Looks like Universal win this round

[PEC]

2011 = 17.1million or 47k/day (46,849)
2010 = 16.9 million or 46k/day (46,301)
2009 = 17.2 million or 47k/day (47,123)
2008 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,448) *366 days
2007 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,575)
2006 = 16.6 million or 45k/day (45,479)
2005 = 16.2 million or 44k/day (44,383)
2004 = 15.1 million or 41k/day (41,256) *366 days
2003 = 14.04 million or 38k/day (38,465)
2002 = 14 million or or 38k/day (38,356)
2001 = 14.7 million or 40k/day (40,273)
2000 = 15.4 million or 42k/day (42,076) *366 days
1999 = 15.2 million or 41k/day (41,643)
1998 = 15.64 million or 43k/day (42,849)
1997 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,575)
1996 = 13.8 million or 37k/day (37,704) *366 days
1995 = 12.9 million or 35k/day (35,342)
1994 = 11.2 million or 31k/day (30,684)
1993 = 12.0 million or 33k/day (32,876)
1992 = 11.5 million or 31k/day (31,420) *366 days
1991 = 18.0 million or 49k/day (49,315)

These are the annual stats for MK from 1991 to 2011 (note 2012 had 17.5). There were a couple of fluke years 1991 (20th Anniversery of MK) and 1997 (IDK) but the long term trend is up. For the ones picking 1991, why didn't they go with 1992 vs 2012 to showa 20 year trend? That would have been 11.5 million vs 17.5 million.

I'm not saying Disney could not do more with WDW, but I think complete data and not cherry picked data is the best to ensure the facts are presented most accurately.

 

[AmyB2006]

Saying Spiderman and Transformers are the same ride is no different than saying 7DMT and BTMRR are the same or LM, PoTC, IASW are the same. They utilize same/similar technology but have completely different story lines.

We actually prefer Transformers to Spiderman and think the depth and complexity of the storyline and the sophistication of the simulation is better, so don't view them as the same anymore than we would the Disney rides that utilize the same technology.

Well again, I've not ridden 7DMT yet. You might be right. I have no idea what LM or IASW is. I'm not up on all these abbreviations. LOL

When I rode Transformers, I literally could picture the Spiderman ride in my head. 'Yep, here's where spiderman jumped on the hood, instead now it's a transformer. Yep here's where the bad guy in spiderman pushed us backwards, except now it's a transformer.' I'm talking same exact in the beginning. I just think that copying exactly one ride into another like that is totally different than a ride having the same rocky exterior and similar theme like BTMRR and 7DMT. So it is different to me.

This is MY opinion. Nothing more. And you can say it's no different than Disney copying rides, and that's your opinion. So we can agree they both copy rides. But in the end, does it make Disney better than Universal, or Universal better than Disney? No, I don't think it does. It just makes them different. Does it change the fact that some people like Disney more and some like Universal more? No it doesn't.

I know you didn't specifically say that, but it's the OP topic on the thread. I just laugh at all these stats being tossed around. Every business has ebbs and flows and ups and downs. Disney will always have a fan base and Universal will too. As long as they both keep coming up with new stuff, I don't think it matters how quick or long it takes. But again, that's just me.

 

[skylizard]

I think those numbers, while correct, don't tell the full story. There is a point where capacity etc become an issue and attendance growth is dependent on expansion. Which Disney feels no need for at this time.

You are correct. Capacity seems to be becoming more of an issue now that the economy has been improving and more people are returning to the parks. (And maybe fp+ adding to that?) From the data quoted earlier, over the years MK has added about 5-10k people per day to the park. That's an awful lot of people and enough to have an impact.
At some point Disney will be forced to expand. They can't just keep shoving more and more people into the parks and expect them to be happy with longer wait lines and less pleasant experiences. I for one will give up Disney if it keeps heading down the path it's going. It's just not as enjoyable as it once was.

 

[rastuso]

Well again, I've not ridden 7DMT yet. You might be right. I have no idea what LM or IASW is. I'm not up on all these abbreviations. LOL

When I rode Transformers, I literally could picture the Spiderman ride in my head. 'Yep, here's where spiderman jumped on the hood, instead now it's a transformer. Yep here's where the bad guy in spiderman pushed us backwards, except now it's a transformer.' I'm talking same exact in the beginning. I just think that copying exactly one ride into another like that is totally different than a ride having the same rocky exterior and similar theme like BTMRR and 7DMT. So it is different to me.

This is MY opinion. Nothing more. And you can say it's no different than Disney copying rides, and that's your opinion. So we can agree they both copy rides. But in the end, does it make Disney better than Universal, or Universal better than Disney? No, I don't think it does. It just makes them different. Does it change the fact that some people like Disney more and some like Universal more? No it doesn't.

I know you didn't specifically say that, but it's the OP topic on the thread. I just laugh at all these stats being tossed around. Every business has ebbs and flows and ups and downs. Disney will always have a fan base and Universal will too. As long as they both keep coming up with new stuff, I don't think it matters how quick or long it takes. But again, that's just me.

There were rumors that Transformers was made so it could be put into the Spiderman building, if Marvel was no longer available to Uni after Disney bought them. No sure if it was true, but the two are definitely similar. I personally think Spidey is superior, with a much more immersive ride, with envirnoments, and the screens blending in, instead of being more like movie screens in a dark room.

Regardless, Universal opened Spidey 15 years ago, and Disney STILL hasn't done anything to compete with it in Orlando.

Spider-man is still the epitome of full immersive, high tech dark rides. Which explains why it literally blew my mind when it opened. It was so ahead of it's time.

-Jason

 

[rastuso]

2011 = 17.1million or 47k/day (46,849)
2010 = 16.9 million or 46k/day (46,301)
2009 = 17.2 million or 47k/day (47,123)
2008 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,448) *366 days
2007 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,575)
2006 = 16.6 million or 45k/day (45,479)
2005 = 16.2 million or 44k/day (44,383)
2004 = 15.1 million or 41k/day (41,256) *366 days
2003 = 14.04 million or 38k/day (38,465)
2002 = 14 million or or 38k/day (38,356)
2001 = 14.7 million or 40k/day (40,273)
2000 = 15.4 million or 42k/day (42,076) *366 days
1999 = 15.2 million or 41k/day (41,643)
1998 = 15.64 million or 43k/day (42,849)
1997 = 17.0 million or 46k/day (46,575)
1996 = 13.8 million or 37k/day (37,704) *366 days
1995 = 12.9 million or 35k/day (35,342)
1994 = 11.2 million or 31k/day (30,684)
1993 = 12.0 million or 33k/day (32,876)
1992 = 11.5 million or 31k/day (31,420) *366 days
1991 = 18.0 million or 49k/day (49,315)

These are the annual stats for MK from 1991 to 2011 (note 2012 had 17.5). There were a couple of fluke years 1991 (20th Anniversery of MK) and 1997 (IDK) but the long term trend is up. For the ones picking 1991, why didn't they go with 1992 vs 2012 to showa 20 year trend? That would have been 11.5 million vs 17.5 million.

I'm not saying Disney could not do more with WDW, but I think complete data and not cherry picked data is the best to ensure the facts are presented most accurately.

I agree 1991 is absolutely the wrong year to be using as the baseline. That number just seems wrong.

1997 was the 25th anniversary celebration. The cakestle didn't appear until October of 1996, and the anniversary crowds were mostly in 97. I guess the 20th anniversary did really pull in the crowds in 91, plus there was the opening of MGM, plus Universal was new. But clearly, starting at 92, there is steady growth, taking out the 25th impact.

Add in the fact that many people that give a click to the other 3 parks ends up in WDW by the end of the day, I would definitely assume the daily number of guests in the Magic Kingdom is MUCH higher now than it was in 1991.

Then take into account that there was only one new E-ticket attraction added AT ALL in that time frame, which was Splash in 92, and no other real significant attraction capacity at all, and you easily see why the MK needed FP+ so desperately to socialize rides.

Universal has been adding plenty of rides to keep up with their attendance, allowing them to continue offering their excellent FOL perk to resort guests.

And really, even IF Avatarland is "all that", even though I can't see it will be, since it seems the water dark ride is gone, and it is just Soarin 2.0, and Soarin' is lost on me, it will just send folks there for a few rides, then they will go right to MK, and could make things even WORSE for the MK.

The night time show at AK is critical to perhaps make a significant impact on MK crowding. There is LOTS of AK capacity left stagnant at night. It is really the only large amount of guest capacity WDW can get cheaply. Although it isn't going to be cheap because they need the whole land to lure folks there, then the show to keep them there until close.

Universal has the same issue. I'm still amazed they don't have a really top notch evening show to keep people at the park. Maybe this new one will do the trick.

-Jason

 

[clsteve]

I think those numbers, while correct, don't tell the full story. There is a point where capacity etc become an issue and attendance growth is dependent on expansion. Which Disney feels no need for at this time. On the whole, Disney has dominated in the attendance figures, over doubling up on IOA in 2012. Until those numbers get close or IOA or Universal overtake DHS or AK, I don't think Disney will panic.

Both those parks, especially IOA, are certainly in reach and Harry Potter has a huge part in that.

Those who claim that Disney has become more crowded are not off base. Obviously Disney has more land to disperse people, parks or otherwise. When compared to Universal as a whole, there are WAY more people in the Disney Parks. By comparison, it can feel more crowded in and around the parks. This is one of the major reasons the experience at Universal can be better. Its easier to enjoy a park that has 8 Million less people over a year than MK.

The fact is, Universal has a lot of catch up to do and we as the consumer benefit.

Until those numbers get closer, I don't think Disney will react and that is unfortunate to those who look at rides as the primary attraction of Disneyworld.

Personally, I enjoy the environment Disney has created. I love Hogsmead and look forward to Diagon alley.

It's understandable why people look at attendance figures- it's an easy comparison. But, they really don't mean anything unless you look at them along with revenue growth and profitability growth as a percentage. Plus, are the higher percentages reflected by guests spending more or by price increases. The Execs could care less about any increase in attendance that doesn't reflect an increase in profitability and growth in occupancy at the Resorts.

We tend to look at attendance to compare the 2. Disney Execs (and especially the Board) are looking at the difference in revenue and profitability growth between them and USF- they know they have a bigger footprint and the attendance figures will always point to them. Plus, is any growth at USF having an impact on length of stay at Disney. If USF is growing organic revenue and profitability (meaning, without price increases) at a higher rate ---- that's where they see each other in competition.

 

[Tonyz]

While Universal Studios has absolutely nothing that interests me in the least, I'm sure that the Harry Potter world is beautiful. However, I don't care about HP, so it would do nothing for me.

I also don't think it's fair to compare Harry Potter to New Fantasyland. Harry Potter was an entire new park. NFL was an expansion of one part of one park.

If anything we should compare TWWoHP to the last theme park that Disney World built... Animal Kingdom. But then it isn't much of a contest, is it?

 

[mesaboy2]

While Universal Studios has absolutely nothing that interests me in the least, I'm sure that the Harry Potter world is beautiful. However, I don't care about HP, so it would do nothing for me.

I also don't think it's fair to compare Harry Potter to New Fantasyland. Harry Potter was an entire new park. NFL was an expansion of one part of one park.

If anything we should compare TWWoHP to the last theme park that Disney World built... Animal Kingdom. But then it isn't much of a contest, is it?

This is not correct. HP is a new land within an existing theme park, and is of the same general size and scope of NFL.

 

[clsteve]

While Universal Studios has absolutely nothing that interests me in the least, I'm sure that the Harry Potter world is beautiful. However, I don't care about HP, so it would do nothing for me.

I also don't think it's fair to compare Harry Potter to New Fantasyland. Harry Potter was an entire new park. NFL was an expansion of one part of one park.

If anything we should compare TWWoHP to the last theme park that Disney World built... Animal Kingdom. But then it isn't much of a contest, is it?

You do not need a completely separate Park Admission for DA. So, it's not a valid comparison.

 

[Tonyz]

This is not correct. HP is a new land within an existing theme park, and is of the same general size and scope of NFL.

Ah... I thought HP was an entire new "world" in Island of Adventure.

Forgive my ignorance. I thought the worlds/islands/whatever in IoA worked like the four parks in Disney.

 

[mesaboy2]

Ah... I thought HP was an entire new "world" in Island of Adventure.

Forgive my ignorance. I thought the worlds/islands/whatever in IoA worked like the four parks in Disney.

Each "island" is roughly comparable to a land in MK. IoA is not that huge.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

HP at IOA built one new ride, repurposed two previously existing ones, and added a heck of a lot of atmosphere (and shops).

It used to be part of that "Renaissance Faire on steroids" portion of IOA. The restaurant was previously there, it was just some mockup of a renaissance dining hall with turkey legs and such.

It's not a whole park. It didnt' even replace an entire land, just part of one.

 

[TwinPrincessMermaids]

Hey, while we are on the subject of duplicating rides, I'd like to order a double of TSMM thank you very much! Next door would be fine. Two where they are now would be fine for that matter!

 

[Jennasis]

Magic Kingdom has three of the exact same rides in 1 park. Astro orbiter, magic carpets of Aladdin, and Dumbo.

 

[Tonyz]

Haha, well looks like my argument just got torn to shreds!

 

[morethananyonex]

Magic Kingdom has three of the exact same rides in 1 park. Astro orbiter, magic carpets of Aladdin, and Dumbo.

Thank you! I was reading this thread wondering how the argument kept being made that Universal has 2 similar attractions so close together without mention of 3 near identical rides in MK, with a 4th at AK.

I completely understand that people have their own opinions about each park. What I don't get is how people can find flaws with one park (either of them) but not see the same flaw in their favourite. It makes almost as much sense as saying I prefer Disney because it rains too much at Universal, or vice versa.

 

[rastuso]

Thank you! I was reading this thread wondering how the argument kept being made that Universal has 2 similar attractions so close together without mention of 3 near identical rides in MK, with a 4th at AK.

I completely understand that people have their own opinions about each park. What I don't get is how people can find flaws with one park (either of them) but not see the same flaw in their favourite. It makes almost as much sense as saying I prefer Disney because it rains too much at Universal, or vice versa.

I have never seen someone say something bad about Disney that was clearly also applicable to Universal.

However, there are TONS of people who blindly badmouth practically everything Universal does, even if their argument is positively silly, since Disney does the same thing.

They say there just isn't anything at Universal that interests them. I simply don't understand that statement. No honest person can just love everything Disney does, especially adding in Avatar, and things such as Aerosmith's RnRC, and Soarin and TT, and then just say Universal is crap, all around.

It shows why Disney really doesn't expand. When you have a large base that will simply love everything you do, and would likely hate if Universal did the exact same thing, you don't need to try hard.

Does anyone honestly believe if WWoHP wasn't build EXACT on Disney property, all the Uni haters would be saying stuff like "Disney did such an amazing job with the narrow walkways. It just makes it that much more immersive." Instead of what we hear now that "the narrow walkways are just soooo crowded. It really turns me off of HP, and I'm happy to go ride 30 year old rides for a week instead."

I don't see the UNI haters say POTC sucks at Disneyland because New Orleans Square is sooooo crowded and cramped.

Yesterday someone argued they felt Universal was just trying to grab money.

I mean really, you can't make this stuff up.

And there are FOUR of the same ride at MK. Remember, there are 2 Dumbos.

-Jason

 

[Jennasis]

And there are FOUR of the same ride at MK. Remember, there are 2 Dumbos.

-Jason

I was being kind. ;-)

 

[TwinPrincessMermaids]

Magic Kingdom has three of the exact same rides in 1 park. Astro orbiter, magic carpets of Aladdin, and Dumbo.

How bout Living with the Land, the Mexican Boat ride, IASM? and POTC and Maelstrom?

The CyberSpace Mountain and new Innoventions Thrillz simulator?

Lots of examples of similar repeats with alternating themes. I like it all for the most part (with a frowny face for HP and overly wizardy stuff.) Eventually, Universal may have to say buh bye to Spiderman, so putting their own Transformers similar ride up is a great idea. (Plus isn't one at IOA and one at USS? Not everyone goes to both...)

 

[Disfan1968]

For my two cents, sometimes rehashes of the same ride with a different theme are ok as it allows for shorter lines in general.

In my mind, this is OK if...

A. The duplicate rides do not represent a redundantly huge monetary investment.
B. The duplicate rides do not take up an inordinately large and valuable space.

After all, there are only so many ways to spin kids around and around.