Epcot Closings!

[DisneyKidds]

As good a short term financial case as might be made for such a change (and the jury is still out on that one), the headlines would read:

WDW Closes Its' Doors.

Anyone going to take the position that that is not going to affect future bookings in any way? Is that a headline Disney can live with? Elimination of EE, E nights, hours - none of these are newsworthy but here on these types of Disney discussion boards. However, closing a park, even if JUST a couple days a week would be larger news. Especially now that people expect things to be more normal the farther we get from 9/11, not that that is what might have precipitated the need for such a change. Furthermore, with investor confidence as shaky as it is now, this type of change would be included in news at the national level as further evidence of a big company everyone knows having financial troubles. Who knows, many might start looking for reasons for such troubles. Did someone cook the books at Disney during their acquisitions like someone did at AOL when they wanted to look strong enough on paper to acquire Time Warner? Perhaps Disney could have slid this change in with minimal media fanfare right after 9/11, touting it as a short term change in response to reduced travel and then not giving the days back. That would have been very opportunistic, but it could have worked. But now, very bad PR that I think would have a negative effect in the long run.

 

[Another Voice]

Some people seem to feel that Disney is run by a vast brain trust that plots and plans each and every maneuver months or years in advance.

Guess what – the company is run just like everyone else. A bunch of people sit and squirm and fret and hesitate and make last minute decisions. People have different opinions, people fight among each other. Sometimes to do what they think is best, sometimes just for corporate politics.

As far as I know, there is no definite decision about park closures. The rumors are not true and the rumors are not false because no one knows at this point. But the issue has been discussed. If it happens, it will happen very quickly – just like the slashing of operating hours, the elimination of Early Entry, closing the Disney Institute and discounts at California Adventure all happened within a very short amount of time. If parks do go to full day closures you’ll hear about at the same time most of Disney does as well.

As for “outlandish rumors” without a “specific source”, no one wants to lose their job just to satisfy the curiosity of some on the Internet. I go to great lengths to keep people out of trouble. Believe what you wish – there were people who claimed that early rumors about Surprise Mornings and 20K were “outlandish” as well. I would also like to ask why should these rumors be labeled “outlandish” or “laughable” – what evidence do you have that Disney wouldn’t do this? And certain decisions can be changed even after they are made (anyone remember the late opening for Adventureland?). Does that make the rumors "outlandish" or just something that didn't happen?

On the money issue: remember that most of the World Showcase restaurants and shops are not owned by Disney (but with some very nasty leases about who sets operating hours). WDW would only be losing a percentage of the revenue lost, an amount that would be more than offset by the cost savings Disney could gain throughout the parts of Epcot that it does own. And as someone mentioned, most guests already have a length of stay or multi-day passport. Disney isn’t going to lose any ticket revenue at all – but it will fill up the other parks with additional wallets. Each park has a certain level of crowds that maximizes profit (guests in park vs. the operational costs). The goal for Disney is to get each park to that level. Having three parks producing the optimal amount of money and a fourth park saving lots of money is a better situation than having four parks producing only marginal returns. And I would not expect that the first park would be Epcot.

So which parks, or any park, go to full-day closures? We'll just have to wait and see. Just don't dismiss it out of hand no matter how badly you don't want to believe.

By the way – anyone else hear the rumor about WDW multi-day passports expiring just like the Disneyland passports do?????

 

[raidermatt]

Two things about AV. First, clearly the information he has is legitimate. We are lucky he passes some of it along to us. Second, as we all know and AV has repeatedly pointed out, rumors are rumors. Nothing more, nothing less. Some are more likely than others, but by definition, no rumor is definite.

Now, on to the topic at hand. We do have a little more than history to go on when it comes to what may happen once the Summer crowds start to dwindle in the next 2-3 weeks.

Check out the hours for September at the Magic Kingdom. 9-6 everyday except Saturdays. I checked laughingplace for last years hours, and it was 9-7 most days, even after 9/11. I've been comparing last year's hours to this year for the past several months. Unfortunately I don't have the exact numbers handy, but the gist is that this year's hours have been shorter than last for every month, HOWEVER, the difference had been shrinking every month through July. In other words, as mgmt had indicated would happen, hours were slowly returning to pre 9/11 levels as attendance also slowly returned.

August, however, showed an increase in the gap between this year and last, and now, September is almost a bare bones schedule. Yes, September is one of the slowest times of the year, but still, this year's schedule is light even by past standards. Remember that 9-6 is considered the bare minimum for MK to be open. (On a side note, the hours are also 9-6 on the first Sat in September, I guess due to a "special event". That leaves only three days during the entire month that the park is open beyond the minimum).

Consider that Epcot's attendance in 2001 dropped at a much faster rate than the other three parks. There's no reason to think that it somehow recovered this year, considering the only "addition" is the re-opening of JIYI. MK is always the big draw, MGM has the Walt exhibit and BAH, and AK got a parade and DR. Say what you will about the quality of the additions, but its very possible that Epcot's attendance will again see the worst percentage change compared to the other three parks.

The comments about ABC's poor ad performance do not appear to be exaggerated. The most positive report I've seen claimed that ABC is maintaining revenue from last year, while all of the other networks were seeing increases. That was several months ago, however, and more recent reports jive with what AV said.

Add it all up, and an Epcot closure one or more days during the week is not all that far-fetched.

With DCA, it would seem to be inevitable.

From my point of view, it would stink, particularly with Epcot. EE is a nibble. Shorter hours are a bite. Complete closures would be mouthful of raggedly torn flesh. At least that's the view of this AP holding, DVC owning, DC card carrying, plush buying, animated feature watching, stockholder.

(sorry if that was a bit graphic. Too much Animal Planet lately I guess... )

 

[stevets]

I understand that ABC is doing lousy, and I get it that California Adventure is losing money. But the more pertinent question remains: is Epcot losing money?


As far as 9-6 MK hours: I've seen them that short during certain times of the year for some time now (Sept. 2001 after labor day (but before 9/11) and Jan. 2002)


The other reason I believe there is no truth to this rumor is that Disney has lots of competition in Orlando, and I thought they wanted to keep people on property? The types of tickets you get at some other Orlando attractions (Universal for instance) might make it worthwhile for a Disney guest to turn one or two days off-site to 3 or 4 days off-site.


Another reason I find this rumor dubious is that Disney recently put a major new attraction in Epcot and is soon to open another.

 

[Galahad]

You'd be hard-pressed to get public numbers on how much each park within WDW is contributing to any profit or loss. My guess, though, would be that Epcot is not the most likely park to be on the losing end.

 

[DG-12]

I never post on this board- and really have nothing top contribute except to say that I would NEVER vacation at WDW with a major park closed for days during my stay!!!!! EVER! We have often gone during the off-season when the MK closed at six- in fact in the years we have gone we have never once gotten to see the MK fireworks b/c it was off-season- I always thought it was worth it b/c the crowds were minimal... BTW, I LOVE DCA- but I can see where they would close that park for a few days a week (too few attractions- making wait times insane but I guess that's another thread). Sorry if I have no useful info to pass on here but I just couldn't resist adding my two cents!
Dana

 

[DisneyKidds]

DG 12 - if you have lurked around here you probably know that we spend a lot of time debating certain things and a thread like this will soon focus on whether making such a move would be a good thing or a bad thing for Disney considering all the factors. As such, your $.02 is very valuable and is very useful info . It goes to show that making such a move would have an adverse effect on WDW visits and will drive people away or to the competition . Thanks for posting and come around more often.

 

[raidermatt]

I understand that ABC is doing lousy, and I get it that California Adventure is losing money. But the more pertinent question remains: is Epcot losing money?

I really have no idea how seriously Disney is considering closing the parks on certain days. However, its important to note that a park does not have to be actually losing money to be closed. Let's say Epcot earned a profit on Tuesday's, but its only $10. (not 10 thousand, just 10). Well, that would be a profit, but it would be horrible for ratios like return on expense.

So in this example, Disney could close Epcot with the hope that enough guests would shoot over to the other three parks (or DD/BW), improving their profitability. The improved profitiability would only have be $10 more than Epcot's fixed costs on a non-operating day for the move to be a break even.

Again, not saying they WILL do this, or that they SHOULD, only that a park doesn't have to be losing money to be a drain.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Ah, the good old loss leader or operation that exists solely to cover sunk costs. Many companies take projects knowing they will do nothing more than cover their overhead and not really generate a profit. Sometimes it makes sense, but too many is a recipe for disaster. Not that that is what Epcot has been reduced to or ever was. How much of the carrying costs of Epcot are a sunk cost and how much of their daily burdened operating cost can they eliminate with a closure. Salaries, yes. However, does Disney generate their own power? How much can they really save there? Water - they have their own water supply so how much there? Capital equipment is paid for. I suppose putting on Illuminations can be expensive materials-wise. What can they realistically save?

 

[d-r]

I think you would see illuminations going to less than every night before you would see epcot completely close for a day.

I honestly don't think this will happen - but then I didn't believe they would close port orleans either, so I'm shakey about making an absolute statement.

 

[Bstanley]

It's curious that the park that is being considered for closing is EPCOT.

With all of the internal debate about Animal Kingdom not being a full-day park and that the people going to AK are 'stolen' from the other parks I find it surprising that AK isn't the park being considered for closing a day or two per week.

You could also spin a much better story about giving the animals a rest, etc...

 

[raidermatt]

I find it surprising that AK isn't the park being considered for closing a day or two per week.

Maybe it is. The original poster heard Epcot, AV thinks otherwise. However, IF one is to be closed, attendance might not be the only factor. Maybe Epcot costs more to operate than AK, or maybe it has lower fixed costs. Just rambling here, but if you close Epcot, 100% of the labor goes away, except for landscaping and some maintenance, which is common to all parks. If you close AK, the animals still need to be fed and cared for, so more of the labor costs move into the fixed category.

Who knows, at this point?

how much of their daily burdened operating cost can they eliminate with a closure.

Quite a bit probably. Labor is probably pretty significant, especially when you factor in ToD and the other live entertainment. Illuminations I'm sure is a decent chunk of change.

If Disney generates its own electricity, there is still a cost to doing that. Also, maybe they can sell it back to the local utility if they have an excess?

We know that the variable operating costs are significant because of the inclination to cut hours and EE. If there weren't significant costs involved, they wouldn't be so quick to cut these.

Of course the difference is on the revenue side, but they maybe banking on that being small, since some single days will go to the other parks, and APs/hoppers have already paid. Short term, revenue wouldn't be hit too hard.

Again, not saying this WILL happen, only that it is conceivable that it could be a money saver, at least in the short term.

 

[Bob O]

I hope this is just a BS rumor that wont come to pass but AV comments make you wonder what the brass is thinking about. And i wonder what the people who usually support disney think about this. Because most of the other cutbacks have been supported by the majority(but not me!!!) but once the cutbacks start you never know when they will stop and what they will lead too.

 

[DC7800]

This idea stinks. Of all the boneheaded, lame-brained, half-baked ideas to emerge from Disney in the past few years, this one tops them all. I completely trust what AV has to say, so this unthinkable idea has at least been considered - and that is scary. The loss of EE, progressively shortened hours, and attraction closures (and reduced hours) are bad enough, but a complete park closure is simply unacceptable. It is my hope that this "plan" is in a similar vein to the Adventureland rumor of some months ago, and that public reaction will sink these plans just as quickly.

the recent closing of Epcot due to an electrical fire was not as large a problem as WDW executives thought it would be. They thought the other parks would be overrun with guests, thus leading to the added hours and shows. It seems they did not take into account the fact that people (traveling seniors) who were going to Epcot would not necessarily opt to visit "family" parks.

It seems the impact on the other 3 was minimal and now something that has been talked about since 9/11 may come to pass. COMPLETELY closing Epcot several days a week. When questioned as to why you would close the park with the second highest attendance in Florida it was stated that MGM is quickly closing in on Epcot's attendance figures and would soon pass it.

Am I missing something here? It sounds like the results from the electrical fire shutdown should make Disney less likely to close one of the parks, especially Epcot. As Raidermatt explained, the idea is that by closing one park those guests will just visit another park that day, improving its margins whilst saving the operating costs of the "closed" park. Just one problem with that - it won't work.

On paper it no doubt sounds like a winning idea to the "sharp pencil guys", but reality is another matter. Based on the above example, a majority of persons didn't shift their visit to another park that day ("impact on the other 3 was minimal"). Maybe they stayed at the resort or spent money at Downtown Disney, but what about all those people who left the property? Were Epcot to close even one day a week, people will find something else to do on vacation, and they may or may not get back around to Epcot another day. Worse still, off-site guests can just as easily switch to IOA as they can to AK. All this means lost revenue to Disney and an extreme drop in Epcot attendance.

Most of our vacations are short enough already. Let's say we get a week in WDW, allowing for 5-6 theme park days. But with even one park closed just a single day per week, maybe we don't need Unlimited passes anymore - a five day hopper will do. With one day less spent in the WDW theme parks, we now have time (and money to spend) for Universal or Sea World. That also means less meals eaten in (expensive) World Showcase restaurants, and fewer souvenirs from Disney shops. If the vast majority of guests (say, 90% or more?) would indeed reschedule to a open park this plan could work, but if they don't, Epcot's financial numbers will resemble the Tower of Terror. My prediction, should the unthinkable ever come to pass, is that people will spend less time in the Disney parks, not just reallocate their days to accomodate WDW's schedule.

Originally posted by Bstanley
It's curious that the park that is being considered for closing is EPCOT. With all of the internal debate about Animal Kingdom not being a full-day park and that the people going to AK are 'stolen' from the other parks I find it surprising that AK isn't the park being considered for closing a day or two per week.

That's a very good point. Maybe I'm reading this all wrong, but there was this comment from AV:

Having three parks producing the optimal amount of money and a fourth park saving lots of money is a better situation than having four parks producing only marginal returns. And I would not expect that the first park would be Epcot.

Epcot is the third most attended park in the nation, so it is hard to see how a complete shutdown would help Disney's finances. However, Animal Kingdom does not have those World Showcase restaurants and shops, and attendance there is already suffering... (just thinking out loud, of course).

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

As manning said in my thread:

"If we ever lose our audience, it will cost us 10 times as much to get them back."


Walt Disney

 

[Testtrack321]

A good lesson Disney is learning now, right DVC?

The big question, is how accurate is the orgional post. Was anyone there (Steve, OWTS?) can tell how bad the crowds were?

Also, when Epcot closes, it does something incredibly stupid, and nieve and Disney has yet to realize. There would be no reason to stay at the Boardwalk, BC, YC, or Swan or Dolphin if Epcot is closed. Their one BIG vangate point that Disney keeps relying on in promotion is that they in walking distance of Epcot. We tried to get to MGM from BC, but it was a good 45 mins.

Then we got the corportations. Kodak (sp?) and a few others still sponsor other shows and rides in other parks. How would it be to them and the others to find out their $50 million down payments were closed half the time? I ganantee you that the whole WoL ordeal will look like a sprain ankel compared to the huge, armogedon like, consequences Disney will have with GM, Compac, Exxon-Moble, Segway LLC, AT&T, Kraft, and Kodak, plus manny more.

If a park would close, it would be a small park that one could tour in less than a day. AK is a perfect fit.

Plus, why don't they closed down a water park, Disneyquest, mini-golf, or one of those place before they close a park? Think, we will close a park, but leave your hands off our sacred mini-golf.


BTW, only 11 more days

 

[raidermatt]

Plus, why don't they closed down a water park, Disneyquest, mini-golf, or one of those place before they close a park?

River Country is already closed, and during the winter one of the others closes. (they might both close, though not at the same time...)

We tried to get to MGM from BC, but it was a good 45 mins.

Its 20-40 minutes from the BW, depending on whether you walk or take the boat, where in the resort you are staying, and whether you catch a boat as it arrives or just miss one. But your point is well-taken.

I don't think anyone hear is saying closing Epcot or even AK would be a good idea. However, its seems that the possibility has at least been discussed, no matter how cockamamy an idea we think it might be.

 

[Another Voice]

“As long as Sea World, Universal, and even Busch stay open everyday, Disney MUST.” That’s the key phrase as far as WDW’s management is concerned. But every corporate decision is not based squarely on what is happening at WDW. It may not depend on attendance, it may not depend on the competition, and (more often than not these days) it doesn’t really depend on what WDW thinks.

This is a corporate game – and the person who will make the call has his eye on a bigger number than what Epcot, Animal Kingdom or even WDW adds to the pool. The game is to keep Attractions total growing, and that is only a way to keep the entire company’s income going up. Disney is much more than WDW and the parks are along way from Team Disney Burbank. However, the ABC building looms right over their heads.

From one perspective, closing a single park is not a problem. Very few guests hit all four parks on the same day. Taking one out of the mix will redirect which park people will visit but won’t encourage people to go off property. Look at the average length of stay at Animal Kingdom and you’ll see that this won’t be much. Nor will people change their ticket buying patterns – again, who goes to all four parks in a single day? You'll be there five days no matter which parks are open and which are closed. Just because you can't go to the Disney/MGM Studios on one day doesn't mean you woun't to another. I’m sure both sides have already spun what happened during the Epcot power outage to “prove” both sides of the argument.

Nor would the closings be year-round. They would occur during the “lean months” with 7-day operations reinstated for summer, holidays and spring break periods. It’s no different than shutting down attractions at off peak periods (which many people don’t have a problem with) – this is simply a way to shut down an economical number of them all at once. The thought is that Disneyland thrived for decades doing this – it won’t hurt WDW.

My personal feeling is that Disney would be completely insane to do this – but the company hasn’t acted rationally in about five years now. I can also see this as a vital contingency plan given that the war is about to really heat up soon, but then again I was at WDW during the first Iraq War and there was never any thought given to rolling closures of the parks. I think closings would seriously degrade the consumer’s opinion of the value of a WDW trip – but hours have been hacked, amenities taken away and prices have risen and no one really seems to care.

So I’m left in the middle – I can see all the reasons why they shouldn’t do it, but I don’t have the confidence that they won’t.

 

[raidermatt]

Just my personal musings, but if I were visiting during a slow period, and Epcot were closed, I'd consider it a signficant problem unless the hours were extended at MK or MGM. Epcot has been the only park open "late" during slow periods. MK was usually open until 7, and now it appears 6 is the norm. MGM cuts back to 7 or so during slow times. AK closes at 5. Closing Epcot takes away the only "late" night option.

Just to be clear, I think its a pretty bad idea, period. But if they are going to do it, I think they would need to give the people SOMETHING to do in the parks past 7pm, even if it is slow.

Now, in SUPER slow periods, like those that came after 9/11, I could understand it a little better.

AV, I might be wrong, but I think a war with Iraq would have a bigger effect on tourism than it did last time. While the Gulf War made Americans uneasy, the majority still didn't really feel threatened. I think it would be different story this time.

Of course, another actual terrorist incident on American soil could have the same effect as well.

I can understand having closure plans should these types of things occur.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Testtrack321 asks:

The big question, is how accurate is the original post. Was anyone there (Steve, OWTS?) can tell how bad the crowds were?

The Landbaron rises sheepishly and though clearly not a CM says, “I was there.”

And I can tell you from first hand experience that MGM was a piece of cake that night. And the two fantasmic shows AND the late closing was a little slice of heaven!!!!

Others in our party went to MK. Their report was exactly like mine. No significant increase in crowds, and a delight to be opened later than 10:00!!!

I cannot speak for the minor distraction known as AK.

And now hold on to your hats guys but I’m about to shock the heck out of you. Especially my lord-liege, AV.

So I’m left in the middle – I can see all the reasons why they shouldn’t do it, but I don’t have the confidence that they won’t.

And I can see (mainly from your post) all the reasons they should do it, but am afraid they won’t!! With the caveat that more traditional hours for the other venues accompany the closings!

Without that concession I may seriously consider selling my DVC interest!!!