Dreamworks to buy Universal Studios Theme Park Assets

[lrodk]

Not officially yet, however...........................

for the first time, that I'm aware of, Dreamworks has officially expresssed interest in an ownership stake in Universal Studios' Theme Park Division. Below is a link to the Business Week article that adds Dreamworks as a strong suitor for control of the parks. Can you imagine the ramifications of such an acquisition on Disney's day to day operations. If Katzenberg's success translates from film to the parks I'd say that would set the stage for some pretty interesting "I can top that" duels between two of the biggest egos, and rivals, in Hollywood. Wouldn't that be fun?

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2003/nf20030523_9440_db011.htm

 

[EUROPA]

ATTRACTION WARS!!!!!

 

[Planogirl]

This would be super IMO! Universal could very well be turned into a major destination ala WDW which could make WDW kick it up several notches and we would all win. Hey, one can always dream!

 

[lrodk]

Universal could very well be turned into a major destination

It's already fast becoming a major destination. With lots of room to grow, and some hefty investement capital, USF could become a major draw, and formidable adversary, in the years to come. Infuse new creative management that has displayed the ability to create products with broad appeal and isn't afraid to take chances, and I'd say that you have the makings of something big. And the fact that the brains behind this coup learned the ropes from the greatest theme park operator in the world is a big plus. Anyone care to guess how many Imagineers would be willing to defect to Katzenberg's camp? They haven't exactly been a happy bunch these past few years.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Universal has lots of room for expansion??? I'll admit they have room but lots...I don't think so. Plus it's disjointed. Plus it's already too crowded with too much invasion of the outside world.

Next: Whats the midget know about theme parks? Geez, his last claim to fame was (granted) a huge movie - who's star looked like his ex-boss!

But most importantly, what Company is gong to find investos to pour big bucks into a theme park in an area that certainly appears saturated. Is the original lesson of the still unprofitable IOA forgotton already?

I certainly wouldn't mind the competetion...We all win, but really guys this would be folly.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Sounds good for consumers!
They would have an advantage with Katzenberg, as people seem to respect him. (As opposed to the general views against Ei$ner. )

 

[lrodk]

Hi Peter. With regard to "lots of room for expansion", I was referring to the former Lockheed Martin property that Universal owns. Located on Sandlake Rd, this 2000 acre property is pretty darn huge, and sits there like a nest in waiting. All it needs is someone with direction to make a financial committment.

On the saturation issue, if Katzenberg succeeds in acquiring US I think the driving force would be not just to co-exist, but rather to steal business from other competitors(especially Disney). Up until now USF was perfectly content, at least publicly, to have a small piece of the pie, catering to specific(local & younger) demographics. Knowing how Katzenberg is/was with Disney, the mission with every undertaking has always been about being top dog. I'm sure you'd agree that there's big money to be made in Orlando for companies like Disney that have created a destination type of setting that capture guests and provide much of what they need right on site. A build-out of the former Lockheed property, more in the way of resorts, and possibly a 3rd park(ie water park), would effectively turn that section into a world class destination resort, tempting guests who would have normally stayed on or near Disney property to fragment their visits. It would all depend on the quaility of expansion and types of offerings, which in order to get me to defect would have to be unique to that resort. If they continue to add resorts of quality similar to Hard Rock, Portofino and Royal Pacific, I think at some point it will have an impact, a huge one. At that point the issue IMHO becomes one of competition rather than saturation. Who has the best product to offer for the $$, and wouldn't it be interesting to try something different, something that can't be had at Disney World. The uniqueness of it would be a huge deciding factor.

One thing I would never do however is underestimate Mr Katzenberg. He's gained my respect over the past two years. After Frank Wells passed away I thought he was poison for the company. But the whole Eisner fiasco brought into light details that painted a different picture. Everyone thought he would fail at Dreamworks. In a short period of time he's managed to turn that studio into one of the major players in Hollywood, from scratch. And since his departure from Disney we all know what happened to their film division. Coincidence? I hardly think so. He's bright and thinks outside of the box. There's no way he's thinking about USF/H if there isn't a sizeable chunk of profit to be made. Height not withstanding, I'd put my money on him any day.

 

[EUROPA]

The Pirate is still under the impression that DW has not had "invasion of the outside world".

As far as the properties being "disjointed" well this is true...but its really not that far and all that is would take a "magical form of transportation" to hook the two together. No I'm not talking about the Disney solution either you know.... Buses.


From what I heard…there is space already laid out for 3 more themed hotels and a couple of parks plus they land they have donated to the city.

If Jim Hill is correct and they do have Theme park rights to LOTR and Harry Potter and the next planed park is going to have a huge castle as its center piece Disney may quickly (relatively speaking) find themselves being “the other theme park in Orlando”.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Good point fellas...But...

The question is still capital. A fledgling company with lots of debt (USF) will be in what kind of position to take on a giant?

For sure you guys don't respect what Eisner's done and I can agree with it to a large extent...But if push comes to shove and Disney sees a real threat to its money pit do you really think Eisner, the Board or a replacemet to Eisner will sit idly by and watch Katzenburg have his way (especially Eisner)?

Disney, even in its current financial state, is in a lot better shape than virtually any new consortium will be and again, if pushed do you not think Disney will again 'create' to whatever extent they need to win the battle...(IMO) eventually bankrupting the newcomer?

The flawed consensus around here is that USF has actually accounted for something yet thus far they have not made a profit, have been a drag on their ownership, failed miserably in living up to their opening hype (IOA) and have falling attendance numbers like everyone else (just not as large as Disney because, frankly, they didn't have larger numbers available to drop and they've given away the park to locals). I remind you that IOA still ranks below "that auful" Animal Kingdom Park in attndance.

If the 'bergs' can get financial backing I promise it'll be a great day for all of us...For awhile. But somebody will lose and it won't be pretty.

 

[lrodk]

But if push comes to shove and Disney sees a real threat to its money pit do you really think Eisner, the Board or a replacemet to Eisner will sit idly by and watch Katzenburg have his way (especially Eisner)?

Of course not Peter. But I would sure love to see them squirm a bit for a change. With any luck it'll get their creative juices flowing and put to good use. The one thing that they can't do however is stop a person like Katzenberg, who often times is as determined as a pit-bull, from executing a well thought out plan. As you eluded to earlier, this would actually be a good thing for Disney enthusiasts. It never hurts to raise the bar, so to speak.

 

[EUROPA]

The flawed consensus around here is that USF has actually accounted for something yet thus far they have not made a profit,

Really?

Well for one reason or another people much more successful in business then I ...are getting ready to fight it out for those assets. Somebody smells money. I think a couple of the sharks smell blood from Disney too.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Thats why IT IS going to be interesting!

 

[pheneix]

>>>USF has actually accounted for something yet thus far they have not made a profit<<<

Oh yes they have. You can be damn sure that Vivendi would not have put one dime towards Mummy if Universal's did not show the stability and strength to sustain such an investment. The dark days of 2001 are long gone, management there has faced the facts that they stumbled out of the gate, learned to live with it, and are doing everything that they possibly can to attract business and build customer loyalty. Universal Orlando is on the verge of breaking any notion that Disney "owned" the theme park industry, and I don't think there is much that Disney can do that will stop that (especially since they are perfectly content to sit idlely by and do nothing).

>>>I remind you that IOA still ranks below "that auful" Animal Kingdom Park in attndance.<<<

Believe whatever you want to, but if AB puts Animal Kingdom above IOA then they are absolutely smoking crack. Just about every Saturday main attractions like Spiderman and the Hulk generate waits of over an hour. Compare that to Animal Kingdom, where a wait of 30 minutes has been an event this year.

And you're right, Animal Kingdom is pretty awful...

 

[larworth]

I don't think I have ever seen anything OFFICIAL about park profitability. However, I do remember reading this comment recently in an article about a potential sale to Balckstone

More recently, former Vivendi Universal Entertainment Chairman Barry Diller had been a keen backer of the theme-park business and gave the division a mandate to expand at home and abroad. Universal recently secured an agreement to open a theme park in Shanghai.

Theme parks, although hard-hit by the war in Iraq and an industrywide slump since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, have been a profitable business for Vivendi. They contributed about $100 million in annual cash flow.

But the parks, with their multimillion-dollar thrill rides, are costly to maintain, and Vivendi does not have the cash to run the business, Fourtou told shareholders Tuesday during the company's annual meeting.

 

[Peter Pirate]

No offense phenix but proof on profitability would be nice (especially since the problems of IOA have been well documnted since day 1). As for attendance, if you won't believe the outside analysis who do you believe? Got a magic 8 ball?

My wife & oldest daughter were at IOA/US four Saturdays ago and had NO WAITS for ANYTHING! Real crowded. Meanwhile my youngest & I visited a very busy Animal Kingdom... Just one day I realize but you bash AK crowds frequently yet I seriously doubt you actually visit it often.

As for Animal Kingdom being auful, my oldest daughter (the one who just went to IOA) asked if we could visit AK this coming weekend (it was her choice for good grades)...So IOA isn't even spanking AK with my 14 year old!

I'm not trying to sound condescending or even argumentative but if you seriously think USF has the ability to financially bury a motivated Disney there is really no need for further discussion...

 

[Another Voice]

Quick hits on a busy night…

No room for expansion – gee, that didn't stop Disney from trying to build a "resort" out in Anaheim (where it has a fraction of the land Universal has in Florida). Somehow I think Universal will do much better. Besides, being crowded with no expansion room hasn't hurt Tokyo Disneyland much. Perhaps it's how you use the land rather than how much total acreage you have.

Invasion of the outside world? Count the number of McDonald's on WDW property and see who is being invaded.

Vivendi has the debt, Universal Entertainment has very little (remember, it was the French and Canadians who messed up the company, not the Hollywood crowd). Besides Disney's $15 billion dollars ain't nothing to sneeze at either. At least Universal has a theme park and hotels for its money; all Disney bought was Go.com and ABC Family.

Universal "wins" if it gets people to start thinking about going to "Orlando" instead of going to "Disney World". Universal's economics are better aimed at the shorter visits. WDW has become such the lifeboat that the company shrinks a bit whenever a guest spends a day off property.

"Disney sees a real threat to its money pit do you really think Eisner, the Board or a replacement to Eisner will sit idly by…" Yea, the speed with which they’ve tackled that ABC problem or how they hard they worked to bring the crowds to California Adventure and the fantastic turnaround they engineered for the Stores proves they're all on top of their game. All this and they've still kept Animation at the top of the industry and the stock price soaring too.

Animal Kingdom is the receipt of the Park Hopper Breathe of Life. One "rumored" analysis claims that if it was a separate park (i.e., no ability to jump over to any of the other Disney parks on the same ticket), it would be drawing about 2/3's of the attendance of Sea World. Pull off the Disney brand from the park and they might as well offer nothing but alligator wrestling for the crowd they'd draw. Facts are different than numbers.

Katzenberg has the one vital ingredient that Eisner lacks – passion. Katzenberg knows he may not be the best (he’ll never admit it in public), but he desperately cares to the do the very best job he possible can. Eisner just shows up to the office to look at his bank balance. Give me an average guy who wants to do good over a genius motivated by just greed any day.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Geez Voice, whenever I post you always show up and I read your words but all I hear is blah, blah, blah, blah... - For all of Voice's minion, this is a joke.

RE: Expansion: Oh so you think the DCA format is a good one to follow, eh? I mean you basically said if it's ok for Dsney, it's ok for USF...As for Japan, this is totally irrelevent. Personal space and wide open spaces mean nothing to these people living like sardines. But I do agree that it's how you use the land.

Yes, McDonalds has a presence at Disney ... and Walt would be proud.

...all Disney got was Go.com and ABC Family.

Yeah, but the Disney isn't selling their parks, are they? Oh, I know, I know...

People wll NEVER talk about going to Orlando to Universal...It's like Coke and Pepsi. Coke is always the standard even if the product is the same. If Disney goes under and USF is all that's left people still will still NEVER say we're going to Universal in the same manner that "I'm going to Disney World" is used.

So, Animal Kingdom is a recepient of the hoppers, huh?...Yeah and so is TDS. You have no way of verifying this myth and you can get your figures to say anything...But still, more people went through the turnstiles at AK than IOA...This is a fact.

Katzenberg v Eisner...You'll get no argument from me on this one. The little guy has won most of the battles thus far... But still Disney is a goliath and the 'bergs' will be borrowing the money (and the bean counters looking at the bottom line - especially if things don't go according to plan immediately).

As I said it'll be fun (for us) if it happens but most rich folk won't be venturing into the entertainment industry investment game in this economic climate...So I seriously doubt that it'll happen.

 

[crusader]

It doesn't look like Dreamworks has enough cash to seal the deal over Marvin Davis. It would take alot more than 9 bil and a small film library to get these assets away from Vivendi which means either another key player partnered in or billions leveraged.

Maybe My Big Fat Greek Wedding's producer has a little kitty to invest?

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Peter!!

Just because I don't post as often doesn't mean I don't read these threads on a daily basis.

Yes, McDonalds has a presence at Disney ... and Walt would be proud.

Are you out of your mind!?!?!?!

Again!?!?!?!?




Just trying to keep you as grounded as possible

 

[Planogirl]

Originally posted by Peter Pirate

People wll NEVER talk about going to Orlando to Universal...It's like Coke and Pepsi. Coke is always the standard even if the product is the same. If Disney goes under and USF is all that's left people still will still NEVER say we're going to Universal in the same manner that "I'm going to Disney World" is used.

And here I am a devoted Pepsi drinker. People will NEVER talk about going to Universal? Are you sure about that? I can direct you to two individuals who have brought this up and I'm not talking about me.

Originally posted by Peter Pirate

Katzenberg v Eisner...You'll get no argument from me on this one. The little guy has won most of the battles thus far... But still Disney is a goliath and the 'bergs' will be borrowing the money (and the bean counters looking at the bottom line - especially if things don't go according to plan immediately).

Let's see, David slew Goliath and he was much shorter... Oh, never mind. I don't actually think that any of us really know what might happen. I HOPE that someone gives Disney a serious run for its money because until that happens, I don't see any reason for Eisner to feel motivated.