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

[mvk]

Bringing in record profits, sure.

However loss of market share typically also means loss of revenue, record profits are as high as they could be, even higher record profits......

If Disney is measuring their success solely on record profits, then they are looking at things in a short term world.

The point is, nothing they are doing is affecting Disney. The entire base might be expanding, but they aren't cutting into Disney's attendance at all, it is still growing at the rates they have always been, and revenue/profits are up huge every quarter.

Universal will likely experience a jump this summer, then normalize back to their normal growth, just like IOA did. Do you think Universal's growth will mean Disney is going to experience losses in attendance? It's not going to happen.

 

[ChipnDale79]

The point is, nothing they are doing is affecting Disney. The entire base might be expanding, but they aren't cutting into Disney's attendance at all, it is still growing at the rates they have always been, and revenue/profits are up huge every quarter.

Universal will likely experience a jump this summer, then normalize back to their normal growth, just like IOA did. Do you think Universal's growth will mean Disney is going to experience losses in attendance? It's not going to happen.

no, the point is they have lost market share, which equates to some loss of revenue. Sure they arent losing money, actually making record profits, but they've missed the extra money they could have received.

In my personal opinion it'll hurt them long term, at some point they will have to spend money, and the longer they wait, the more they will have to spend at one time.

 

[diamondpixienc]

Just read this entire thread and I do not have any factual data to add but I do have an observation from our recent 8 day trip we just enjoyed 2 weeks ago to US/IOA & SeaWorld. Now, maybe it was the time of year it was the week following Easter Sunday and/ or maybe many people are just waiting for Daigon Alley to open this summer IDK but this is what I saw.

Sea World was pretty much empty. Longest wait I saw was 45min for Antarctica and it was about 2 when I saw that. Both the Kraken and Manta were Walk Ons pretty much all day and the longest wait I saw was 10 min.

US/IOA the longest waits over our 3 park days i saw were for Harry Potter's Forbidden Journey and Ollivander's and the Despicable Me. All three attractions were over an hour by 11. All other rides and attractions between the 2 parks were pretty much walk ons maybe 10-20 minute waits including Transformers, The Simpsons and Spider-Man with Spider-Man getting up to 45min at one time but that was around 2ish that day. Managed to see and do EVERYTHING including the shows, got pics with both Bumblebee & Optimus Prime and the "night time spectacular"
I'm telling you it was soooo not busy not what I had expected for spring break.

Again, maybe I just lucked up and was there during a rare bubble but US/IOA and Sea World were not very crowded at all. We stayed off site at Bonnet Creek but did venture over to DTD for some shopping. So if that is apart of Disney's strategy for those who vacation at the dark side exclusively then it is working because we made time to go over shop and grab a sandwich from EOS, custom pretzels and marshmallows from Goofy's Candy Co, and search for any Frozen a/k/a Elsa merchandise.

We also made time for a dinner at Chef Mickey's one night. So, I don't think Disney have much to worry about. As someone said and what I observed it appears that most people are taking a day or 2 to venture over to see Potter but still dip their toe in the World some how and fork over a few dollars on Disney's property. We did!

 

[TuneTownMagic]

Disney needs to step up their game. When Uni announces a new attraction, BOOM, it's done and done well fairly quickly where Disney announces something and proceeds at a snail's pace in comparison. The Fantasyland addition is pretty but it doesn't touch WWoHP. I say this as someone who likes HP but is not crazy about the series.

I have noticed this about Universal's pace too, when it comes to new attractions being created and released. As a loyal Disney fan, I would first assume that because Disney does things with a special amount of detail and magic, that is why they take so much longer to get plans for a new attraction/land in motion. But, after seeing WWoHP, I would take back that opinion. The amount of detail and the presentation of that land surpassed anything I've seen at Disney, and I don't think New Fantasyland expansion matches it. I mean, the queue for a ride at WW had holographic moving images of the characters, and moving paintings. This is why Disney's slow time frame has me scratching my head. Maybe, it is as others have said; Disney just is not worried and their parks are doing just fine right now.

I do think HP is important enough in pop culture/literature/movies for WW to continue its popularity for a very long time to come.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

I admit that I haven't studied Disney's financial statements lately as I'm not looking to change my current investments, but here's a thought.

Disney continues to bring in record profits from it's parks which is also coinciding with record attendance. These are good things, but what is their per guest spending? That is really the bigger number here. If the number is dropping, then they are losing ancillary spending and more guests are the only things supporting their increased profits, if the number is stable, their prices are aligned with guests coming in the door, if they are rising, their prices are being absorbed by the increased guests.

There is a flip side to be concerned with on the increased per guest spend, that at some point, you hit a tipping point in the spending, where it reverses and usually reverses quick. We have seen Disney increase their prices on just about everything and at staggering pace; if per guest spending is dropping, the impact of this is already being seen; if its still rising, that could be a good thing, but for how long before it causes a quick reverse?

 

[StarWarsJez]

Universal continue to impress me and Disney unfortunately disappoints due to lack of real innovation. I hope that Harry Potter phase 2 further boosts Universal growth - at the expense of Disney's.

Having just come back from DisneyLand and specifically Cars Land - it's clear that Disney CAN still create great rides and theming. However it clearly doesn't want to spend the money on this in Florida.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Universal continue to impress me and Disney unfortunately disappoints due to lack of real innovation. I hope that Harry Potter phase 2 further boosts Universal growth - at the expense of Disney's.

Having just come back from DisneyLand and specifically Cars Land - it's clear that Disney CAN still create great rides and theming. However it clearly doesn't want to spend the money on this in Florida.

It decreases from WDW's profit generating machine and the wdw clientele... Simply the east coast, rust belt, Canada and NATO...don't have the stomach to go for longer duration visits than they did 20 years and dump larger amounts of funds on "more Disney"
...they pay higher prices everytime...but I don't believe they are buying/consuming a bigger volume of things.

Until there is that demand...investment will be expensive window dressing. I don't think it ever will return.

This is still the final legacy of the Eisner years in parks...he personally pushed for euro, Hong Kong, animal kingdom... And none of them have hit anywhere close to big enough.

 

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

This is still the final legacy of the Eisner years in parks...he personally pushed for euro, Hong Kong, animal kingdom... And none of them have hit anywhere close to big enough.

Could you elaborate on what you mean here, please?

They haven't "hit anywhere close to big enough" for *what*?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Could you elaborate on what you mean here, please?

They haven't "hit anywhere close to big enough" for *what*?

Eurodisney... While a well done complex... Still never sees true "profit" and it's struggles with debt are legendary

Hong Kong was an expensive, poorly design facility that has vastly underperformed and they've had to keep up constant expansion/reinvestment in an attempt to make it stick

And animal kingdom... After billions of dollars in development... Was then rushed into opening and has basically become a really expensive MGM - a secondary park, not an anchor.

 

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

Eurodisney... While a well done complex... Still never sees true "profit" and it's struggles with debt are legendary

Hong Kong was an expensive, poorly design facility that has vastly underperformed and they've had to keep up constant expansion/reinvestment in an attempt to make it stick

And animal kingdom... After billions of dollars in development... Was then rushed into opening and has basically become a really expensive MGM - a secondary park, not an anchor.

Okay...well...I'm slightly hopeful about AK with the Rivers Of Light show that is coming and then Avatar. Making AK a nighttime park should see some real return on investment.

 

[mvk]

I admit that I haven't studied Disney's financial statements lately as I'm not looking to change my current investments, but here's a thought.

Disney continues to bring in record profits from it's parks which is also coinciding with record attendance. These are good things, but what is their per guest spending? That is really the bigger number here. If the number is dropping, then they are losing ancillary spending and more guests are the only things supporting their increased profits, if the number is stable, their prices are aligned with guests coming in the door, if they are rising, their prices are being absorbed by the increased guests.

There is a flip side to be concerned with on the increased per guest spend, that at some point, you hit a tipping point in the spending, where it reverses and usually reverses quick. We have seen Disney increase their prices on just about everything and at staggering pace; if per guest spending is dropping, the impact of this is already being seen; if its still rising, that could be a good thing, but for how long before it causes a quick reverse?

Spending per guest was specifically mentioned as one of the drivers of the huge revenue growth.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Spending per guest was specifically mentioned as one of the drivers of the huge revenue growth.

I just read the recent statement, what is the net, net though. Factor out the price increases, did spending increase without them or only because of them?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I just read the recent statement, what is the net, net though. Factor out the price increases, did spending increase without them or only because of them?

That is the fundamental question...if its simply a "rise" in spending on a parallel line with price increases...then it's a false increase in "revenues"