Motley Fool - predicts EPCOT will be WDW's least visited park by 2020

[lockedoutlogic]

Does it really matter if Epcot is the least attended? I would think what is most important is income versus operating expenses. If Epcot has lower attendance but the average visitor spends more money, then why should Disney care?

Well...Disney would care for the operational cost...and we should care because it provides stability long term.

If you want attendance in order of overhead cost...it SHOULD go like this:
1. AK
2. Epcot
3. MK
4. Studios

Perhaps mk and Epcot are swapped...but if you're objective it's not hard to see what costs the most to run.

And my belief: Epcot is the greatest amusement park ever built and nothing else will ever compare...so yeah...anything that cheapens it/diminishes it is of concern.

 

[Angie789]

This really is a "no duh" prediction. I will say that, despite the fact the DISboarders call both AK and DHS half day parks, Epcot is the only park that I hear people in the real world encouraging others to avoid altogether.

We are skipping it for our upcoming trip (and for the foreseeable future). Other than Soarin', there is just nothing there that is a big draw for my family - not even Frozen, even though I have a 4 year old daughter. We liked Test Track fine, but don't feel a strong need to do it again. Future World is a boring, empty shell. World Showcase has a cool factor, but we don't feel the enchantment that others seem to there (maybe because we travel internationally? or because we hate shopping? or because all of us are a little too type A for a park that seems to be made for moseying around?). Whatever the reason, until Epcot sees some major changes, we won't be back.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

True to some extent but when combined with criticism that the park is stagnant (hard to argue with as they continue to take things offline with no grand vision announced for its future) you can start to get a stigma attached to the park (like the Animal Kingdom, "half-day park" thing).

I find World showcase quite timeless and i don't think Epcot even needs any expansions like DHS is getting but my lord they are letting future world go downhill fast.

Its probably the area i tend to skip the most on my visits.

Whats frustrating is that i don't think it would break the bank to fix most of the issues

A coaster park needs lots of change to stay relevant. Disney less. MK needs very little. Epcot also doesn't need constant change. But the two parts are very different. World Showcase needs almost no changes by design. It could use a new country or two but I don't think that will happen any time soon. The world is a different place and countries are not lining up to fork over the money while giving Disney the control and profits. Now Future World could use some changes, but it isn't bad now. I think Disney knows that Epcot can remain more static than the other parks. I loved it when I was there for Food and Wine recently.

Epcot just needs some reinvestment. World showcase is pretty good as is maybe a few minor changes and it's great.

Future world however is not very futuristic at all anymore. Innoventions is basically a shell. Wonders of life a festival pavilion, and imagination is also not nearly what it once was. I agree that Epcot doesn't need expansion which it really doesn't have a lot of room for expansion anyways.

This is the area that either needs improvement or complete change, but it isn't critical. There is much to do that people love.

That's not really a big deal

This is where you are wrong, unfortunately. When there is a Frozen ride in Norway, a huge percentage of all the families with little girls that make Magic Kingdom's attendance numbers the highest in the world by far, will HAVE to visit Epcot. It is that big a deal to these kids and even some adults. Little Elsa's were EVERYWHERE at the Halloween Party this year and all over the U.S. for Halloween. Frozen is said to still be one of the biggest sellers this Christmas. Frozen fever is still going strong and is unlikely to abate any time soon. Just look around at stores in your area and look at wait times for Anna and Elsa. The wait times were huge and far beyond the other princesses this October. A Frozen ride is going to give Epcot a huge boost even if those families aren't interested in much else. I say unfortunately because this may mean nothing else will need to be done anytime soon.

 

[Planogirl]

Epcot is a sad version of what it once was so this doesn't surprise me. It needs a lot. Many people tell me that it's dull and I agree. World Showcase is fine for now but otherwise?

 

[DDLand]

This guy seems like he's fairly plugged into the fan community. He could honestly be just some guy reading WDWmagic and sharing his opinions. Funny.

Well he seems to be making a big deal out of nothing. This would be like Disney complaining that Disneyland didn't grow as fast as DCA when it was being upgraded and Cars Land opened. It's just common sense of sorts. I will say there's a possibility that things don't turn out for him...

1) DAK may not surpass Epcot. Avatar should have a positive effect, and the other park enhancements are awesome. However, it's conceivable (and the author's handling of this is crap) that Frozen could considerably grow Epcot attendance. Frozen as much as he'd love it to be the case, isn't over. In many ways it's just getting started. This is another reason that I think he's a Disney fan. He takes an almost illogical swipe at Frozen. A Maelstrom fan perhaps? Frozen 2 could also be out by 2020 further reigniting interest in the attraction.
2) New attractions at Epcot could be launched. I think Shanghai has something to do with further investment. I'd imagine that since they already have multiple buildings already to go, they could install new attractions in like two years. Much less than say the construction of a full land.

Though I actually found myself agreeing with @Yellowstonetim a fair amount. It's a well known fact Epcot has the highest per capita spending, guests stay longer at Epcot than the other two laggards, and that the financial health of Epcot is secure. One has to be the bottom, and if it's at the bottom because one of their other parks is successful what's the big deal?

Of course it could do more to host large groups of people. I think that's where the biggest criticism could be. Epcot needs to do its part to alleviate the attendance problems at MK, but it's not a rush with the other two moving to address it.

Ironically for all the complaints about Epcot's state, it wouldn't surprise me if it was as profitable or even more profitable than either of the Universal Parks.

Alcohol and food sales in a international themed environment with fireworks= $

 

[lockedoutlogic]

This is where you are wrong, unfortunately. When there is a Frozen ride in Norway, a huge percentage of all the families with little girls that make Magic Kingdom's attendance numbers the highest in the world by far, will HAVE to visit Epcot. It is that big a deal to these kids and even some adults. Little Elsa's were EVERYWHERE at the Halloween Party this year and all over the U.S. for Halloween. Frozen is said to still be one of the biggest sellers this Christmas. Frozen fever is still going strong and is unlikely to abate any time soon. Just look around at stores in your area and look at wait times for Anna and Elsa. The wait times were huge and far beyond the other princesses this October. A Frozen ride is going to give Epcot a huge boost even if those families aren't interested in much else. I say unfortunately because this may mean nothing else will need to be done anytime soon.

Oh brother...it's fallen back to the pack...as expected.

I would say the Elsa level fell by about 75% at the grade school parade this year from last. They were far eclipsed by minions.

It's a very good/solid princess property...but won't have anywhere near the legs to carry Epcot. And then what do you? Double down? Morocco become Jasmine's Persian bizarre? That was always the problem with this.

They'll get a bump...mainly because nothing else comes to each park in under 5 years...but there's no cultural phenomenon...as predicted.

I'll go one better...the sequel will disappoint at the box office. Still will make a lot...but the legs won't be there either.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Epcot is a sad version of what it once was so this doesn't surprise me. It needs a lot. Many people tell me that it's dull and I agree. World Showcase is fine for now but otherwise?

When they made the choice to look at parks with concern of quarterlies...instead of as a core pillar/foundation of their longterm business...

This was the natural decay.

The reality is that Epcot...like animal kingdom...will always cost a lot to run. So why half it? Why go cheap when you're already in that deep?

Stupidity that isn't detected by those that only look at balance sheets and have little common sense.

 

[twebber55]

This guy seems like he's fairly plugged into the fan community. He could honestly be just some guy reading WDWmagic and sharing his opinions. Funny.

Well he seems to be making a big deal out of nothing. This would be like Disney complaining that Disneyland didn't grow as fast as DCA when it was being upgraded and Cars Land opened. It's just common sense of sorts. I will say there's a possibility that things don't turn out for him...

1) DAK may not surpass Epcot. Avatar should have a positive effect, and the other park enhancements are awesome. However, it's conceivable (and the author's handling of this is crap) that Frozen could considerably grow Epcot attendance. Frozen as much as he'd love it to be the case, isn't over. In many ways it's just getting started. This is another reason that I think he's a Disney fan. He takes an almost illogical swipe at Frozen. A Maelstrom fan perhaps? Frozen 2 could also be out by 2020 further reigniting interest in the attraction.
2) New attractions at Epcot could be launched. I think Shanghai has something to do with further investment. I'd imagine that since they already have multiple buildings already to go, they could install new attractions in like two years. Much less than say the construction of a full land.

Though I actually found myself agreeing with @Yellowstonetim a fair amount. It's a well known fact Epcot has the highest per capita spending, guests stay longer at Epcot than the other two laggards, and that the financial health of Epcot is secure. One has to be the bottom, and if it's at the bottom because one of their other parks is successful what's the big deal?

Of course it could do more to host large groups of people. I think that's where the biggest criticism could be. Epcot needs to do its part to alleviate the attendance problems at MK, but it's not a rush with the other two moving to address it.

Ironically for all the complaints about Epcot's state, it wouldn't surprise me if it was as profitable or even more profitable than either of the Universal Parks.

Alcohol and food sales in a international themed environment with fireworks= $

I have no doubt that the expansion at DAK will have a greater impact on attendance than Frozen will have on EPCOT. However, thats a pretty big gap to close....

 

[twebber55]

Oh brother...it's fallen back to the pack...as expected.

I would say the Elsa level fell by about 75% at the grade school parade this year from last. They were far eclipsed by minions.

It's a very good/solid princess property...but won't have anywhere near the legs to carry Epcot. And then what do you? Double down? Morocco become Jasmine's Persian bizarre? That was always the problem with this.

They'll get a bump...mainly because nothing else comes to each park in under 5 years...but there's no cultural phenomenon...as predicted.

I'll go one better...the sequel will disappoint at the box office. Still will make a lot...but the legs won't be there either.

the sequel will do well regardless but if its a quality movie i see it breaking a billion again
this movie for whatever reason resonated with the public

 

[Tigger's ally]

I myself would really like a cost analysis of Illuminations. How much does this cost annually then driven down to nightly. How much does it cost per night to put this on. Then, I would like to see a study on how much $ is spent by patrons before, during and after. I always and I mean always try to get a ADR at Rose and Crown on the last nigh of my trip to finish it off in style. The food is decent, the beer is really good, but the atmosphere from waiting for the lamps to be lit, to the music starting, to the great announcement of what is coming and then the show is ALWAYS my favorite part of the trip. Epcot is my favorite park as I love the lands and their differences. But, if Illuminations were not there, I doubt I would eat at R&C. Would love to see the dollar figures them bean counters have for this.....

 

[rteetz]

I myself would really like a cost analysis of Illuminations. How much does this cost annually then driven down to nightly. How much does it cost per night to put this on. Then, I would like to see a study on how much $ is spent by patrons before, during and after. I always and I mean always try to get a ADR at Rose and Crown on the last nigh of my trip to finish it off in style. The food is decent, the beer is really good, but the atmosphere from waiting for the lamps to be lit, to the music starting, to the great announcement of what is coming and then the show is ALWAYS my favorite part of the trip. Epcot is my favorite park as I love the lands and their differences. But, if Illuminations were not there, I doubt I would eat at R&C. Would love to see the dollar figures them bean counters have for this.....

Leave illuminations imagine if they didn't have food and wine or flower and garden festivals.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

the sequel will do well regardless but if its a quality movie i see it breaking a billion again
this movie for whatever reason resonated with the public

That's just my point...

I think they could do a good box office on a bad movie...but what does that do to a permenant layover in an older park?

And when's the last time you saw a good musical sequel? There is a reason why you go don't go to that well again.

 

[Tigger's ally]

Leave illuminations imagine if they didn't have food and winds or flower and garden festivals.

they added a food and winds? I mean they got an earth....and fire..... they needed a winds.

 

[rteetz]

they added a food and winds? I mean they got an earth....and fire..... they needed a winds.

Auto correct

 

[Josh Hendy]

The reality is that Epcot...like animal kingdom...will always cost a lot to run. So why half it? Why go cheap when you're already in that deep?

Stupidity that isn't detected by those that only look at balance sheets and have little common sense.

I don't buy the idea that Epcot and DAK have to be run as money-losing, culturally important, "moral victories".

Busch Gardens Tampa is successful despite having the huge overhead of running a zoo. The secret ingredient is really simple - build lots of great rides, so that people actually want to go there.

Nobody visits DAK as an attraction all on its own. It's too expensive for animal lovers and has WAY too few rides to be taken seriously as a theme park. Disney stupidly thinks of it only as being a half park for half price "extra days". They are just too dumb and out of touch to realize that if BGT can attract people from all over Florida, all over the east coast and all over the world to ride its coasters and also see its animals and soak up the lovely ambiance, then DAK could do the same thing.

Ditto for Epcot. They're not getting sponsors because frankly they're too lazy to go out and beat the bushes. They recognize the profitability of F&W and F&G because they were handed to them by previous management, but they're too stupid to realize that they're sitting on what should be a constant, year-round, exciting and unique "world festival of culture and technology".

Walt traveled all over to pump up Disneyland, the World's Fair, Disney World, even went to South America to pump up the USA and help the war effort. Do the current top execs at Disney even travel to Orlando more than once a year, do they actually walk around the parks without an entourage? Let alone travel all over the USA, Europe and Asia to meet with corporations and national governments to promote WDW as marketing goldmine. I doubt it ...

The execs at Disney Corp. are not lazy in that they sleep in, work short hours, and phone it in at meetings. They're lazy in that they think they can sit in LA looking at spreadsheets and the stock ticker, and talk pretty constantly to bankers in NY about their company, and to lawyers and lobbyists about how to preserve and enhance intellectual property laws ... but they don't know jack about theme parks and resorts.

 

[DDLand]

I don't buy the idea that Epcot and DAK have to be run as money-losing, culturally important, "moral victories".

Busch Gardens Tampa is successful despite having the huge overhead of running a zoo. The secret ingredient is really simple - build lots of great rides, so that people actually want to go there.

Nobody visits DAK as an attraction all on its own. It's too expensive for animal lovers and has WAY too few rides to be taken seriously as a theme park. Disney stupidly thinks of it only as being a half park for half price "extra days". They are just too dumb and out of touch to realize that if BGT can attract people from all over Florida, all over the east coast and all over the world to ride its coasters and also see its animals and soak up the lovely ambiance, then DAK could do the same thing.

Ditto for Epcot. They're not getting sponsors because frankly they're too lazy to go out and beat the bushes. They recognize the profitability of F&W and F&G because they were handed to them by previous management, but they're too stupid to realize that they're sitting on what should be a constant, year-round, exciting and unique "world festival of culture and technology".

Walt traveled all over to pump up Disneyland, the World's Fair, Disney World, even went to South America to pump up the USA and help the war effort. Do the current top execs at Disney even travel to Orlando more than once a year, do they actually walk around the parks without an entourage? Let alone travel all over the USA, Europe and Asia to meet with corporations and national governments to promote WDW as marketing goldmine. I doubt it ...

The execs at Disney Corp. are not lazy in that they sleep in, work short hours, and phone it in at meetings. They're lazy in that they think they can sit in LA looking at spreadsheets and the stock ticker, and talk pretty constantly to bankers in NY about their company, and to lawyers and lobbyists about how to preserve and enhance intellectual property laws ... but they don't know jack about theme parks and resorts.

I agree with your basic premise, but I'd temper things a bit in certain areas. While I do think more can be done to excite and draw guests into DAK, it's actually become a pretty great product. Many of the problems you've mentioned have been rectified or are being fixed right now. It's true DAK will need more after Avatar, but great steps will have been taken to get that park on the right track. In the same way DCA is far from finished, DAK will need more love but the big problem will have been fixed.

I don't think DAK should be aspiring to be like Busch Gardens Tampa, with DAK drawing in around 2.5 times as many guests annually and charging around 30% more on weekdays for admission then their much smaller rival. Indeed, Busch Gardens Tampa attracts fewer guests than any Disney theme park in the chain. What they should be shooting for is a true companion status with MK. Instead of MK and the rest, it should be MK and DAK. Like Disney Sea, Disney's Animal Kingdom should and can be a draw like you're saying.

Epcot is an interesting beast. I'm not sure exactly how they're going to proceed. I've read Disney isn't moving forward with anything big because they want sponsors, but sponsors aren't coming because right now it's a 1980s throwback that needs to be totally redesigned from the ground up. Sponsors used to be big at Epcot, but companies began questioning whether it was wise to throw millions at an attraction when they could blanket whole cities and websites with ads instead. GE, AT&T, etc. were there in force. Now I'd be shocked for them to make a commitment like that. I don't believe there's a ton of demand. I could be off, but you're certainly on to something in saying Disney could and should get some high profile sponsors to captivate interest in Epcot.

I think their management style has been one of timidity. Now that's changing in a big way.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Woah, woah...who said anything about running parks at a "loss"?

Not this rat...

All the profit is in giftshops...
And just a simple check of rudimentary, oversimplified math would yield a sum of $1,000,000,000 if you multiply 10,000,000 X $100...right?

 

[Kaz#289]

My wife is not a big fan of Epcot but I drag her every year. I like Soar'in and they also have the character meet and greet just for Disney credit card members which never has a line.

 

[RustManFan]

I would think that once all announced projects at AK and DHS are done (or at least far along) that Epcot would finally get some attention.

Disney, please fill those empty buildings!!

 

[Shellyb84]

Fine with me. We love Epcot and staying at the Epcot resorts, so that just makes it less crowded for us