E-Ticket Nights- Just a Replacement for Late Hours or a Real Deal

[raidermatt]

That being said - do all the discussions have to evolve into what is good from the business point of view?

No they don't. But its pretty clear that enights are (and were) bad from the guest point of view. Sometimes what might be best for the guests just isn't feasible. For instance, I'm sure if the parks were kept open until 3am, there would be some guests that would be thrilled. But its probably not adviseable from the business point of view.

I'm just pointing out that enights are definitely bad for the guest, and are probably bad for the bottom line as well, IF you focus on the long term.

However, that doesn't change to fact that when they first started they were more than a replacement for something that we should have had in the first place - and that was the question at hand.

No, they weren't. Closing times were cut back, therefore, something was taken away. Its just that the amount of time taken away has increased over time.

BTW - I'm not sure I buy your E-night conspiracy theory that Disney knows they were bad from the get-go and they are trying to hide it from the public. Do you have something more than speculation on that one?

I don't have any inside info, and this isn't the type of thing we'd ever expect Disney to admit. However, it is the most likely explanation, given these two very relevant facts:

1- Unlike Early Entry, Enights are very difficult to find in Disney promotional material. A big complaint about the cancellation of EE was that it was still mentioned in the planning video, and still listed on the official Disney website as a benefit.

Go to Disney.com and check the daily activities schedule for MK. You'll find parades and fireworks, but no mention of Engihts. Is it in the FAQ? No. Look at the benefits of staying on-site. Does it list the right to purchase an Enight ticket? No.

Are they mentioned in teh vacation planning video? No.

Why not? If its good for the guests, and brings in revenue, why not promote them more? At least as much as EE... Because they don't want the publicity. Why not? Well, it could be that they have a limited number of tickets and don't want to disappoint too many guests. But that leads us to fact #2...

2. They cancelled Enights in May, and apparently are going to use them sparingly in the off-season. Again, they would rather cancel than promote. So over-crowding is not the reason. Any other suggestions?

 

[raidermatt]

Sure, some will say Disneys initial motivation was always to screw the customer.

No, it was to try to extract more money out of the customer TODAY without giving proper and accurate consideration to the consequences TOMORROW.

People bought into the idea and were willing to pay for E-nights with the full knowledge that a regular hour was being taken away. Why? Because you got something unique and different.

If the motivation was to provide something new and different, why take the hour away? Why not just tack on the enight to the then current closing times?

Most people were happy to do it and saw E-nights as a good benefit.

The numbers just don't add up on this one. Average MK attendance is (or at least was) something like 40,000 per day. I don't see how a case can be made that most of these guests were happy to have the hour cut from closing time, when fewer than 5,000 attend Engihts. (if there were no lines, enight attendance was even lower).

Face it, the hours today would be the hours today even if E-night never existed.

Sadly, I agree.

E-nights have kept some people happy, provide first time guests who don't have a clue about midnight closings something they never would have had, and have provided a revenue stream that is better than nothing.

Enights have also made some people MORE UNhappy. And why were they cancelled in May, rather than promoted? If it makes more people happy than angry, PROMOTE THEM!

 

[DisneyKidds]

No, they weren't. Closing times were cut back, therefore, something was taken away. Its just that the amount of time taken away has increased over time.

Agreed, something was definitely taken away. I never said that wasn't the case. However, what was sold back was more than what was taken away. At first, you bought back the ability to be riding SM at 2 am and liesurely strolling toward the exit at 2:30. You could not have done that before (except for New Years and Easter). So you absolutely can not say that at first E-nights were no more than a replacement. To say that, Disney would have immediately had to have closed the MK at 9 and sold an E-night until 12 - only then would E-night represent a replacement. That simply was not the case. So when they first started I do not agree that the E-night event was bad for the guest who chose to participate. Whether the decisions behind it were bad for the guest is another question.

 

[DisneyKidds]

See, I'm getting dizzy already .

If the motivation was to provide something new and different, why take the hour away? Why not just tack on the enight to the then current closing times?

It may be a chicken or the egg question. I believe Baron, or someone, stated that Disney made a decision that they had to cut hours in response to fires, or whatever - the threat of reduced tourism in the area. Bottom line is the impetus seems to have been a decision to cut hours by one. If that was the case perhaps Disney said - 'ok, folks - we have to cut the hours to save money, but what can we do to try and still recognize the savings and provide the guests something that they will enjoy and will help to lessen the pain of this cut?' That would be far different from the other scenario where the first decision was to institute an E-night event and Disney said - 'you know what, if we do this E-night thing, not only can we squeeze some more money out of some of the guests, but I bet we can save even more by closing the park an hour early - people won't know the difference'. So which came first, the decision to cut hours or the decision to have E-nights. I think it makes a difference.

The numbers just don't add up on this one. Average MK attendance is (or at least was) something like 40,000 per day. I don't see how a case can be made that most of these guests were happy to have the hour cut from closing time, when fewer than 5,000 attend Engihts.

You are right - I should have said that most people who participated in E-night were happy to do it. E-night was generally a good thing for the guests who decided to take advantage. It is unfortunate that that decision became necessary, but if someone didn't participate it was likely their choice. If everyone was so discontent over the loss of the hour how come more people didn't do it? So perhaps the people who wanted to be there were there (minus 10 bucks) and the rest didn't really care that much. I'd be interested to know how often the event really sold out.

As for the whole promotion thing I really don't know what is going on. Initially demand may have been greater than the number of tickets available so they increased the number. That would explain the increase in E-night crowds. At that point perhaps they realized that they could only sell so many tickets, thus the lack of hard sell. How to explain the cancellations? Perhaps Disney wasn't actually turning much profit on the events so they were an easy target to cut some expenses. Were E-nights cancelled due to lack of participation or as a cost cutting move? That might provide the answer.

 

[raidermatt]

However, what was sold back was more than what was taken away.

Math 101...

Let's be generous and say Enight opens 1/4 of the park. Therefore, an enight hour = 1/4 of a regular hour.

Hmmmm.

1 regular hour at no extra cost, or the equivalent of 3/4 of an hour for $10 (now $12).

I know, I know, short lines during enight.... but lines were short anyway during the last hour, espcecially when that last hour was from 11-12 or from 12-1.

Of course, guest response is not always as simple as doing the math, so maybe we should do a poll:

Which is more valuable, an hour of extra closing time, or a 3-hour enight for $12...

Do you really think a majority would pick the enight?

 

[raidermatt]

If that was the case perhaps Disney said - 'ok, folks - we have to cut the hours to save money, but what can we do to try and still recognize the savings and provide the guests something that they will enjoy and will help to lessen the pain of this cut?'

It was the threat of attendance dropping due to the wildfires.

I could buy this under only one of two scenarios:

1- When the threat was no longer there, did they return to the previous situation. (answer=no)

2- Did they find out that MORE guests actually liked enights over the extra hour of closing time. (answer=I highly doubt it but of course can't prove it)

Since I ain't buyin' either 1 or 2, I can't buy that your original scenario was reality. If it was, it lasted all of about 10 minutes, which is the same thing as not at all.

I should have said that most people who participated in E-night were happy to do it.

That's the same as saying most people who are going to WDW today are happy to do it, so that's a good thing.

Well, I'm sure its true that most people who are there are happy. But that doesn't account for those who didn't go (and are the reason attendance is not recovering). Similar thing with enights. Of course if you ask those who use it if they enjoyed it most will say yes. That's why they bought the $10 ticket. But those who didn't buy the ticket are not factored into the equation, and they are by far the larger group.

 

[DisneyKidds]

1 regular hour at no extra cost, or the equivalent of 3/4 of an hour for $10 (now $12).

Must be the new math, because it just doesn't make sense. You assumption must be that you can do everything in that one hour, therefore you can do less in the 3/4 of an hour of E-night because not everything is available to you. That is absurd. You are equating one hour at closing to three hours of E-night and saying they are comparable, that in fact the three hours of e-night provides you less opportunity. How? Look at it like this.......

What is someone going to do in that hour from 11 to 12 (pre E-night). As some have said, you might ride your favorite mountain three times in a row, and maybe even do another. You aren't going to do all those things that aren't available on E-nights. Ok, maybe someone would like to do the Hall of Presidents during that hour - but I doubt many.

Fact of the matter is if you participate in E-night you could do those three trips on your fave mountain and maybe even another - AND STILL HAVE TWO HOURS LEFT TO DO THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE OPEN!!!.

So the math that 3 hours x 1/4 of the park = 3/4 of an hour which is < 1 regular hours is..... well, it is just plain silly.

Yes, E-night does nothing for those left out in the cold. I wonder how many were forced out in the cold and how many were out in the cold by choice.

 

[DisneyKidds]

But those who didn't buy the ticket are not factored into the equation,

But it was likely the choice they made. That would be adults making those decisions, adults who should be able to live with their decision. An unfortunate decision to have to make, but theirs nonetheless. Now, if E-night was sold out that is a different story.

When the threat was no longer there, did they return to the previous situation. (answer=no)

Once they had that taste from the well..... Even if attendance went back up, or the threat was never realized, it may have been to difficult for them to give it back after they saw what they were saving by eliminating that hour. Very unfortunate indeed. As someone said - the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But the good intentions may have been there.

 

[raidermatt]

But it was likely the choice they made. That would be adults making those decisions, adults who should be able to live with their decision. An unfortunate decision to have to make, but theirs nonetheless.

I'm not following you on this one. My point was that even if 5000 people attended an enight, and most are happy with the deal, there are 35,000 people who did not attend. If some of them are not happy about the situation, that should be pretty important to Disney, since they might not come back, or might reduce their next visit.

You assumption must be that you can do everything in that one hour, therefore you can do less in the 3/4 of an hour of E-night because not everything is available to you. That is absurd.

Its also quite absurd to tell me that the value of my hour has increased because fewer rides are open. But then again, that thinking goes a long way toward explaining the lower numbers of attractions at AK, and even moreso DCA.

But the good intentions may have been there.

I guess I can go along with this, though I'd put the chances as slim or none, with slim in its car approaching the city limit sign...

 

[DisneyKidds]

I'm not following you on this one. My point was that even if 5000 people attended an enight, and most are happy with the deal, there are 35,000 people who did not attend. If some of them are not happy about the situation, that should be pretty important to Disney, since they might not come back, or might reduce their next visit.

I guess I am trying to say that it is possible that a lot of those 35,000 didn't find it that important to be there. They chose not to go so perhaps that hour isn't quite as important to everyone. Case in point - if the MK were open until midnight the Kidd clan would not be there at midnight. With two small children it is not something we'd do. You are an experienced WDW guy. Ever find yourself on Main St. after the first parade lets out? Quite an exodus. How about the fireworks that follow? Another mass exodus. The late parade? Ditto. Of those 40,000 guests for the day, how many do you really think intend to stay after the 11:00 parade? I submit the number is probably not even five figures. There is a reason you could do so much between 11 and 12 - the majority of the people cleared out at 11. Going one step further, most of those who would have stayed until 12 but didn't, left by choice. Chances are they could have bought an E-night ticket but it wasn't that important to them. So how many really unhappy people were there in the early days of E-nights? Probably not that many, especially if they took advantage of the E-night option. Of couse a 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 o'clock close changes al that - but in the beginning..........

Make any more sense?

Its also quite absurd to tell me that the value of my hour has increased because fewer rides are open.

And I'm not with you here. I guess you are saying you would rather have 45 rides open for one hour as opposed to 15 rides open for three hours. That is your perogative. However, the 45 rides for an hour was not an option anymore. They took it away . But getting the 15 back for 3 hours was a pretty good compromise in my book, even though I was out 10 bucks. And a question - of the 45 rides you had for the hour, how many could you actually do in that hour (maybe 4)? And I bet a couple of those would have been available at E-night.

You asked an interesting question earlier. If I had a choice today between the MK hours back at midnight, or the MK hours to 11 with a three hour E-night..... I guess if I were without kids I'd take (BOTH!!! - shoo, get out of here Baron) ..... that is really a tough question.

 

[raidermatt]

Got it. And you're right, not all 35k are there during the hour. But whatever the number is, you have to multiply it by 7, since an hour was taken from every day, and balance that against the enight patrons. Of course, there's also a certain number of enight patrons that bought the ticket but still would prefer the one hour for free. No, Disney didn't lose them as customers, but when you are a service-oriented company, every negative tick mark adds up in the LONG TERM...

 

[DisneyKidds]

Got it. In the long term one unhappy customer is one too many . I still think that if done with the guest in mind with the kind of hours we were talking in 97/98 (whenever E-night started) Disney could have kept the vast majority pretty content. Alas, we will never know .

 

[raidermatt]

In the long term one unhappy customer is one too many

Wellll, not exactly.... If 1000 customers are made happier by a decision, and 100 are upset, it still could be a good decision. I suspect that wasn't the case with enghts, but as you said, we'll proabably never know.

I was thinking more along these lines:

Every customer has a point at which they are pleased enough with WDW to return. If their experiences are positive enough, they stay on the "right" side of the that line and return, maybe even more frequently.

If their experiences are not positive enough, and they move to the "wrong" side of the line, they may not return, or at least will return less frequently.

So if WDW is going to make a decision that will push some people further in the happy direction, they also need to make sure they aren't pushing more people in the unhappy direction.

This is nothing new, and I'm sure we all understand it, its just how I try to visualize the impacts of different changes.