As rivals struggle, Disney widens gap

[WDWKOOK]

JASON GARCIA, NEWS — BY STAFF ON APRIL 26, 2010 AT 11:43 PM (http://thedailydisney.com/blog/2010/04/as-rivals-struggle-disney-widens-gap/)

Although it was forced to take a hit to its bottom line, Walt Disney World managed to use the global economic downturn to pull some business away from its theme-park rivals.

A closely watched industry report released Monday found that all four of Disney World’s theme parks managed to eke out attendance gains last year, despite the worst recession since the Great Depression. At the same time, the report found that both Universal Orlando and SeaWorld Orlando suffered substantial losses.

The result was what analysts called one of the most dramatic shifts in Orlando’s theme-park market in years.

“The strongest do the best in hard times, and Disney was able to really do its best to counteract the recession,” said Ray Braun, a senior vice president with AECOM, the Los Angeles-based business-research firm that prepared the annual attendance estimates along with the Themed Entertainment Association. “By holding their own, they gained market share.”

According to the 2009 attendance estimates, the Magic Kingdom remained the world’s busiest theme park, with 17.2 million visitors, up 1 percent from a year earlier. The rest of Disney World’s theme parks — Epcot, Disney’s Hollywood Studios and Disney’s Animal Kingdom — each recorded slight gains of between 0.5 percent and 1 percent.

On the other hand, attendance plummeted 10 percent at Universal Studios Florida, to 5.53 million, and 11.3 percent at Islands of Adventure, to 4.63 million.

Those drops were so sharp that SeaWorld Orlando leapfrogged Universal Studios to become Central Florida’s busiest non-Disney theme park. But SeaWorld’s attendance of 5.8 million people was still 6.8 percent below a year earlier.

Orlando’s water parks saw a similar shift, with Disney World’s Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach both maintaining flat attendance while SeaWorld’s Aquatica and the Universal-owned Wet ‘N Wild declined.

All of the figures compiled by AECOM and the Themed Entertainment Association are unofficial and have in the past been criticized by Orlando’s big parks as unreliable. But in the absence of official tallies from the parks themselves, the figures are widely used within the industry as estimates.

Braun and other analysts attributed Disney World’s market-share gains to the resort’s targeted use of discounts, which helped lure tourists despite a steep drop in travel overall. All of Disney’s most significant promotions during the year — including seven nights for the price of four and free dining — required travelers to stay in the resort’s hotels.

The promotions effectively worked in tandem with other strategic moves Disney has made over the years — such as the launch of a complimentary airport shuttle and luggage service that eliminates the need to rent a car — to help Disney keep an even greater share of its guests on its property and away from its rivals.

Abe Pizam, dean of the University of Central Florida’s Rosen College of Hospitality Management, noted that Disney has historically avoided discounts for fear of undermining the premium prices it typically commands. But he said the resort clearly now sees promotions as a way to further its strategy of capturing the entirety of its guests’ vacation spending.

“They have done it very smartly,” Pizam said.

Still, the approach came at a cost for Disney: In large part because of those discounts, operating profit for Walt Disney Parks and Resorts shrank 25 percent during the company’s 2009 fiscal year, which ended in October.

Analysts also said that Disney could have trouble returning to full prices without triggering an attendance drop. The company has said it is trying to wean consumers off of promotions gradually; Disney World, for instance, is currently reducing hotel rates by as much as 30 percent, which, while significant, is a significantly smaller discount than last year’s seven-days-for-the-price-of-four offer.

Discounts “don’t necessarily make for a sustainable market-share shift,” Braun said.

Disney’s rivals do have reason to be optimistic about 2010.
Within a matter of weeks, Universal will open the long-awaited Wizarding World of Harry Potter in Islands of Adventure, which is expected to provide a huge attendance boost. And SeaWorld, which sells some joint ticket packages with Universal, may be better positioned than Disney to reap the benefits of Universal’s gains.

“We are confident that the Wizarding World of Harry Potter will be great for both our guests and for our business,” Universal spokesman Tom Schroder said.

SeaWorld spokesman Gerard Hoeppner said that, while the eruption of a volcano in Iceland wreaked havoc earlier this month on European air travel, SeaWorld has otherwise seen “hopeful signs” in terms of advance bookings from the United Kingdom as well as an uptick in travel from Latin American countries, particularly Brazil.

“We’re seeing some very good trends there,” Hoeppner said.

Disney World would not comment on the attendance estimates.

[crazy4wdw]

Here's the link to the AECOM and the Themed Entertainment Association report:

http://www.teaconnect.org/etea/2009report.pdf

[WDWKOOK]

Here's the link to the AECOM and the Themed Entertainment Association report:

http://www.teaconnect.org/etea/2009report.pdf
Very interesting - thanks for posting the pdf link, crazy4wdw:)

[gymnastgirlflips]

I really think people are keeping the new Harry Potter world opening up this summer in mind. I'm glad Disney is seeing more people coming to the parks (unless I'm there, I'd rather it be less crowded hah), but it seems like every Harry Potter fan is going to have to go to Universal in the next couple years.

I'm guessing since Universal doesn't take a long time to cover, families may choose Sea World and other smaller theme parks to visit during their orlando trip than Disney. I guess we'll just have to see.

[Jolly Ole Bert]

I think another problem Universal has is marketing. We live 12 hrs from Orlando, and quite frequently see TV ad's for Disney and Sea World parks. Until just recently when the Harry Potter ad's came out, Universal TV promo's were seldom...if ever. If someone living in our region does not have internet access, they probably would be unaware of Rip Ride Rockit, The Simpsons ride, etc. I know that seems extreme, but it really shows how seldom Universal advertised on our air waves. It's looking like they are not making the same mistake with Potter, as the TV ad's are back with full force for this addition.

[gymnastgirlflips]

I think another problem Universal has is marketing. We live 12 hrs from Orlando, and quite frequently see TV ad's for Disney and Sea World parks. Until just recently when the Harry Potter ad's came out, Universal TV promo's were seldom...if ever. If someone living in our region does not have internet access, they probably would be unaware of Rip Ride Rockit, The Simpsons ride, etc. I know that seems extreme, but it really shows how seldom Universal advertised on our air waves. It's looking like they are not making the same mistake with Potter, as the TV ad's are back with full force for this addition.

That's completley true! I forgot I used to complain about their advertising style, anyone remember that little girl on their commercial that said "If I see another princess I'm going to hurl"? Ugh. Well, I like their technique more this time around at least..

[skiingfast]

I was shocked the IOA is less popular than Universal Studios. But even more surpised that Seaworld was on top of the group.

I'm guessing with Harry Potter coming in 2010 numbers will cause a large gain for the studios. And as mentioned I couldn't recall a single ad for Universal Studios for 20 years and only IOA around its opening but have noticed a lot for the new attraction. I read in the late 90's that opening a new thrill attraction increased attendance 15% for typical amusment parks. I suspect that IOA will get this and studios a complementary rise.

[Uncleromulus]

Apparently they need it!!!! And they had best hope that the Potter thing can sustain itself for a few years, once the initial frenzy wears off.
Otherwise they may have laid a giant egg.

[Micca]

I wouldn't bet my retirement on Harry Potter. I think there could be a big spike at Universral over the summer, but I'll bet it dies down sooner than later.
I've been wrong many time before so...

[skiingfast]

I wouldn't bet my retirement on Harry Potter. I think there could be a big spike at Universral over the summer, but I'll bet it dies down sooner than later.
I've been wrong many time before so...

Well one of the problems with building it now is the books are done, and the movie series is coming to an end too. Of course giving the benifit of doubt to Universal they probably started planning this five years ago when the franchise was in its prime.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Look, most of Disney is built upon things that were long ago past their prime so I have no doubt that HP will be a significant boost for years to come (the books and movies alike are huge) but like any theme park they will not be able to just sit back and rest on their laurels, they will need to keep pushing the envelope to stay relevent.

It's no surprise that Disney has suffered "less" than their competitors, they have the means to survive well beyond Universal, not to mention the cult that Disney has established with the "magical" theme and their tremendous ability to market virtually anything (good or not) to people who will buy it (good or not).

The test will come down the road as the coffers empty a bit and they must find a way to get back to the pricing levels they were once at OR find newer and "more magical" ways of parting us with our money in the event that pre recession numbers becomes unattainable. But again, they are poised for this. They are the experts and we can only hope that they don't totally lose sight of the things that make them different from everyone else lest they become everyone else. I know they will continue to run their business prudently the question is will they seek to run "Disney" prudently.

[tutter99]

I really think branding the area as Harry Potter will ultimately hurt it. If it was promoted as a medieval / wizardry area it would still have the Harry Potter appeal along with the Renaissance appeal which is a pretty large market as well. Where Disney really shines is the longevity of their attractions, something like Rock n Roller coaster featuring Areosmith gets the name recognition but the featured artist could always be changed down the road to renew interest (and generate hundreds of posts on rumor boards;)).

[Peter Pirate 2]

Harry Potter is the francise though. However, it will be incumbant on Universal to keep it fresh with new rides, tweaks and relavent upgrades, etc. As long as this happens people, as with at Disney, will flock to see the new, next greatest attraction.

Besides there is a good chance that even though the HP books are finished we will soon be seeing related works from Rowling which will fit perfectly as far as Universal is concerned, meaning it will stay relavent (at least) for years just on this basis.

[Jolly Ole Bert]

not to mention the cult that Disney has established with the "magical" theme and their tremendous ability to market virtually anything (good or not) to people who will buy it (good or not).
Surprisingly, that is a big part of it. I remember last summer on a particular Disnay page/board, members were encouraged to flood websites such as Screamscape, WestCoaster, and other general theme-park review sites with negative publicity on Rip Ride Rockit. ("Just make up something: It hurt your neck, it hurt your back, your kid threw up...") Even if they had NOT been on the ride itself. :sad2: The Disney die-hards were worried that a mixture of bad economy, plus a Universal white-knuckle thrill ride would be a serious threat to the House of Mouse. And so the campaign against RRR happened. (Mind you, I am not a part of this broad "cult"). And sadly, the campaign is going to be tremendous against Potter. To the point where a mod had to remind people not to send in the negative reviews until AFTER the new addition actually opened in June, as a few were already sent to some trip advisor type sites pre-maturely. :rotfl2: Once again, don't flame me, as I am nowhere a part of that cult.

Other reasons IOA suffered last year was probably the same reason our family skipped the park: The Harry Potter construction. If you're hearing that an entire section (Lost Continent) of a park is closed for rehab, and several of your favorite attractions are closed due to a major makeover...you're gonna skip the place until the makeover is finished. That is why we did not go to IOA last year, but are certainly looking forward to going this Fall. :cool1:

Throw in Potter, and if the Universal marketing team starts running broad TV ad's all over the country like they did in the 1990's....then I'd say there is nothing to worry about.

[skiingfast]

[QUOTE=Jolly Ole Bert;36475056]
Other reasons IOA suffered last year was probably the same reason our family skipped the park: The Harry Potter construction. If you're hearing that an entire section (Lost Continent) of a park is closed for rehab, and several of your favorite attractions are closed due to a major makeover...you're gonna skip the place until the makeover is finished. That is why we did not go to IOA last year, but are certainly looking forward to going this Fall. :cool1:

QUOTE]

Look at the numbers for Disney California Adventure. Half the park has been construction walls for 18 months and is going to be for another year. Somehow it seems that it has bringing in people with curiosity as it has closed attractions and only added TSMM, the next attraction will be reopened in a few weeks.


HP is not a franchise of any respective size compared to Peter Pan or Snow White. Those movies played until almost every child in the first world saw them. There was little competition. While HP was coming out there are hundreds of books and many movies geared to the same age groups.

Not that it is small, but it won't bring in millions of extra people this year, the next year and the year after.

[Peter Pirate 2]

[QUOTE=Jolly Ole Bert;36475056]

Not that it is small, but it won't bring in millions of extra people this year, the next year and the year after.

Agree to disagree then I guess.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Don't know how my last post incorrectly quoted Jolly Ole Bert instead of skiingfast.:confused3

[Ron from Michigan]

Let's face it. People just love Disney. We have been going to Orlando for 30 years and have only been to Universal once. We love all the choices that WDW offers. With the changes comming to the MK they are going to bring more families in.

[tjkraz]

Not to sound condescending but Universal's attendance numbers are so low that they only stand to go up. I wouldn't be surprised if they gained a couple million guests.

At the same time, I don't really think Disney will suffer comparatively. Disney's admission prices make full week stays so beneficial (days 5-7 virtually free) that I think US/IOA will simply be a diversion for most. I envision people still staying at Disney resorts for their entire trip and picking a day or two to visit US. Since they will still have Disney tickets for those days, the scenario could play out with folks heading to US in the morning and returning to the Disney parks at night.

However, I'm struck by the lack of impact many of Universal's other attraction openings. Take Spider-Man for example. Spidey has been around for decades. There is far more content available for consumers, and many more people grew up with Spidey than Harry Potter. The Spider-Man films have all done better at the box office than any single HP film. And the attraction itself won awards as the best in the theme park industry for many years. Yet look where IOA stands today.

You could argue that rides like The Mummy, Simpsons and Rockit are better than any comparable ride at a Disney park, and that their Seuss land is as well-themed as anything Disney has to offer. Still that hasn't been enough to drive attendance higher at the Universal parks.

I took my family to US/IOA about 14 months ago and my wife and I were both disappointed with the overall quality of the experience. I had been to US myself a few years back for a conference and found it quite enjoyable. Thought the family would have fun too, but it ended up being a string of disappointments and annoyances. Some people talk about how things have slipped at Disney, but our US experience didn't hold a candle to any Disney visit in my memory.

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. As a Disney fan, I certainly know that competition is good. It can only help us if US/IOA actually does start to siphon off some business.

[Peter Pirate 2]

As AP holders to both and a long time Disney fan I do actually understand why people like Disney better BUT it isn't based on a lot of tangible data (IMO) it's more the intangible that I think exists due to Disney's aura and ability to market itself so well.

The Universal crowd is less 'well-heeled' than the WDW crowd in my opinion. USF's crowd is more ethnically diverse and is much younger across the board, as well which will lead to different although not necessarily worse park experience. Disney is easily the more popular 'family with young children' parks ... Even with Suess and USF's other offerings, what Disney has done for the little one's still stands supreme, IMO, BUT it has very little to do with content (Peter Pan vs Harry Potter for example) but more to do with presentation. Kids are easy to please if you give them what they like. Disney ALWAYS went the extra mile to please adults as well and that is a BIG, BIG deal.

I think the Universal Team Members are only slightly less efficient as the Disney CM's across the board BUT Disney does have more exceptional CM's that comes from the Disney heritage and Universal will probably never climb to Disney's level here. USF's best hope is that Disney's quality drops over time (this is happening and could be significant in years to come). But these 'exceptional' CM's of Disney are worth way, way more than Universal's money can buy in guest goodwill. This is absolutely undeniable.

Disney is often credited with superior theming and this is just not accurate. IOA in particular is on a par with the best Disney has done and Universal Studios is certainly no worse that MGM. Remember that most of the outstanding things at Universal were created by former Disney imagineer's.

The big difference between the Parks is customer perception, IMO. Many, many, many Disney lovers will try Universal but they usually try it once (and it's not a clone so differences or perceived negatives, really stand out) plus while they think they're going in with an open mind they really aren't. We really CAN"T because we have been conditioned to the idyllic Disney way and no matter what the grittier, more in your face experiences of USF does, it just doesn't give people looking for a Princess driven, magical experience the warm and fuzzies and it never will.

It took me a long time to come to grips that Universal isn't Disney (and vice-versa). To realize that Disney wasn't "mine" personally or my families any more than Universal, Coca-Cola or Wal Mart is. They are all just corporate conglomerates trying to take my money. Disney is just a brand that over the years has somehow ingrained itself into the psyche of many people and it's a very difficult thing to see objectively because when you're having a good personal or family experience there is no amount of 'fact' or 'reality' that is going to be more 'factual' or 'real' to you than your personal situation - and this isn't wrong. Disney pulls you in. Gives you that particular feeling that is virtually undescribable. They make you feel safe. They make you feel isolated in a world of the unreal and then bingo, you're hooked. Some will be for life, some like me, start to feel differently after the kids grew and we become less forgiving of little annoyances, changes or shortcomings heretofore glossed over by our thrill over the excellent family experience we are being "given".

I still love Disney and I would NEVER EVER change what my family gained from our forays to into the magic and in fact our memories are littered with things that happened at Disney. But I now realize that it was ultimately my family that really created those memories. We could have had them at Universal or in travel to real life locations had we so chosen. I am thankful for what Disney "gave" me and I wouldn't change a thing but it wasn't them, it was us.

[Kelly B Disney]

I have long thought that the quality of service, quality of people and personalities at Universal overall was never up to what you get at the Disney Parks or resorts. I've stayed there ,ate at the hotels there, been there many times over the years...

I have seen people and had experiences more than once in Universal with some of the WORST workers with the worst attitiudes anywhere!. They don't seem like they try to hire quality people there at all. Even in the higher end restaurants/bars in the hotels. The guest services in the park was a nightmare to deal with. The very people who are supposed to be handling the utmost in customer service.I base this on several times dealing with them. The CM's at Disney are head and shoulders above them from bathroom attendants to the waiters in Jiko and Flying Fish to the bartenders at Carribean beach Resort... I think if Universal invested in quality hirings and customer service from people who take pride in themselves and their jobs I would feel more comfortable at their parks but I don't. And I am from Jersey people!!! I live 30 mins from Manhattan and I am not a snob-- just want what I want when on vacation...

I like the Univesal parks I really do. The rides are great but the parks are without a doubt dirtier than Disney and the people that work there and go there seem less appealing than you see at disney. I don't feel real safe at City Walk at times. I also attribute this to that campaign on tv awhile back that someone mentioned when the little girl said she was going to hurl if she saw another princess...WTH is that? It's a children's theme park and they all are after all .... That whole campaign they ran was in the spirit of trying to break down what many who love disney hold dear...the make beleive --the magic. Universal seems to cater to a different kind of people and their staff only proves that --in my personal experience... I will go to Harry Potter and really look forward to seeing it but stay at Disney and spend most of my time at Disney parks and only eat at their restaurants. I go to Orlando 3-5 times per year and have basically stopped going to Universal alltogether.

[skiingfast]

I think the biggest difference, is the time spent or worthiness of where you would spend a vacation. As a previous poster mentioned US is just a diversion from WDW. It's too much a day trip out of the resort like the beaches of Kennedy Space Center.

It the same as in Anahiem, people who come for a solid trip goto DL 3 or more days and to Universal or Seaworld to fill in their Disney trip.

So drawing people to univesal is a three day trip at most, park, park, waterslide. While Disney is a 5 day at least, parkx4, waterslide,golf, boating, ect. You don't want to spend 2 days travel for 3 days. But for 5 days two days travel sound great that's a 7 day week. While WDW draws from vacationers who wold spend full days driving. Universal needs day tripers. It draws from a population of maybe 20M while WDW is pulling people from a pool of 250M. You can in fact guess that a large percent of people going to Universal and WDW that did'nt drive, are spending 5 days in WDW too.

I think that the difference in the experience come down to a simple perceptions. Disney makes an experience and let the money follow. Where as Universal want the money up front to have an experience.

[mrsR123]

Kudos to the Pirate for an outstanding post. Reading it felt like old times.

[ChrisFL]

I think the biggest difference, is the time spent or worthiness of where you would spend a vacation. As a previous poster mentioned US is just a diversion from WDW. It's too much a day trip out of the resort like the beaches of Kennedy Space Center.

It the same as in Anahiem, people who come for a solid trip goto DL 3 or more days and to Universal or Seaworld to fill in their Disney trip.

So drawing people to univesal is a three day trip at most, park, park, waterslide. While Disney is a 5 day at least, parkx4, waterslide,golf, boating, ect. You don't want to spend 2 days travel for 3 days. But for 5 days two days travel sound great that's a 7 day week. While WDW draws from vacationers who wold spend full days driving. Universal needs day tripers. It draws from a population of maybe 20M while WDW is pulling people from a pool of 250M. You can in fact guess that a large percent of people going to Universal and WDW that did'nt drive, are spending 5 days in WDW too.

I think that the difference in the experience come down to a simple perceptions. Disney makes an experience and let the money follow. Where as Universal want the money up front to have an experience.

Part of that is because Disney has tried many ways to keep guests from venturing off Disney property....they added tons of hotel rooms, they built MGM studios so people wouldn't go to Universal, they built Animal Kingdom so people wouldn't go to Busch Gardens...

...then they added Magical Express, so people wouldn't want to rent a car for anything, and then they have their ticket deals so it's just cheap enough not to want to leave their property.

I still believe the reason Universal hasn't succeeded in Florida as well as it should have is their marketing has for a looong time been suspect at best.

They don't know how to attract the families who go to Disney World all the time and still attract the thrill seekers who would usually go to Ohio, or some of the other East coast parks.

However, Harry Potter is going to change a lot of that I believe. I agree with the previous poster who said people probably skipped IOA due to all of the construction...it isn't the same as people going to DL and DCA, because again, Disney is the main attention grabber in both situations...people would venture back to WDW before going to IOA when there's a huge chunk of the park being refurbished, then plan to go to IOA next year when it's got everything open.

[skiingfast]

[QUOTE=ChrisFL;36490918]Part of that is because Disney has tried many ways to keep guests from venturing off Disney property....they added tons of hotel rooms, they built MGM studios so people wouldn't go to Universal, they built Animal Kingdom so people wouldn't go to Busch Gardens...

...then they added Magical Express, so people wouldn't want to rent a car for anything, and then they have their ticket deals so it's just cheap enough not to want to leave their property.

[QUOTE]

I know that it is often cited that Disney built the studio park to foil Universal. In truth Universal Studio was built quickly off the Califoria designs just like MK off of DL's. The Disney park opened before USF and it had to be in the works to develop attractions foriegn to Disney for quite a while.

Also I don't think Univeral originated the design of an movies based amusment park. It had actual studio tours while disney had rides based on movies. Universal blended the two in its Califorifornia movie lot.

Regarding busch Gardens and AK. It's not the only, amusment park/zoo. And I mean it is like amusment park with a zoo. When AK first opened they were saying it's like a zoo with rides.

ME may of fixed other problems too. Disney needed parking. And lots of money was going to shuttles and taxis that weren't theirs to control.

As far as building hotels. I think that was disney's idea in 1955. They just had some troubles for a long time and didn't get back to business until Eisner got there.

It does speak volumns that people are seeing commercials for Universal again. Myself included. That will make a difference.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Kudos to the Pirate for an outstanding post. Reading it felt like old times.

Thanks. I have been feeling a bit nostalgic lately.:thumbsup2
pirate:

[AprilLizbeth]

I have to say that I think that the recession is finally leveling out the cost of a Disney vacation. Somewhat like the housing market here in Florida, over the last few years there has been and exponental increase in prices overall at Disney World. Tickets and particularly hotel prices have shot up to an unafordable level for some people. I hope that Disney is forced to keep discounts comming and prices lower. You just arent going to lure in customers in a recovering economy by saying "Well thats it! The discounts are gone and now we are returning to ungodly prices. Book now!"

[skiingfast]

I have to say that I think that the recession is finally leveling out the cost of a Disney vacation. Somewhat like the housing market here in Florida, over the last few years there has been and exponental increase in prices overall at Disney World. Tickets and particularly hotel prices have shot up to an unafordable level for some people. I hope that Disney is forced to keep discounts comming and prices lower. You just arent going to lure in customers in a recovering economy by saying "Well thats it! The discounts are gone and now we are returning to ungodly prices. Book now!"

It's interesting that in this thread to consider the pricing aspect. DL relies a lot on ticket pricing schemes as food and hotels are less of the revenue from those guests. While in WDW they offere more hotels or dining offers
but not ticket only deals. It speaks a lot to how they focus keeping guests on site.

It's also interesting that WDW gate entries went up just a hair, while DLR had impressive results when considering the economy and the construction around the resort.

[Jolly Ole Bert]

For Universal, having their parks 7 miles from WDW can be both a blessing and a curse. On one hand, you're located in one of the top tourist destinations on the globe. While on the other hand, it is inevitable that people will always, always compare you with Disney. I wish more people would leave out the Disney factor and appreciate Universal for what it is. Sometimes I wonder if US & IOA would be better off in a place such as Branson, Myrtle Beach, or Nashville, so that way the parks could stand alone as unique, and out from under Mickey's shadow. As hungry as Nashville is for a theme-park after the tragic (*stupid) loss of Opryland, I've wondered how the Universal parks would have done if built someplace like that rather than in Mickey's backyard. Sure, you'd have the seasonal factor and not the nice Central Fla weather. But the quality of theming, atmosphere, and service would stand head & shoulders beyond that of regional parks. Universal definitely deserves silver or bronze in the entire theme-park industry when it comes to theming and quality. Our family grew up going to Six Flags parks, Dollywood, etc. And obviously those types of parks cannot hold a candle to Disney or Universal.

[skiingfast]

I am sure that universal was built to cannabalize Disney park goers. Orlando was nothing special until Disney showed up. When the tourist industry was well established Universal came in. They in quite a sense asked to be compared.

Of course the best US park is in Japan and not next to TDL. I've also heard that since Universal owner NBC partnered with Blackstone Group they have wanted to build a lot more parks. I think they have a few in the works but all I can think of is somthing at Dubailand and in South Korea.

[ChrisFL]

I know that it is often cited that Disney built the studio park to foil Universal. In truth Universal Studio was built quickly off the Califoria designs just like MK off of DL's. The Disney park opened before USF and it had to be in the works to develop attractions foriegn to Disney for quite a while.


It's well known that MGM was built hastily in an attempt to beat Universal to the punch....It stemmed from Michael Eisner, formerly being the had of Paramount and already had a deep disdain for Universal as a competitor...there was plans to add a movie ride to EPCOT Center, then that ride, eventually named the Great Movie ride, instead became the center piece for Eisner's pet theme park project...

Too bad there was barely any attractions when it opened...only the Great Movie Ride and the Studio Tour...no Muppets, Star Tours or even Sunset Blvd. existed when MGM Studios first opened...but it still opened nearly a year before USF did.

[skiingfast]

It's well known that MGM was built hastily in an attempt to beat Universal to the punch....It stemmed from Michael Eisner, formerly being the had of Paramount and already had a deep disdain for Universal as a competitor...there was plans to add a movie ride to EPCOT Center, then that ride, eventually named the Great Movie ride, instead became the center piece for Eisner's pet theme park project...

Too bad there was barely any attractions when it opened...only the Great Movie Ride and the Studio Tour...no Muppets, Star Tours or even Sunset Blvd. existed when MGM Studios first opened...but it still opened nearly a year before USF did.

No it's not well known, it's assumed by many because of the similar park theme. Eisner didn't like Univeral is a tale of its own.

The fact is WDW was stagnant since opening Epcot and they were looking to expand but didn't have the means or internal cooperation. Because of business problems disney wasn't making much money in the early 80's and was pretty ripe to move upward when Eisner came in. Eisner allowed disney to form strategy for better or worse.

He didn't just try to screw everyone he competed with in the media business because he was with Disney. He was incentized to create value in the company anyway he could. This is why in the 80s Disney started to expand businees in movies, tv, parks, merchandise and anything else they could.

It is not mentioned that Disney started a cruise line or built castaway cay because Eisner didn't like Arison or Kloster, the founders of Carnival and Norweigen Cruise Lines.

It's just easy link that Eisner worked for this company and that, who was a competitor with this party and that. So obviously he had nothing but hate for all of them.