “Julu” and “Jirvania” by Jan Anderegg and after falling in love with those stories which have wonderful reviews, they could have created a new world at Animal Kingdom encompassing the magical land of Jirvania where all imagination is born! It’s not too late!
In all seriousness though, I am a huge Star Wars fan, but the idea of the Star Cruiser hotel/voyage never appealed to me at all. I’m glad they are cutting their losses and turning their focus back on more important things, like finding out more about the opal dragon Julu, and how she helps young Jack Lemoine save imagination from certain destruction!
My wife and I absolutely loved our stay on the Starcruiser! Despite the high price tag, it was obvious when you experienced the Halcyon that there was A LOT of costs in running the 3 day adventure from the staff to the exclusive “all you can eat” cruise ship style food, to the maintenance and operational budget. The problem is that the story doesn’t change, so if you are able to afford it, there’s very little incentive to return. If they had an annual story or adventure change, they may have attracted more customers, but not enough to be in the black finacially any time soon. Such a shame that few others will get the experience. Wish I could get some of the props!
Seems like a lot of these recent moves have been about writing off as much as they can in FY 2023, so they can talk about saving billions in the next earnings calls. In the case of the Starcruiser, it sounds like the $300 million “loss” is what the Starcruiser would have (theoretically) been worth if it had remained open through 2024. So…somebody did the math and worked out that a tax break from a $300 million write-off would look better to the shareholders than whatever profits the Starcruiser makes. Even when Disney “fails,” they come out ahead…
Why can’t they adjust and make this a well themed deluxe resort and drop all the “sailings” and include an exclusive entry into HS. We don’t need all the entertainment maybe just a bit here and there and the awesome resort itself. They’ve already got it built, something should happen here.
When will the layoffs end its so sad to watch Disney suffer from bad self inflicted choices
Well this confirms what you (and I) have been saying about there actually being very little profit per room. I just didn’t realize quite the staggering degree to which we were right. I did have to do a quick check on what ‘accelerated depreciation’ was, and after reading that it seems like they just want this gone and don’t think they could have made enough offset even at full price between now and March 2024 (when they SHOULD have closed it to get the full two years out.) Although it was more than a half-year ago now, I can also confirm that there were two major technological effects (the force pull and the Yoda) which were not functioning in September, which indicates to me that maintenance on this must have been extremely expensive. The cast turnover is also high due to the intensity of the scheduling and performances, and from what I’ve seen there aren’t many opening day ‘A-list’ actors still involved. It’s just a lot of mess, and yet…somehow from that mess there was still a stellar (if unmaintainable) product. I think the fact that so many people want parts of this to remain or be resurrected speaks to the fact that there is interest, so long as it’s affordable…and that’s also what makes it so boggling that it’s being bulldozed. Boy do I hope some of those non-attached assets become available on the market somewhere, so I can own a piece of this history…
I also want to state that THERE IS DEFINITE interest from me regarding more information on this saga as it becomes available, and I’d love to read a spoiler-filled article like many previous commenters requested. I’ve done a few of the plots now, but I’m always amazed how much more I learn each time I read someone else’s experience.
300M? There goes the price of Turkey Legs – again!
All you can do is shake your head at the awe inspiring stupidity.
I look at your beautiful photo of the white seating area with the bridge and think people will pay just to walk through this thing.
Hey Disney, you own the building and the land it sits on.
I’ve been in crummy bars with terrible bands that were packed and made tons of money.
Re-purpose this thing with lower aspirations and expectations and make some money.
Last time I looked Space 220 was still a hard ADR to snag and Oga’s Cantina was doing well with a robot dj.
Make it part of a tour and the lunch stop.
I don’t make a dime spending time on this so I’m not wasting another minute giving serious thought to solutions but I will say that there is more wasted space in the upper levels of Disney management than there is in this Star Wars building.
I’d pay to go there. I’m just not going to be there for two days. If they made it more like the Star Trek Experience in Las Vegas (RIP) then I’d have paid decent money for a few hours. But I can’t get into cosplay much less for two days in quarters that remind me of a submarine.
Star cruiser was one thing that we wanted to do BUT CIULD NOT AFFORD!
We’re Disney stock holders which have tanked, DVC members, Annual pass holders so after all of that COST, we still did not have enough points for the “short” voyage nor could we afford the out of pocket to the tune of maybe 5g for us.
This is a shame .
Disney had better get outta the woke biz and back to family to make it work.
I’m sorry but now on earth is anything being discussed here “woke”? This had plenty of mistakes but that word is being thrown around but I don’t understand what about Starcruiser was “woke.”
The last question of “how would you rather have invested $300-500 million” hurts a bit. Just to stay with Star Wars, I’d like a 3rd ride in Galaxy’s Edge, a TS restaurant, and some more free-roaming characters (or even a stunt show ala Marvel Campus). I think the Starcruiser budget should cover that. I do like seeing your pictures of the Starcruiser. Some day, I’ll probably watch/read the story.
I think the logic here has to be about cutting expenses as quickly as is feasible (and definitely not having the roll over into the next fiscal year). They probably want the tax write off now to balance their end of fiscal year books as much as possible rather than waiting until next year to claim any depreciation. That would also imply that the books don’t look great for this year.
It strikes me as similar to how multiple streamers, including Disney+, are pulling self produced content from their services to take tax write-offs. I don’t pretend to understand why that works, but if multiple companies are doing it then there must be something to it.
“That would also imply that the books don’t look great for this year.”
Bingo.
McCarthy pretty much prepped investors for that during the last earnings call.
I agree specifically that Disney is taking the loss this year rather than over the next several years (I think five?) because they’re assuming that a significant percentage of their profits for the next five years (or so!) will be gained this year. Since businesses pay income taxes on profits rather than revenues, it’s a tax move to claim the losses before October 1.
This just goes to show what horrible business people they are. Instead of just shutting everything down and taking such a huge loss why didn’t they just keep it open ,reduce prices and then try to make up some of the loss by filling the cabins more often? I don’t understand what is going on at Disney. Are these the same people that hot plus was a good idea and park reservations?
“…reduce prices…”
The issue there is that there’s only so far prices can be reduced while still covering operating expenses. My guess is that they’ve been operating Starcruiser at a loss this year even without taking the colossal capital expenditures into account. I know that seems unbelievable given the high prices of Starcruiser, but this is incredibly expensive to operate. That’s a big part of the problem. (I wouldn’t be surprised if full occupancy at 30% off means operating at a loss.)
My point in the post was that they could’ve done the ‘long farewell’ to fill rooms without resorting to discounting. The sense of urgency and end date would’ve prompted more bookings–it would’ve been viable for a few more months. That Disney didn’t want to even do that suggests the write-off this fiscal year was more valuable to the company than a few more months of operating revenue.
I wish the company would pull the plug on the half-baked remakes as quickly as they did with this. They’re in a bubble where they have no clue how the public feels. Walt Disney had the uncanny ability to know exactly how the general public felt and he reached for it. The company just doesn’t get it right now. Between reading the Chapek article and now this, I have the feeling they’re floundering and once revenge travel finally subsides, they’re going to have to deal with so much more than just closing this property. As an accountant, it drives me nuts thinking that this costly building is not going to be used. There has to be something it can be used for.
I wish the same, but I have to admit that the remakes are paying for themselves. I don’t know anyone who enjoyed the “live action” Lion King, but it made over a billion dollars, way more than it cost to computer render those talking lions. One thing the movies undeniably have going for them is the scale of consumers they can reach, whereas Starcruiser had both a hard limit on how many people fit in at once and a limit on how many people could/would pay the cost of entry.
“I wish the company would pull the plug on the half-baked remakes as quickly as they did with this.”
For the most part, those remakes make a ton of money (regardless of quality) and introduce a new audience to those stories (by new audience, I don’t just mean younger generations–I mean China).
Totally agree on the remakes. They really have to stop churning these out. It’s baffling to me that absolutely everyone seems to dislike them and yet they make so much money!
Unfortunately the global public seems to like the remakes just fine. Personally, I avoid them because they are awful, but they don’t tarnish my feelings about the original movies I still love, and I bet I’m not in the minority on that one. So long as there is a market for these remakes and it’s not driving fans of the originals away, Disney is going to keep churning them out.
“I’ll admit that I find the Starcruiser saga endlessly fascinating”
+1 here. The amount they invested in such a short lived offering is remarkable. When companies we perceive as so on the mark miss so wildly, it is incredibly interesting.
Re: where I would have liked the money spent. My vote for would be another fully fledged land. I’ve read so many of your posts lauding the international parks. It seems like the reason the states don’t get the same treatment is budget. From my outside perspective, the money could be there if they weren’t spending 500ish million dollars on two 18 month offerings (i.e. Harmonious and Starcruiser).
“I’ve read so many of your posts lauding the international parks. It seems like the reason the states don’t get the same treatment is budget.”
It isn’t–that’s the thing!!!
Walt Disney World has seen a tremendous amount of investment since around 2010. The issue isn’t the level of investment, it’s that some of that money has been blown.
I probably been clearer in the Chapek post, but that was sorta the point of that. It’s not just Starcruiser–it’s interactive queues, MagicBands, non-working technology, abandoned plans, and so much more.
OLC has invested far less in Tokyo Disney Resort (even proportionately–smaller resort, fewer parks), it just doesn’t seem like it because they are so methodical about how the money gets spent and they have repeatedly turned down Disney’s pitches for untested/outright bad ideas.
That is the estimated cost of extending the monorail to all parks at Disney. A bunch of idiots running Disney, cough….Iger, McCarthy and the Board. But I’m sure they didn’t miss a beat expensing their trips on Iger’s yacht calling it a “business meeting” and charging it to Disney.
Example of how Disney is like Nike now (Board member) cheapened product, bad business decisions and lavish spending that goes un accounted for.