Harry Potter helps Universal take bigger share of theme-park attendance

crazy4wdw

Moderator - Restaurant Board
Moderator
Joined
Jan 3, 2001
Messages
9,238
From the Orlando Sentinel:

Harry Potter helps Universal take bigger share of theme-park attendance

By Jason Garcia, Orlando Sentinel
7:44 p.m. EDT, April 19, 2014

Universal Orlando's second Harry Potter land is set to open by summer, and that could be bad news for Walt Disney World and SeaWorld Orlando.

An analysis of theme-park attendance data shows that Universal took visitor market share from its rival resorts after the original Wizarding World of Harry Potter opened in Universal's Islands of Adventure park in 2010.

Disney World's share of Orlando theme-park traffic shrank from 74.9 percent in 2009, the year before the first Wizarding World debuted, to 71.3 percent in 2012, the most recent year for which figures are available. SeaWorld's share dropped from 9.1 percent to 7.9 percent.

Universal's piece of the pie, meanwhile, grew from 16 percent to 20.8 percent during the same period.

Driven almost entirely by Universal's growth, total Orlando attendance rose 7.2 percent, from 63.5 million in 2009 to 68 million in 2012. Disney World's attendance grew modestly during the period, while SeaWorld's declined.

"To see that kind of shift in market share is really phenomenal," said Dennis Speigel, president of International Theme Park Services, a consulting business in Cincinnati. "Very seldom do we ever see that kind of shift in competitive markets."

Universal would not comment. But executives at the resort's parent company, cable operator Comcast Corp., have said in the past they expect to gain more market share, particularly once the Wizarding World of Harry Potter — Diagon Alley opens at Universal Studios Florida.

"We're doubling down on theme parks," Comcast Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Brian Roberts told analysts at a conference in January. "We have a low market share — and only one way to go."

The market-share calculations are based on annual attendance estimates compiled by the Themed Entertainment Association and the consulting company AECOM. Because the theme parks do not disclose figures themselves, the TEA/AECOM estimates are widely used across the industry. SeaWorld Entertainment Inc., for example, cites the reports in regulatory filings.

Attendance estimates for 2013 are expected to be released in about a month.

Both Disney and SeaWorld officials would not directly answer questions about why they think they have lost market share and whether they expect further losses once Diagon Alley opens.

"We are very pleased with the performance of our parks and resorts business," Disney World spokeswoman Jacquee Wahler said. "As we've publicly reported, we continue to set attendance records, invest in our product and provide more reasons for guests to return."

SeaWorld said attendance alone is not enough to accurately evaluate its performance.

"Analysis of a theme park company's performance should include revenue, operating profits, and the free cash flow that factors into the cost of building and financing new attractions," the company said in a written statement.

"SeaWorld Entertainment does not report attendance on a park-by-park basis, but last year generated its third consecutive year of record revenue and operating profit. That performance is based in part on strong attendance in our SeaWorld-branded parks."

Not surprisingly, Universal's Islands of Adventure, as home to the original Harry Potter attraction, made the biggest gain among individual gates in Orlando, with its market share rising from 7.3 percent in 2009 to 11.7 percent in 2012. Neighboring Universal Studios Florida grew more modestly, from 8.7 percent to 9.1 percent.

All four of Disney World's theme parks ceded ground during the period. The biggest decline occurred at its biggest park — Magic Kingdom — whose share slipped from 27.2 percent to 25.8 percent.

Analysts say various factors likely have contributed to the shifts. Both Disney World and SeaWorld have added only a few major attractions since Universal launched Wizarding World. The bulk of Disney World's Fantasyland expansion in the Magic Kingdom didn't open until late 2012, while SeaWorld's Antarctica: Empire of the Penguin attraction didn't arrive until early 2013.

Disney World has aggressively raised prices since 2010, with company executives saying they were willing to sacrifice some attendance and hotel bookings in order to rebuild pricing after the global recession. And SeaWorld endured an extended stretch of negative publicity after the February 2010 death of a killer-whale trainer and the protracted litigation that followed.

Universal also struggled through a prolonged attendance slump in the years before Wizarding World opened.

Still, "there's no question that Harry Potter was the biggest driver" of the market-share shifts, Speigel said.

Executives at Disney and SeaWorld have said in the past that they expected to get a bit of a boost themselves from Potter.

"When a competitor puts a good property in the marketplace, it brings more people to the market …. And we all know that's good for us because we usually get a good piece of all visitation to Orlando," Walt Disney Co. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Bob Iger told analysts in early 2011, responding to a question about the impact of the original Wizarding World.

And late last year, in response to a question about Diagon Alley's impending opening, SeaWorld President and CEO Jim Atchison told analysts, "That's actually a benefit for the whole destination. ... It tends to help raise all the ships, if you will."

But the attendance figures show that Universal has claimed almost all of Orlando's theme-park attendance growth since Wizarding World debuted. Combined traffic at Universal's two parks soared 39.6 percent from 2009 to 2012, swelling by more than 4 million visitors in all.

By contrast, Walt Disney World's overall attendance grew by 2.1 percent during the same period, as the resort added about 996,000 more visitors. One of Disney World's four parks — Epcot — was essentially flat during the period, with attendance inching up by 0.7 percent.

And SeaWorld's attendance declined during the period, dropping 7.6 percent — a loss of about 442,000 visitors.

Scott Smith, an assistant professor at the University of South Carolina, said Universal is doing a better job of keeping more of its traffic on property, as Disney World tries to do. And he said that should continue this year with the opening of a fourth on-property hotel, the 1,800-room Cabana Bay Beach Resort.

"Having two parks, plus the CityWalk area, plus the resorts — they're now able to keep people almost exclusively on their property," Smith said.

jrgarcia@tribune.com or 407-420-5414
 
There are probably a lot of people on this board smiling after reading that. I doubt this will set anything in motion even if these numbers continue this trend in the next year or so. It seems to me there's a lot of arrogance with Disney in this regard. They are daring someone to try and take their lunch money. I'm not going to be the one ranting that Disney is doing NOTHING but I agree with many on the boards who think the effort put towards new attractions is a lazy one.
 
That's great news. Even if mostly new biz went to US, it still should increase pressure for all Theme Parks to expand. :thumbsup2
 
I'll say the same thing I've said on the subject every other time it's been brought up.

I seriously doubt Disney is intimidated in the least. I will believe it when it's this way in about 5 years. Universal took a steep plunge in the years before the data mentioned in this article. They made steep gains. From the info I have read, it's still higher than it was before, however, not in the drastic way it is described. Taking massive losses then huge gains is not the same thing as consistently breaking even/small gains and then making a huge gain.

I liked Wizarding World. Thought it was about the same thing as New Fantasyland (which we have not seen the TEA numbers on yet), but it was alright. DW and I are Harry Potter fans. I'm just not convinced Harry Potter will be a sustainable thing. The books and movies are over. Prices on the movies have dropped severely. There were two quadruple features, each costing something like $8 in target. The Little Mermaid was beside it for $25. So, 1989 Disney movie: $25 (well, that's what the tag said. The movie was sold out). Harry Potter movies fairly recent, you can get all 8 for $20. Yeah, Mermaid was just re-released. But they also had Lion King for $20. Seems that all of Disney's movies steadily sell for the same price. You don't see Disney movies on clearance. I'm just not convinced any other company in Disney's market has the sustainability they have. So, I don't think they're too intimidated. I'm 23, and I think my grandchildren will probably still be watching Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, etc. I think Transformers and Harry Potter will be a memory in 10 years. Just my opinion.

However, competition can only mean good things for the customer. Contrary to what this article is attempting to suggest, the numbers I have seen suggest that when Disney gets gains, Universal also does. When Universal has gains, so does Disney. From the numbers I have read, Disney and Universal are a package. Most go for four or five days at Disney, then one or two at Universal. I think a lot of people would love to push this huge war of hatred between these two parks trying to put each other out of business while that simply is not the case. Disney saw how it goes when they built Animal Kingdom. The park attendance didn't increase the way they thought it would. It did more of spreading out park attendance across their parks and made people stay longer. It didn't bring the volume of new visitors to Orlando that they had hoped.
 

I can see it. I am planning a trip to Universal later this year specifically for Harry Potter. I haven't been to Universal since before they added Islands of Adventure. It has no appeal to me. We are going for Harry Potter alone so yes, it probably is a boom for Universal.

That said, I've already completed a Disney trip this year and am planning one in another 2 years. Universal/Harry Potter will be one and done until my kids are into it, approximately 5-7 years from now. I don't think Disney is shaking in their boots quite yet.
 
Well see what the long term financial effects are for Disney, but as a die hard Disney Parks fan, there is some frustration. Its more than just Harry Potter for Universal. I'm a newbie to theme park obsession. Within the last 3-4 years, US added Potter, re-did Spider-Man, added Transformers, expanded the Springfield area of The Simpsons attraction. Disney did a great job with New Fantasyland, but I'm not going back to WDW for New Fantasyland. I will however go back to US for Potter...and all I mentioned above. Oh yeah...looks as though US is also bringing back a brand new King Kong attraction too.

As a paying consumer, it just appears as though, US has increased ticket prices, but they are also giving new cutting edge attractions. Disney is increasing ticket prices, in exchange for new....?

I know Disney doesn't have to do a thing, and they will still make money off me, but as a fan, it is slightly frustrating. At the end of the day, I take the attitude, that is US is going to keep adding attractions, I still win, because I'll do a day or two at their park!
 
Disney is not a short term player by any means. They are thinking long term. It took Fantasyland how long to fully open? What we know we are getting is Disney Springs and Avatarland by 2016 and 2018 respectively. Then there are of course all of the rumors.

This is me just speculating, but I think that Disney does have long term plans that are in play. However it requires other things to happen. We all have heard the rumors of such and such happening at DHS, Epcot and MK. And while crowds are packed during peak season, during off season not so much.

Over the last six to eight years or so I would say Disney has been focusing on building DVC properties as evident by how well they are selling. BLT sold out faster than AKL. GF is complete and sales data for that should be interesting. On top of that we also have the Poly DVC and expansion to Poly. Why does this matter?

Disney may earn more money off of 1st time visitors than repeat visitors, but they know that if you own DVC you will go. They also know you are likely to add on and go multiple times. Again, speculation, they are increasing DVC ownership to help fill the parks with more guests. Especially in slower seasons. Again, me speculating, but I think that you are more likely to re-visit Disney with a DVC ownership versus a single new ride or attraction.

Disney is able to grasp the concept that they are a multi-day, multi-visit park. US on the other hand can be done in a single day with purchases of FP. Is it expensive to do so? Yes. But I've never felt like US was a park I needed to visit for more than 2 days where as WDW I could spend a week there in the off season and still feel like I missed something.
 
I'm sure disney yawns when they see this kind of data...

They charge more, they get you there much more, and they have a 3 to 1 advantage...which is "down" from a 3 to 1...

they are very margin focused and have been throughout the CMB years...i'm sure they are looking at ways at this very moment to make just a LITTLE bit more from low cost/risk offerings and traditional profit generators that could be a little more profitable...

but they aren't worried about universal...and not interested in spending additonal capital on rides and entertainment...or any interest in preserving what can loosely be described as "value" in their ticket, room, and goods costs...

its just not the deal right now.
 
It took Fantasyland how long to fully open? What we know we are getting is Disney Springs and Avatarland by 2016 and 2018 respectively.

I think that's my problem with their current business plan. For how long it took them to build New Fantasyland, I was disappointed. Since I only went when it first opened, I'll hold out on complete judgment until my next trip. 7 Dwarfs Mine Train just seems "meh" to me after experiencing the effort Disney put into revamping California Adventure. For how much money Disney sunk into the FP+ program, I think they could've done a little more with the actual parks in a shorter period of time.

As for Avatarland, I'd say it's a more dated cultural reference than Harry Potter even though I'm sure the end result will be nice.
 
If you think WDW is not adding much lately-just think if US/IOA attendance was flat after adding HP etc, or flat after adding Carsland in CA.
 
Disney's attendance rose during that same period. So more people just traveled to Orlando during that time to see Harry Potter. Probably people that didn't want to go to Disney anyway. Disney is not losing customers because of Universal building Harry Potter Land. If anything, they will gain visitors who are in the area to see Potter and go to Disney because they are close. Disney targets a different audience than Universal. Unless there is a shortage of little girls that love princesses, I don't see why Disney would care too much about this.
 
As for Avatarland, I'd say it's a more dated cultural reference than Harry Potter even though I'm sure the end result will be nice.

Though I am excited for Avatarland, I can definitely agree with the dated standpoint. I just recently saw Avatar for the first time and I thought it was pretty good. Like I said above, I am a Harry Potter fan as well. Both don't cross me as long term good theme park ideas. I think Harry Potter mostly captured a couple generations of fans. I don't see today's youth getting into Harry Potter. Maybe it happens, but I doubt it. I'll say the same about Avatar. Some franchises for some reason just sustain better than others.

It seems to me Disney tends to invest into long term ideas...those franchises that will likely be around forever. Its own movies are typically based on "tales as old as time"...stories that have proven to stand the test of time. The latest two franchises they bought? Star Wars and Marvel. Two more enormous franchises that, once again, have proven to stand the test of time. Our children's children will still be into Spiderman. All of these franchises can have attractions built featuring them and entertain not for one, five, ten, or twenty years, but for multiple decades and generations. The rides will break down/become dated before the franchise does.

That's why Avatar kind of shocks me. It doesn't really fit Disney's model. People talked about it 24/7 for about a year, then things went silent. It really just screams of Disney trying to force something into Animal Kingdom to make it a night park. I feel like it'll be an awesome area to go to, but future generations may be confused about what it is....similar to the Swiss Family Treehouse. Seems that lots of kids love that treehouse, but they have no clue what a Swiss Family is. I still feel that Beastly Kingdom would have been immensely better, but Avatarland will be entertaining as well.
 
Margin and market share are both very important to most companies. I do suspect that if these numbers are real, then Disney knows these numbers and are paying attention to them.

I don't know what their "breaking point" is on market share reduction before they act on it, but I would suspect they have an internal number that if they slip below, something will be done.
 
Though I am excited for Avatarland, I can definitely agree with the dated standpoint. I just recently saw Avatar for the first time and I thought it was pretty good. Like I said above, I am a Harry Potter fan as well. Both don't cross me as long term good theme park ideas. I think Harry Potter mostly captured a couple generations of fans. I don't see today's youth getting into Harry Potter. Maybe it happens, but I doubt it. I'll say the same about Avatar. Some franchises for some reason just sustain better than others.

It seems to me Disney tends to invest into long term ideas...those franchises that will likely be around forever. Its own movies are typically based on "tales as old as time"...stories that have proven to stand the test of time. The latest two franchises they bought? Star Wars and Marvel. Two more enormous franchises that, once again, have proven to stand the test of time. Our children's children will still be into Spiderman. All of these franchises can have attractions built featuring them and entertain not for one, five, ten, or twenty years, but for multiple decades and generations. The rides will break down/become dated before the franchise does.

That's why Avatar kind of shocks me. It doesn't really fit Disney's model. People talked about it 24/7 for about a year, then things went silent. It really just screams of Disney trying to force something into Animal Kingdom to make it a night park. I feel like it'll be an awesome area to go to, but future generations may be confused about what it is....similar to the Swiss Family Treehouse. Seems that lots of kids love that treehouse, but they have no clue what a Swiss Family is. I still feel that Beastly Kingdom would have been immensely better, but Avatarland will be entertaining as well.

Which at the same time a ride doesn't have to be based on an ever going popular franchise to be popular. Look at Splash Mountain. Most people have never heard of the movie much less seen Song of the South. Then you have rides that aren't based on any franchise like Space Mountain, Sorian, Tower of Terror ect. So as long as Avatar is built right and isn't made by cutting corners then it should prove popular.
 
Margin and market share are both very important to most companies. I do suspect that if these numbers are real, then Disney knows these numbers and are paying attention to them.

I don't know what their "breaking point" is on market share reduction before they act on it, but I would suspect they have an internal number that if they slip below, something will be done.

that would have to be accompanied by NOT posting record revenues and profits, yes?
 
that would have to be accompanied by NOT posting record revenues and profits, yes?

This seems to always been lost on a few of you here, sure they've had record revenues and profits, but the question should also be asked, could those records have been higher?

I don't care how much record revenue or profits they make, if they hit their internal breaking point on market share loss, then they will do something.

I just finished reading Marty Sklar's book "Dream it, Do it", one of the points that he makes throughout the book is, what does the word "Trend" end with? End.
 
This seems to always been lost on a few of you here, sure they've had record revenues and profits, but the question should also be asked, could those records have been higher?

I don't care how much record revenue or profits they make, if they hit their internal breaking point on market share loss, then they will do something.

I just finished reading Marty Sklar's book "Dream it, Do it", one of the points that he makes throughout the book is, what does the word "Trend" end with? End.

It's being lost on me? Oh do tell...I haven't been stupid in a while ;)
 
I am glad about Universal's investment and success. It's good for customers and it's good for the market. I can't speak for Disney, but in my business, nothing gets our attention like a competitor's success.
 
It's being lost on me? Oh do tell...I haven't been stupid in a while ;)

What business do you know of, that allows their market share to decrease? Even if they are making record profits.

If you're a stockholder, at some point when that market share continues to drop, do you say, "wait a minute, why aren't you trying to make more money for me?"

I don't know what that breaking point is for disney, but every company should be worried about market share.

I agree a couple of points is no big deal, but if you think Disney isn't paying attention to market share, then I don't know what to tell you.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE







New Posts





DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top Bottom