Jim Hill Piece on Universal vs Disney in Orlando

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by Planogirl
So that is what RnR Coaster looks like? Wow! And that's Six Flags Holland? Cool. Thanks for posting those pictures Spaceman Spiff.

http://www.wdwmagicmedia.com/construc.htm

...you can find pictures of RNRC before the built the building around it. Really not much to it. One Cobra Roll(two half loops) and a corkscrew.

 

[raidermatt]

WDW's attendance dropped 7.4% in 2001.

Universal Florida's dropped 9.2%.

Universal did not gain ground last year, and, in fact, lost ground. Despite having unique roller coasters and despite heavy discounting.

Now, I'm not saying Universal is worthless, or that they aren't doing some good things. There are certainly lots of people who do think Universal's attractions are better than Disney's.

Of course, there are lots of people who prefer going to a zoo, park or beach as well.

Disney has never succeeded by trying to "out-hip" others. Its not profitable and its not a solid long-term strategy. They have always produced products that appeal to the young ones, and then to their parents. This has worked extremely well because these are the people that spend more money while on vacation, and there's a heck of a lot more of them than there are teenagers.

Disney's problem is that they are focusing too much on short term expenses and disregarding the guests that have always been their bread and butter. Its the same thing that happened to Epcot. They abandoned their strategy of providing innovative family entertainment and let the park stagnate. Now, they are fishing for solutions, thinking that thrill rides are the answer.

These problems have nothing to do with outside companies. Universal is not causing Epcot's attendance to plummet. Universal can build all of the coasters it wants. If Disney stuck to its guns, and committed to their long-term strategy, WDW would have no problem at all keeping and even increasing its customer base. Universal can also grow by sticking with their strategy, which is clearly more teen/thrill focused.

Universal is not really doing what Disney used to do. Universal is doing what they have committed to do. They have been reasonably successful, and certainly seem to be poised to build on that success. Great for them. But Disney would be having problems even if Universal was nothing more than an old Drive-in movie theater.

 

[Bob O]

DizvilTT I have ridden Batwing and have seen the others. It was an ok ride but nothing impressive as are none of vekoma's(Superman Ride of Steel as a far more impressive ride at SFA) coasters and few if any are rated as excellant coasters on any listing of the top coasters by coaster enthusiasts. Now B & M has their own flying coaster in GA which if reports are true is a mjor improvement in both ride elements and the ease of loading/unloading which increases rider capacity.
Disney isnt my enemy and ive ridden numerous vekoma coasters and while some are ok none are excellant coasters. They are popular because they cost less and is why so many SF parks have them. I perfer the disney parks overall but they do need to improve their product,escpecially for more non-children related attractions.
Raidermatt the numbers you have are different than recent numbers in a newsweek article. And disney is having problems and Universal is making their problems look that much worse with the additions to their parks, be it IOA or the recent attractions/upcoming ones that have been announced.
I have seen both DD and the Hulk on the discovery/travel channels. Both tend to show the same shows and have featured both coasters.

 

[raidermatt]

Bob-

What Newsweek did was compare 1999 to 2001, which would normally be a fair comparison. However, 1999 was the first year of operation for IoA, and it was a partial year for that park. IoA's attendance was only 3.4 million. It went to 6.0 million in 2000, and fell to 5.5 million in 2001.

Had IoA been open a full year in 1999, and drawn 5.5 million, Universal Florida's change from 1999 to 2001 would have been a 6% drop (nearly identical to Disney's), not an 11% increase.

Newsweek didn't even mention a 2000 to 2001 comparison, apparently since it didn't fit the premise of its article.

 

[DizVilnTT]

Alrighty then, here's the answers to recent threads:

EUROPA:

"Disney does not have a ride like Jurassic Park and yes I love it. Grizzly River Run is that in Florida? I was comparing Florida parks. Now think about Popeye and that lame excuse of a ride in Animal Kingdom. Which one do you think is better again?"

Sorry about that. I didn't know that we were just comparing Florida parks. And yes, I agree Popeye is MUCH better than Kali River Rapids at AK.

"Just what indoor attraction do you think Disney has the compares to Poseidon's Furry??"

I actually like MuppetVision better than Poseidon, but if you're just talking plain theater attractions (ie no 3-D, simulator, etc.) then you got me.

"Attack??
I think that I said if Diller gets control that Universal could become the park to go to in Orlando 10 years down the road. Merely an opinion only time will tell. How is that forcing Testtrack to accept anything? Hot under the collar?? Speaking directly to someone does not constitute an attack. If you could please show me where I've done such a thing?"

Yes, I agree "attack" wasn't the right choice of vocabulary. I was trying to say that you seem a little too serious in your opinions, that's all. Again, I apologize for coming off so rude. And I am indeed sorry to (I think) Bob O or JacksBack for claiming they were on drugs. Anyway, let's move on:

Wow!!!! Kudos to Spaceman Spiff AND Europa for pointing that Superman ride out to me! I never knew.

Spaceman Spiff:

"That's right, Incredible Huk is so low-tech because its operating system had to have its own generator because every launch out of the Gamma Ray Tube would cause a black out in the surrounding areas. Not to mention the fact that this system was specially created by Universal Creatice/B&M. Unlike RnR, The Hulk truly is a one of a kind exprience. The Hulk was not meant to be hidden inside a building filled with cardbard cutouts. B&M even made sure that the coaster was as loud as possible so that it could be heard all over the park. Next time you ever decide to grace Universal with your glowing persona check it out, the roar of the green beast it another unique effect that UC wanted for this "un-themed" juggernaut. Hulk is listed on many internet and coaster clubs and fan sites top 10 coasters in the USA, um... where is RnR again? Now unlike you I admit that I do have a preference in parks and Universal by far is my favorite. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy other parks for their ability to create incredible attractions. I think RnR is great and truly enjoy the exprience for what it is, but when you compare The Hulk to a wild mouse coaster I'm afraid I will take you to the mat time and time again. Simple is definitely something The Hulk is not."

Oh boy, here goes.
1. You see, Universal came up with this system because the newer LIMs/LSMs couldn't propel a train of that size up an incline while it was moving. They used the old motorized wheel technology that's BEEN AROUND SINCE THE LATE 60s! It is NOT high tech. And just because it's powerful, doesn't mean it's cutting edge. If you had an old 1970s stereo syestem (with the huge counsols) and today's stereo system, which one takes up more space? The old one. Which one takes up more power than five of the other ones COMBINED? The old one. Which is more high tech and cutting edge? The new one. Same thing here. Hulk is the old one, LIMs and LSMs the new ones.

2. What? You actually think that a louder roar from a train means that it is better themed than a roller coaster with: An actual preshow to explain the plot, a killer loading area, a chance to see the coaster take off down the highway, five stereos on EACH SEAT for music accompanyment, a traffic light, traffic signs, and a killer unload area? Wow, you REALLY praise Universal.

3. You say something about the Hulk being in the top ten, and RNRC isn't. Okay, DID YOU EVEN PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT I WAS SAYING? I only said that RNRC was better THEMED! I never said anything about it being a better ride. And yes, I HAVE been to IOA and I HAVE ridden Hulk well over a dozen times and yes I do think it is a better ride, BUT THAT WAS NOT WHAT I STATED EARLIER. You're going off-subject.

4. Did you just call RNRC a Wid Mouse, or are you referring to the point I made about the system? Well anyway, I WAS NOT COMPARING THE HULK WITH A WILD MOUSE. I WAS COMPARING THE SYSTEM IT USES TO THE WHEEL SYSTEM FOUND ON THE WILD MOUSES. Maybe you should go back and reread what I said earlier, because to me it seems like you didn't understand it at all.

Oh yeah, and I agree with everything Raidermatt said in his two recent posts. This is a guy with insight! Kudos!

 

[EUROPA]

I hate that this has turned into "this" is better then "that". I guess I'm to blame for some of that. I just honestly think that some people have a hidden agenda with Universal sometimes. Every new person I turn on to Universal that were normally Disney only fans have loved both of the parts are planning on returning. When I see people post that they hate Universal or found that all of the rides sucked, I just have to question that. What am I or millions of other people seeing that they are not??


Trying to discuss which park is down or up in attendance is almost impossible. Due the fact that neither Disney nor Universal release those types of numbers. Even when they do give estimates they have been known to fib about them as well, or at least I think that is what AV has told us.

Either way you slice it, up or down. I like the way that Universal is trying to win my business better then what Disney is doing. Will that help them in the long run or hurt them? Only time will tell.

 

[raidermatt]

Trying to discuss which park is down or up in attendance is almost impossible. Due the fact that neither Disney nor Universal release those types of numbers. Even when they do give estimates they have been known to fib about them as well, or at least I think that is what AV has told us.

True they are not exact. But they are still useful in looking at trends. They are most likely at least in the ballpark.

Still, if one chooses to not accept them because they are not verifiable, that's fine. But that also means that when either a trade publication or Disney says that WDW's attendance is down, that info should not be accepted either.

If we go that route, we can't really even discuss WDW's attendance problem, because we can't accept that they even have a problem.

Either way you slice it, up or down. I like the way that Universal is trying to win my business better then what Disney is doing.

Nothing wrong with that. If nobody felt that way, Universal wouldn't be in existence. But that still doesn't mean there are not people who legitimately feel that Universal stinks. We know there are those that think WDW stinks. Labeling everyone who feels that way as "somebody with an agenda" doesn't really accomplish much.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

DizVilnTT, check your PM Box

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by raidermatt
True they are not exact. But they are still useful in looking at trends. They are most likely at least in the ballpark.

Still, if one chooses to not accept them because they are not verifiable, that's fine. But that also means that when either a trade publication or Disney says that WDW's attendance is down, that info should not be accepted either.

If we go that route, we can't really even discuss WDW's attendance problem, because we can't accept that they even have a problem.

I'd hope that both companies would lie to increase their attendance not decrease...But with Esiner who really knows. Maybe it was a scheme to lower the stock prices so he could buy more shares.

We know there are those that think WDW stinks.

Who? Where? let me at them....!

Labeling everyone who feels that way as "somebody with an agenda" doesn't really accomplish much.

I said..." I just honestly think that some people have a hidden agenda..."

Which is why I don't respond to most universal bashing that I see.

 

[Bob O]

DizvilTT-The preshow for RNRC is very lame and after the first time a total waste and they should allow you to bypass it to save it. The loading area is just that, a place to wait till you ride, no more no less. The coaster is going up a track and isnt on a highway. The stereo system is nice, if they could just change the music selections. Traffic signs, traffic lights "oh wow" and nothing special at all to unload you into a gift shop, how original!
The theming and ride elements go into the rides total package and even if you like to cheap cutouts/lights it is still a medicore ride compared to either Hulk or DD.
The latest awards by Amusement Business today in their golden ticket awards for top steel coasters show DD as the 11th rated coaster and the Hulk as 17th rated and not surprisingly no RNRC to be found.
Now if only disney could build just one coaster to compete with the best in the business. Not numerous, just one!!!
Raidermatt-Numbers can be spun in numerous ways but by disney having to shut hotels and stop other ones in construction is a sure sign their attendance is problematic and their is little on the horrizon to see things improve, unless of course cutbacks are improvements.

 

[DizVilnTT]

Simply amazing.

Alright, people. I'll restste what I said earlier. I do not prefer one company over another. I'm like the one-eyed man, I only see the truth and nothing beyond. I like parks in general, not companies in particular. I try not to (though sometimes i do) look beyond the truth to the realm of opinions and feelings, like those people with their "second eye," or the sight of reasons behind this or the reason why they did that. Ok? Good.

Furthermore, I didn't want to believe it. I really didn't. But it seems that Testtrack was right. In my posts I have criticized both Disney and Universal. From the Universal people, I got hate mail, death threats, questions about my religion, and I am "misguided," "ill-informed," "stupid," "childish," etc. From the Disney people? Diddly-squat. No complaints. Why? Well, in my time in boards and websites here's what I've found:

-Disney fans are very protective of the Disney name, but they won't verbally attack someone else from another company. They'll spend their time talking about their last trip to WDW or construction at DCA, etc. If another Disney fan questions their beliefs in a certain ride, they'll debate it. Example: "I don't like Timekeeper." "Why?" "Well, it's a bit dull, and the CircleVision 360 never fascinated me." "Really? I think it's hilarious, even though it's been done before in some way." And on like that. They know what is done well and what is done poorly. They complain about Eisner and Pressler. They praise TOT and M:S. And they state their opinions about these topics.
-Universal fans, on the other hand know one thing:
1. Everything Universal does is better than Disney because....
I'm not talking about people like Europa or Landbaron, who are good guys and both know both sides of the fence, just the people who go into chats with people just to bash Disney. Example: "I don't like Timekeeper." "Why?" "Because the technology is so much worse than Poseidon, which is much better show." Disney people just talk about the facts of Disney rides, Universal fans always compare the two companies and claim that Universal is better in every way shape and form. Even in this thread. Why are the Universal fans even here? This section is titled "DISNEY NEWS AND RUMORS." And don't give me, when this thread is about...NO!!!!!! The thread was an announcement that Jim Hill posted an article about Central Florida! Then suddenly people are saying "Oh Universal will be so much better than Disney in ten years," and then here comes JacksBack: "The last two years Universal has been kicking Disney's butt because this is so much better and that...", then all hell broke loose. I came in just to point a few things out, and suddenly I'm a Disney lover because I said bad things about Universal!!!!! Because of this, as of now, I will now officially become pro-Disney and anti-Universal because of the horrible treatment I've received on this thread. Testtrack was right, you Universal worshippers won't rest until you have EVERYONE believing that Universal is better than Disney because.... And if they disagree with you, you yell heresy and verbally attack them!!!!! You people are so blinded by your arrogance and love for Universal.
AND IN THE LAND OF THE BLIND, THE ONE-EYED MAN IS KING

 

[EUROPA]

Hey DizVilnTT stick around long enough and you will see it goes both ways with Disney and Universal around here. All though Universal does seem to get the short end of the stick on these boards. For many reasons I'm sure. Things like being the new kids on the block (compared to Disney) or people just not wanting to experience anything but Disney. Then there are the "Disney Zombies"(stick around I'm sure one will post here soon) as my wife and I like to call them. There are also people who have just never experienced Universal so they really have no opinion. I'm sure there are a handful of people who really just don't like Universal as raidermatt has said.
I try not to get involved in to many of these types of thread because you are not going to change anyones mind.

After all this is the "DIS", not the "UIS".

Some of us who love both parks and see the competition between the two companies as a good thing for the consumer. (Come on big bucks no whammies...we want an attraction war between ME and Diller)

I've been to many parks as well and think that I can recognize a great coaster from a great themed attraction like Disney and Universal can both pull off. Just seems to me that Universal is currently trying harder then Disney. I hope for all of our sakes that Disney gets it together and start putting money back into their parks in Florida.

Got you PM as well everything is cool!

 

[Planogirl]

I agree with Europa. I've seen some Disney fans go into complete tirades against Universal and some have admitted that they haven't even been there. Luckily, the Disney zombiehood is kept minimal on this board but in some other places, it can be strong!

I haven't been to Universal yet so I refuse to blast them. At this point, I mostly want them to do well to hopefully light a fire under Michael Eisner and company. And after we visit Universal, I hope to add these parks to our regular agenda. I love theme parks period.

 

[Brian430]

When you consider the long-term prospect each company has for future growth, Universal looks like a more formidable threat than ever.

In recent years, Universal has acquired more than 2,000 additional acres on which to grow, while Disney has allocated its largest chunk of property for the development of a subdivision.

At WDW, 9,000 acres have been set aside for Celebration, which is a Del Webb-style planned community. The problem is 9,000 acres represents most of the land WDW had for long-term growth.

While Disney owns 30,000 acres, 10,000 have been set aside as wildlife habitat. This leaves 20,000 total acres on which WDW can build. Subtract the 9,000-acre subdivision and you have 11,000 acres on which to build.

Sounds like a lot of land, but given the fact WDW has already constructed 24 large-scale resorts, five golf courses, three water parks, four theme parks, a camp ground, a multi-sports facility, two night-time districts and a large shopping complex …11,000 acres doesn’t seem so big anymore.

Even the Orlando Sentinel has reported that Disney has room for one more theme park. Universal’s master plan calls for two more theme parks, hotels, golf courses and maybe another water park.

The reality is that WDW had sold off its most valuable asset – its land. I contend most of what makes WDW feel so "magical" is its massive size – not just its theme parks. It’s the fact that these theme parks are tucked away from civilization and spread throughout a massive property dedicated to vacations and entertainment.

Let’s face it, if Islands of Adventure sat in a distant forest and could only be reached by taking a boat ride across a 1,000-acre lake, it would feel pretty darn "magical" too.

Step on Disney property and you were in a land of make-believe that expanded far beyond the borders of the its theme parks. Now WDW developments are starting to appear on top of each other creating a very urban feel. Each new development makes WDW seem smaller not bigger. Look at Pop Century’s tight proximity to the Caribbean Beach Resort. CBR once was once surrounded by forests. Now when you look to the south you see the eye soar of another garish discount motel and its enormous black top parking lot. There at least 10 other examples of a newfound urban density at WDW that most of us can site as well.

Maybe I’m crazy, but I’m a big fan of the concept of WDW; of 30,000 acres devoted to fun and escapism. And I rue the day that WDW gave away that land to build an albeit nice, but a very ordinary planned community.

These days, anyone with financing can build or buy a world-class attraction. Few, if any, companies can place those attractions on a property as large (and thefore as unique) as WDW. Which is why the decision to give away nearly half of their useable land, was a decision to give away their most powerful competitive advantage. Universal couldn't be happier with Celebration, I'm sure.

I keep reading posts on this site about how Disney is sacrificing its long term value in sake some short-term profits. Well my friends, you will not find a more damaging example of this new new short-sighted business mentality than in Celebration. Parceling their property into business units that fall outside of WDW's core competency is utter lunacy.

And 10 years from now, when WDW has the same urban density as Universal (and therefore nothing unique to offer), Disney management will learn the painful lesson that the whole truly was greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[Bob O]

DizVilnTT-I have no idea who is sending you the messages and to send threatening messages is childish to say the least and should never be condoned. I would agree with Europa that the door swings both ways for people who protect either Universal/Disney and the disney backers will act in the same manner as the pro-universal people.
I prefer Disney over Universal when it comes to the overall quality of the parks and guest experience but from what ive seen of late is a unwillingness of disney to improve their product while Universal will, also disney is happy to open incomplete parks while having guests pay full admission until the park is completed decades later. I hope the competition will eventually force disney to restore the hours of their parks and improve them in a more timely manner and not let them slide like they have.

 

[Bob O]

DizVilnTT-I have no idea who is sending you the messages and to send threatening messages is childish to say the least and should never be condoned. I would agree with Europa that the door swings both ways for people who protect either Universal/Disney and the disney backers will act in the same manner as the pro-universal people.
I prefer Disney over Universal when it comes to the overall quality of the parks and guest experience but from what ive seen of late is a unwillingness of disney to improve their product while Universal will, also disney is happy to open incomplete parks while having guests pay full admission until the park is completed decades later. I hope the competition will eventually force disney to restore the hours of their parks and improve them in a more timely manner and not let them slide like they have.

 

[Brian430]

When you consider the long-term prospect each company has for future growth, Universal looks like a more formidable threat than ever.

In recent years, Universal has acquired more than 2,000 additional acres on which to grow, while Disney has allocated its largest chunk of property for the development of a subdivision.

At WDW, 9,000 acres have been set aside for Celebration, which is a Del Webb-style planned community. The problem is 9,000 acres represents most of the land WDW had for long-term growth.

While Disney owns 30,000 acres, 10,000 have been set aside as wildlife habitat. This leaves 20,000 total acres on which WDW can build. Subtract the 9,000-acre subdivision and you have 11,000 acres on which to build.

Sounds like a lot of land, but given the fact WDW has already constructed 24 large-scale resorts, five golf courses, three water parks, four theme parks, a camp ground, a multi-sports facility, two night-time districts and a large shopping complex …11,000 acres doesn’t seem so big anymore.

Even the Orlando Sentinel has reported that Disney has room for one more theme park. Universal’s master plan calls for two more theme parks, hotels, golf courses and maybe another water park.

The reality is that WDW had sold off its most valuable asset – its land. I contend most of what makes WDW feel so "magical" is its massive size – not just its theme parks. It’s the fact that these theme parks are tucked away from civilization and spread throughout a massive property dedicated to vacations and entertainment.

Let’s face it, if Islands of Adventure sat in a distant forest and could only be reached by taking a boat ride across a 1,000-acre lake, it would feel pretty darn "magical" too.

Step on Disney property and you were in a land of make-believe that expanded far beyond the borders of the its theme parks. Now WDW developments are starting to appear on top of each other creating a very urban feel. Each new development makes WDW seem smaller not bigger. Look at Pop Century’s tight proximity to the Caribbean Beach Resort. CBR once was once surrounded by forests. Now when you look to the south you see the eye soar of another garish discount motel and its enormous black top parking lot. There at least 10 other examples of a newfound urban density at WDW that most of us can site as well.

Maybe I’m crazy, but I’m a big fan of the concept of WDW; of 30,000 acres devoted to fun and escapism. And I rue the day that WDW gave away that land to build an albeit nice, but a very ordinary planned community.

These days, anyone with financing can build or buy a world-class attraction. Few, if any, companies can place those attractions on a property as large (and thefore as unique) as WDW. Which is why the decision to give away nearly half of their useable land, was a decision to give away their most powerful competitive advantage. Universal couldn't be happier with Celebration, I'm sure.

I keep reading posts on this site about how Disney is sacrificing its long term value in sake some short-term profits. Well my friends, you will not find a more damaging example of this new new short-sighted business mentality than in Celebration. Parceling their property into business units that fall outside of WDW's core competency is utter lunacy.

And 10 years from now, when WDW has the same urban density as Universal (and therefore nothing unique to offer), Disney management will learn the painful lesson that the whole truly was greater than the sum of its parts.

 

[Testtrack321]

With 2,000 acres of land, I cannot see Universal building a golf course, hotels, two more parks, and the Tashma Hall. Plus, Disney is reportedly working on two more concepts to use at a latter date as parks. WDW isn't full, and Universal's land purchassing won't buy them all that, especially with the Junk that Viviendi is in now.

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with Brian that a great part of disney was the escape from reality aspect. That once you were on the property you were in your own world and the building of cheap hotels like the All Stars/PopCentury and encroaching non-wdw property is a negative. The thing i found bad about Universal while staying at the Portifino(great hotel) was hearing sirens from passing emergency vehicles and looking out the windows and seeing the main street which you never saw at disney.
I think Universal with the Lockheed property has alot of room for expansion but disney has made a bad decision IMHO with building celebration on their property(and then screwing/lying to the people who bought in). But disney also has land for expansion but IMHO both companies should be thinking about fixing up their current parks before any thought is made of building something new. With the current trends i would think expansion into new parks would be a time off,escpecially for disney which has gaping holes in their parks and have overbuilt hotel capacity.

 

[EUROPA]

Testtrack321...according to what I hear, Universal has enough land that the next Two Hotels and the Third park will not even touch the Lockheed property that the other poster was talking about. So yes they do have enough property to do everything they have planned and more.


Just as Jim has mentioned in the article one of Viendi's plans is to demereg the Universal portion of Viendi's assest and let Diller(ME's old boss) run it. By the way just Like Disney Universal's parks return a very good profit. If they demege they won't have all of the baggege like Disney still does. Viendi's other plans is to sell off any portion of the assets that are hurting the company, Universal Entertainment which includes the Parks, Production(Movies and TV), and the lukrative Record lables that are under the unbrella is not the assets that are hurting them though.