Has Disney let Universal Catch Up In All Market Segments?

[blackshirt]

Universal/IOA will never be able to compete with Disney for that important segment of 10 and younger. They don't yet have the characters(although they seem to be making a dent) Sorry, but 20 years from now, Shrek, as distasteful as it may seem to some, will still be around. Mickey will remain a symbol of Disney, but will continue to be propped up by new creations. What was the last truly GREAT Disney Creation? Lion King? YES! Sorry, can't include Pixar characters. We are going to Orlando in two weeks, and quite frankly, if it was not at my daughter's( She is 11) insistence, we would bypass Disney entirely. I'm not mad, just disappointed. For me there is nothing new at Disney. The parks are still great, but they are just.......tired,old. One new attraction every five years for each park, financed by outside corporations is not acceptable. At least Universal SEEMS to be trying!!! ANYWAY, Sorry to ramble... We will be going Master's Week to Orlando, but each year the trips to Disney dwindle compared to visits to other parks(not just Universal/IOA). Believe it or not this saddens me, but Disney has really rested on its laurels for far to long. They continue to take their so called "guests" for granted. We all know what happens when a company does this for an extended period of time.
Just IMHO

 

[HB2K]

Believe it or not this saddens me, but Disney has really rested on its laurels for far to long. They continue to take their so called "guests" for granted. We all know what happens when a company does this for an extended period of time.
Just IMHO

I feel your pain...and that's why I've been in car 3 / 4

 

[pheneix]

For the record, Universal Orlando is half owned by the investment group Blackstone, and if/when a sale should take place Blackstone would be the front runner for a purchase.

The only park that Vivendi owns outright is Universal Studios Hollywood, and it shows...

 

[Eyesnur]

Mickey Mouse is still Mickey Mouse. Shrek is forgotten already. Universal is building for now which is good for the consumer. They have what, 3 new announced attactions? Hey, so does WDW!

USF has two parks that are half day parks (by account of all except those Universal/IOA pumpers). WDW hs much, much more. WDW will continue to add attractions slowly, Universal will quickly run out of space.

Lastly, how many people go to USF for a whole week? Not many. The best case scenerio for USF is to continue to whittle a day or two from those WDW vacations. After that it's all about longevity. Winner? Disney by three lengths.

...Oh, one more thing. The parnership (I use the term loosely) between Blackstone & Vivendi has to be more complex than it appears otherwise why would Vivendi be holding it (it=a Universal that still can't service its debt) when they (Vivendi) so desperately need the cash?

 

[HB2K]

Originally posted by Eyesnur
Mickey Mouse is still Mickey Mouse. Shrek is forgotten already. Universal is building for now which is good for the consumer. They have what, 3 new announced attactions? Hey, so does WDW!

USF has two parks that are half day parks (by account of all except those Universal/IOA pumpers). WDW hs much, much more. WDW will continue to add attractions slowly, Universal will quickly run out of space.

Lastly, how many people go to USF for a whole week? Not many. The best case scenerio for USF is to continue to whittle a day or two from those WDW vacations. After that it's all about longevity. Winner? Disney by three lengths.

...Oh, one more thing. The parnership (I use the term loosely) between Blackstone & Vivendi has to be more complex than it appears otherwise why would Vivendi be holding it (it=a Universal that still can't service its debt) when they (Vivendi) so desperately need the cash?

Thanks for the comedy! That had to be the funniest post I've read in a while....and the half a day part about IOA is truely priceless....

 

[Eyesnur]

If AK is a half day park then certainly IOA and US fare no better. Read some comments by those not pumping USF occasionally.

Oh, btw, have you forgotten that AK still outdrew IOA and US last year? You guys conveniently forget this or rest on the 'wait until next year' line...

 

[raidermatt]

Universal is building for now which is good for the consumer. They have what, 3 new announced attactions? Hey, so does WDW!

Universal has two parks, WDW 4. Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect Disney to be building more new attractions than Universal?

USF has two parks that are half day parks (by account of all except those Universal/IOA pumpers).

I'm not a U/IOA pumper and in fact have never been there, nor do I really have the desire to expend the necessary effort to leave WDW and go there. But to their audience, U/IoA is not considered 2 1/2 day parks. Much of Disney's audience, however, consders AK to be a 1/2 day park.

WDW hs much, much more. WDW will continue to add attractions slowly, Universal will quickly run out of space.

And space is one of those advantages WDW has and they can thank the dead guy for it. But with that space and size still comes a need to keep folks coming back, as well as attract new guests. That's where the "slow addition strategy" hurts.

Lastly, how many people go to USF for a whole week? Not many.

True, but I wonder how much their average "length of stay" has increased since IoA was added, vs. WDW's since AK was added...

The best case scenerio for USF is to continue to whittle a day or two from those WDW vacations. After that it's all about longevity. Winner? Disney by three lengths.

If they really do manage to continue taking a day or two from WDW vacations, won't that be a problem for WDW, since their guests' length of stay would decrease? Disney's cost structure, infrastructure and entire business model is based on longer stays. Losing a day or two, should it happen in large enough numbers, would be devastating to them.

Can't really contribute to the Blackstone/Vivendi discussion beyond uninformed speculation... it could be that Vivendi simply hasn't found a buyer willing to pay what they want, or it could be they want to have the resort's cash flow coming in over the long term, or maybe they consider the resort to be of growing value... Again, just uninformed speculation...

 

[raidermatt]

Oh, btw, have you forgotten that AK still outdrew IOA and US last year? You guys conveniently forget this or rest on the 'wait until next year' line...

If we are going to start tossing aroung attendance figures again...is it meaningless that the gap between AK and IoA was the smallest its ever been, 1.2 mil, while USF only trailed AK by 400k? Is it meaningless that Universal's attendance rose last year while Disney's fell?

I know, now you'll rest on the "International travel" line...

 

[pheneix]

>>>have you forgotten that AK still outdrew IOA and US last year?<<<

Having seen samples of all three of these park's daily attendance numbers grace my inbox numerous times this year, I can tell you that both USF and IOA outdrew Animal Kingdom each and every time, sometimes by a difference of several thousand (ever since Spring Break unnofficially started a couple of weeks ago). Even last year I'd say the tide turned right around the time that Halloween Horror Nights blew open its gates and shattered every attendance record that Universal ever held.

Eyesnur, does the name "Marcie" ring any bells?

 

[Eyesnur]

Never in my life have I referred to the 'International travel line'...But thanks for the point.

As for the figures...Yes, I think they are pretty much meaningless year to year. But the trend for a five year period can be telling and this bump in the road Disney may be feeling will eventually even out, as will USF's bump up.

is it meaningless that the gap between AK and IOA was the smallest it's ever been?

No, not at all. It simply goes to show that Universal's best park still can't outdraw WDW's worst park

 

[pheneix]

>>>But the trend for a five year period can be telling and this bump in the road Disney may be feeling will eventually even out, as will USF's bump up.<<<

There's one opinion. Many others feel that Disney is going to be in a HELL of a shock this summer when Universal Studios is firmly in the spotlight in Florida thanks to two new attractions (and at the rate Mission Space is going, Universal is in for some very smooth sailing until the end of September), and that USF just might cruise in to the #2 slot in the state of Florida. Personally I think that MGM might hold on to #2 (its performance is significantly better than Epcot or Animal Kingdom), but Epcot and Animal Kingdom are toast.

And then there's the Magic Kingdom. The fact that it's attendance is currently over twice as high as any other park in Florida really says a lot if you ask me.

 

[Planogirl]

Plus I believe that adding LOTR and Harry Potter attractions has the potential to shoot Universal to new levels. And this is from a long-time Disney fan who's frankly VERY worried nowadays.

By the way, Universal own Wet and Wild now and I understand that there's talk of building another park somewhere down the road. I hope that someone better informed can comment on this.

 

[raidermatt]

Never in my life have I referred to the 'International travel line'...But thanks for the point.

Never have I said "Wait 'till next year", so touche!

As for the figures...Yes, I think they are pretty much meaningless year to year. But the trend for a five year period can be telling and this bump in the road Disney may be feeling will eventually even out, as will USF's bump up.

Vs. 1997 numbers, AK added 7.3 million guests, while the other three parks lost 8.9 million. (MK lost 3 million, Epcot 3.5, and MGM 2.4)

IoA added 6.1 million, while USF lost 2.0 million.

SeaWorld added 100k.

Percentage wise, MK is down 17.6%, USF 22.5%, MGM 23.1%, and Epcot 29.7%. WDW as a whole is down 4.1%, Universal is up 46.1%.


Lots of ways to interpret those. I certainly can't say they prove Universal is gaining, but they definitely could be an indication of inroads being made.

No, not at all. It simply goes to show that Universal's best park still can't outdraw WDW's worst park

Actually, if we are going to be literal, it shows that IoA couldn't outdraw AK last year.

As a business, Disney must grow vs. Disney, not just stay ahead of Universal. Likewise, Universal has to be viewed as succeeding if it grows vs. Universal, even if it doesn't catch Disney in one year.

Bottom line, while the published evidence does not yet support a position that Universal is definitely hurting WDW significantly, it also does not yet support a position that WDW is chugging along as it always has.

 

[HauntedMansionFan]

Originally posted by HB2K
Shrek, Jimmy Neutron, the rumored Mummy coaster, etc.

Disney has Mickey's Philharmagic, Mission: SPACE, and the newly announced Animal Kingdom coaster. That sounds like expansion to me also. Or am I missing something?

P.S. These attractions (Shrek, JNuetron) were announced months ago and apparently close to opening (per screamscape).

These really aren't "additions" per se, just retooling of rides/shows that were already in place.

 

[HauntedMansionFan]

Originally posted by HB2K
They own the theme park rights to Harry Potter & LOR. They are hotter properties.

Actually Warner Brothers owns any attraction and characters rights to Harry Potter, they are already planning on building a theme land in their movie park in Australia. They have already had a "Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets Movie Experience". And Lord of the Rings is owned by New Line Features, whose parent company is AOL/Time Warner. So unless there is a merger in the future or some huge purchases in the works, Universal won't have a Harry Potter or LOTR attractions anytime soon.

 

[Eyesnur]

I don't disagee that USF is probably taking market share...They'd be gone if they weren't. The fact is the pie gets divided smaller with each new serious entrant - but if total visitor figures to Orlando theme parks grow, meaning WDW see's more guests than previously (generally speaking), while USF see's even a larger number uptick and obviously a larger percentage increase, because of their new marketing, hotels & park additions, does this necessarily mean USF is catching Disney?

I'm not sure that was clear. Think of WDW drawing 1000 guests per year and owning 90% of the market while SW & USF each have 5%. The next year USF makes a big effort to gain ground and successfully increases their market share from 5% to 10%, knocking WDW's market share down to (say) 80%. This is ironical because although they only owned 80% of the market (versus 90% last year) they actully did increase to 1100 guests (versus 1000 las year). Good or bad? Certainly the upstart is 'catching' the established park at the low end of the curve but can it continue to follow this curve based on the posibilities of each particular Company?

 

[HB2K]

Originally posted by Eyesnur
If AK is a half day park then certainly IOA and US fare no better. Read some comments by those not pumping USF occasionally.

Oh, btw, have you forgotten that AK still outdrew IOA and US last year? You guys conveniently forget this or rest on the 'wait until next year' line...

A) IOA is not a half a day park. They have not, to my knowledge, had the ammount of complaints regarding this topic as DAK has.

B) I don't care about people's comments or perceptions with regard to this arguement. From what I've read, IOA hasn't had the same ammount of guests complain that they feel rooked. The numbers speak, not what you or I think about the park itself (although just the attraction count proves your arguement wrong).

C) How many people attend DAK because they were forced to purchase a day for that park on their park hopper. Most people on vacation have no desire to visit the same park twice. Since you are forced to buy a minimum 4 day park hopper (unless you're crafty and can still find the three day) I'd be willing to bet whatever difference in attedance is reported between IOA & DAK is off set by this fact.

 

[HauntedMansionFan]

Originally posted by raidermatt
Vs. 1997 numbers, AK added 7.3 million guests, while the other three parks lost 8.9 million. (MK lost 3 million, Epcot 3.5, and MGM 2.4)

1997? Let's get a little more up to date, 2001 attendance figures, here are the figures and the change from 2000:

Magic Kingdom: 14,700,00 -4%
EPCOT: 9,000,000 -15%
Disney/MGM Studios: 8,300,000 -6%
Animal Kingdom: 7,700,000 -7%
Universal Studios Orlando: 7,200,000 -10%
Islands of Adventure: 5,500,000 -8%

Hmmm, by those counts it seems that the loss was pretty even, but even Disney's "worst" park brought in more then 2,000,000 visitors then Univeral's "best" park.

But let's go even further into 2002:

Magic Kingdom: 14,000,000
Epcot: 8,300,000
Disney/MGM Studios: 8,000,000
Animal Kingdom: 7,300,000
Universal Studios Orlando: 6,900,000
Islands of Adventure: 6,100,000

Hmm... AK still outperformed by almost 1.5 million. Interesting....

 

[HauntedMansionFan]

Originally posted by HB2K
A) IOA is not a half a day park. They have not, to my knowledge, had the ammount of complaints regarding this topic as DAK has.

It may not be a half day park, but you certainly don't need more then two days between both Universal parks.

C) How many people attend DAK because they were forced to purchase a day for that park on their park hopper. Most people on vacation have no desire to visit the same park twice. Since you are forced to buy a minimum 4 day park hopper (unless you're crafty and can still find the three day) I'd be willing to bet whatever difference in attedance is reported between IOA & DAK is off set by this fact.

Just because you have a 4 day hopper pass, nobody has "forced" you to spend that 4th day or any day at Animal Kingdom.

 

[HB2K]

Actually Warner Brothers owns any attraction and characters rights to Harry Potter, they are already planning on building a theme land in their movie park in Australia. They have already had a "Harry Potter & the Chamber of Secrets Movie Experience". And Lord of the Rings is owned by New Line Features, whose parent company is AOL/Time Warner. So unless there is a merger in the future or some huge purchases in the works, Universal won't have a Harry Potter or LOTR attractions anytime soon.

It's my understanding that Universal Studios owns the domestic theme park rights for both the Lord of the Rings trilogy & the Harry Potter series. I do not know about international rights, or if the deal fell through.

Should they still own the rights to these theme park properties, doesn't anyone from the car 1/2 side think this is a scarry thing? What about Pixar? If they break off from Disney (and it's looking that way), where else can they shop their movie's theme park rights?

Maybe if the stars all line up correctly, Universal will have a rodent of their own.

Anyone else?