Given Walt's original intention of the place being affordable for families, I'm guessing he would frown at this steep price hike.
And I whole heartedly agree with what AJ said about Walt. I understand he was a business man looking to turn a profit, but I wonder how an increase like this would sit with him and the idealistic views he made publicly known.
Disney's game of "screw the tourists" has to end!
At $87 a single day ticket is the equivalent of £54 sterling, (sorry guys but I live in the UK and have to convert to get any sense out of this). That's less that I have to pay to see a decent live music show, eg Rush, and a lot less than major groups like U2. So - I get a whole day in one of the best theme parks in the world for less money than a 2 hour music show.... That's good value in my book.
Even with the increased prices the annual passes are pretty damn good value. I'm staggered that the SoCal pass used to be only $199. That makes no business sense at all. At $269 it still only needs you to visit 4 times and you are in credit. Assuming you live close enough to need an annual pass that's still a bargain. No one likes big price increases but in the cold light of day the new prices still represent extraordinary value and Disney, whatever some posters may wish, isn't a philanthropist - it's a commercial company. It can only invest if it has the funds to do so. Having a realistic pricing pattern is all part of that...
Walt would've said no, but Roy would've convinced him otherwise.
Don't confuse the creative genius of Walt with the business sense of the man who kept the dream afloat.
Built up demand + anticipation= $$$$
Cars land just went from "Ka-chow" to "Ca-ching"
Thats just how it is, unless people stop going, which by the way is impossible, Disney will continue to raise prices.
Having said that, see you at Disneyland this summer!
I wasn't comparing pass prices with those available from other parks. As someone who doesn't live in the US and therefore who doesn't currently consider any sort of pass I just observe that even the increased prices represent astonishing value for money. If other parks are under-selling themselves as well with annual pass prices I'll predict a general price-rise right across the board. The other way of looking at it is following my analogy of prices for music (rock) concerts - When I was younger I could see a show for £20, even a big band. Suddenly bands worked out that instead of making a loss on touring they could make money from it by charging more and prices doubled within a few years. Now the going rate is £60. The thing is people still went to the shows. They just expected more bang for their buck. It seems to me that Disney is delivery quite a lot more bang for it's buck at Disneyland/California Adventure. People will squeal, but they'll still sell enough passes to make it well worth while, and within a year or two it will all be forgotten... That's how it works, whether people like it or not....
Demand is up to extremely high levels. Add to that demand is incredibly high for locals. The business evaluation is simply that the park is underpriced and that the underpriced demand is locals.
Consider that overloaded parks stress the park infrastructure and the per visit margin is higher for tourists, Tourists are also realizing that the overloaded park reduces value to themselves. Shuffling prices is more about demand management and targeting higher value customers while keeping operational and maintenance costs in control.
Affordability for the average customer = Down 10 %
Not that I agree with the price increases, but in-park spending is actually completely the opposite of that scenario. Occasional guests spend the most, and the more often someone visits the less they spend incrementally in park. Once-in-a-lifetime tourists are likely to spend a boatload of money on souvenirs and will want to spend good money to eat at the better restaurants with good atmosphere (Hello big buck Blue Bayou and character dining). Their daughters will want to be princesses, their sons pirates. Premium APs do none of that. They don't need as much Disney stuff, they're usually pretty well stocked except for collectables, they're not going to hit up Bippity Boppity Botique or the Princess Fantasy Faire, and when you're in the park every other weekend you're not missing out by eating off-site for less money. I have found it a little odd that Disney has been so focused on courting premium APs with monthly payments and the like, while at the same time converting every store to be a mini-emporium selling plushies and generic Disney Parks tourist stuff, things APs almost never buy.
Back to the price increases, 30% is eye-watering high and is definitely cause for re-evaluation, especially with a kid on the way - that will get expensive quick, and as someone else said it might be time to go back to the old once-a-year plan. The only thing that might take the edge off is if it really does bring the crowds under control. If that does happen to a significant extent then just maybe the price could be worth it. We'll see...
Keep park admission the same price. Dramatically raise the fees for strollers, either the parks or you own. Crowds wouldn't be so bad with that stroller army in the way of what used to be simple movement across the park. More money + thins out the crowding issue. I know it's a farcical example and would never happen but every time I go there and deal with the crowds it crosses my mind.