Universal announces details on diagon alley

[Eoghann]

The logic behind the slow roll out of new rides at WDW isn't really that hard to follow. Rides are expensive and they are amortizing the cost over multiple years.

From a short term financial perspective that makes perfect sense. Longer term the argument becomes more complex. There is a case to be made they could damage their brand if they continue to increase prices and "reduce quality".

The unanswered question is whether people (and I mean the average person not people on a board like this) actually see a reduction in quality. If they don't then the brand is not at risk.

There is a core of truth to most of the complaints about Disney, but it tends to be wrapped in hyperbole and also a myopic vision that assumes everyone wants the same thing from a visit to WDW.

Universal are making some great strides. I'm actually looking forward to visiting their parks for 1 day for the first time on my next visit to WDW. But what people aren't getting is that Universal's return on investment right now is going to be 100-300% higher than what Disney would get for the same money spent on rides.

 

[ChipnDale79]

Universal are making some great strides. I'm actually looking forward to visiting their parks for 1 day for the first time on my next visit to WDW. But what people aren't getting is that Universal's return on investment right now is going to be 100-300% higher than what Disney would get for the same money spent on rides.

I have to question if that's really true or not, see Universal is going to get you for 1 maybe 2 days, Disney is going to get most people for 5, 6, or 7 days. While they may spend the same amount of money on new rides and new improvements, Disney would probably make more profit based on the number of days spent on property.

 

[Eoghann]

I have to question if that's really true or not, see Universal is going to get you for 1 maybe 2 days, Disney is going to get most people for 5, 6, or 7 days. While they may spend the same amount of money on new rides and new improvements, Disney would probably make more profit based on the number of days spent on property.

Your math assumes that Disney could significantly increase the number of people they have on property with some new rides (or a new land). that is highly questionable, whereas it's relatively easy for Universal to do because they're starting from a much lower base number.

Because Disney hasn't lost any customers to Universal. Universal has simply gained new customers.

Basically building the exact same Harry Potter land at Disney would not have had the same effect it had at Universal. It would have boosted attendance certainly. But it wouldn't have made the huge percentage gains that Universal got, nor would it have converted off-site guests into onsite guests in any significant margin.

 

[ChipnDale79]

Your math assumes that Disney could significantly increase the number of people they have on property with some new rides (or a new land). that is highly questionable, whereas it's relatively easy for Universal to do because they're starting from a much lower base number.

Because Disney hasn't lost any customers to Universal. Universal has simply gained new customers.

Basically building the exact same Harry Potter land at Disney would not have had the same effect it had at Universal. It would have boosted attendance certainly. But it wouldn't have made the huge percentage gains that Universal got, nor would it have converted off-site guests into onsite guests in any significant margin.

Both arguments are speculative, could it have drawn as many new guest as Universal did? It certainly could have, I believe that HP could have been the tipping point on the decision for some to go to disney and some to not go.

At some point we need to agree that while disney is not losing whole weeks of vacation to Universal, but they certainly are losing a day or two from many more guests than they have in the past. If Unviersal and Disney continue to go down the current paths they are, then those numbers of guests leaving disney for a day or two is only going to grow.

If you're going to equate the return on investment, I think its fair to calculate in the potential for keeping people on property for those 1 or 2 days that Universal is getting now.

I don't care how large of a company you are, or how popular you are, if you rest on your laurels it will catch up with you in time.

 

[going/again]

What's wrong with that? Universal is doing some amazing things. I truly enjoy everything they've done, and their rides are top notch. But Disney has our hearts, and it makes us sad to see that they are so out of touch with what guests want and need.

It's like watching the love of your life slowly get fat over the years, while you look around and similar aged women are getting hotter and hotter. You still love your wife, but you're damn mad that she's not taking care of herself like she should be.

Bet you daren't tell her that,

 

[mm1971]

I'm going to post and I'm sure several will rip into it, but here goes.

First, US/IOA has a limited footprint and is only able to expand in a limited manner. As such, they are forced to update existing rides/assets and replace existing attractions. This is why I don't really think Disney is "worried". My family likes US/IOA, but my kids were never thrill riders so 1 or 2 days will always be plenty of time there. It still feels like an amusement park to us, even with the very well done HP stuff. HP was a few hours for us on our first visit, but less time on a second trip.

Next, Disney is really putting a lot more effort into the experience than being an amusement park. It is a "destination". To the point where there are some that never enter the parks on some trips. Over the last 10 years they have really focused on expanding the resorts and less on the parks. Basically, how much busier will it actually get by adding a new ride or section to a park? It takes 10's of millions of dollars and years to add attractions. Or they can build a DVC resort that will guarantee visitors for the next 50 years. That has been the focus until recently.

Really both companies play off each other. People that visit Disney will sometimes spend a day or two at US/IOA and vise versa. While we go back and forth the Disney is better or US/IOA is better, do you really think either throws their hands up when the other has a new attraction to visit. I doubt it. Each event brings more people into the Orlando area and to both sites.

With that said, Disney has started to redirect more $$ towards attractions. FL expansion will be complete this year. They are changing DTD and updating the offerings. Avatarland (not even going to discuss whether I like it or not) will be new and help make AK a full day park open later in the evenings. They will be adding to HS next with Star Wars (when $$ available in the budget) and who knows what else. Epcot unfortunately is a victim of how it was set up in the first place. Most attractions are sponsored and that is the trouble. Disney never had visions that they would have to maintain and create new attractions at their full expense. Hopefully either they will change their approach or find some new sponsors willing to put in the $$ to make a great attraction. US/IOA is doing what they can to draw tourists to their parks. I'm not sure why that means Disney is not doing what they believe is best. I don't see where any increase in crowds to Disney will go. It's already crazy busy. So the solution is to slow new additions and create more rooms to put people. I think the new HP area at US will be a great addition and help US/IOA fund the next redesign or addition and keep the crowds coming in for a few more years. I look forward to what the next development will be, but remember that expansion of the parks is very limited due to land availability. With that I am not sure they can ever compete on the grand scale that Disney is on, but I'd like to see them try so I have more options for my family.

Key point: Both raise prices about the same each year. One follows the other. Take that as they both realize it is a relationship, not a competition. Otherwise you would see price competition to get guests to their parks. As much as they both would rather have that individual guest spend the day at their parks, they feed off each other and that is the key. Get people to the area and then hopefully get them to your resort/park. I think our vision of them competing is a little more than the way they see it. Just food for thought.

Oh.....and we will be at Disney in August. If the kids decide they want to see the new HP stuff or the transformers ride or ET, we'll head over for a day. I won't feel guilty about visiting either park because it is my vacation and I'll choose where my $$ goes.

 

[rteetz]

My 2 cents, it appears that Universal is taking things seriously and are building new big attractions in half to maybe a quarter of the time frame Disney is currently. Avatar was announced 2 to 3 years ago and they just broke ground? We'll miss the Lion King while we are there. For the life of me I can't understand this, I don't understand why the show is down for a full 6 months. This show should be down for a month or two tops. Build the new building while the old building still holds the current show, then move the show once the building is complete. I understand Disney is a company and at the end of the day they are in business to make a profit. However, what really bothers me is that prices keep increasing while the entire experience decreases. It appears they take more things away then add things. At the end of the day, it makes it harder and harder to justify paying the increased price. Meanwhile, Universal is increasing prices as well, but at the same time they are increasing the guest experience by leaps and bounds. I can easily justify the increased price for Universal. Again, this is all my opinion.

they are moving the floats and sound system and things those things are internal parts of the new facility. 6 months seems about right for this in my opinion. They are also hiring new actors they go through extensive interview for this. Disney is going to keep increasing ticket prices until people don't buy them anymore attendance keeps going up so they keep doing it. I do agree tho I would like to see disney start stepping up their game.

 

[ChipnDale79]

they are moving the floats and sound system and things those things are internal parts of the new facility. 6 months seems about right for this in my opinion. They are also hiring new actors they go through extensive interview for this. Disney is going to keep increasing ticket prices until people don't buy them anymore attendance keeps going up so they keep doing it. I do agree tho I would like to see disney start stepping up their game.

I have a hard time buying it takes 6 months to move the sound system and floats. That's a project that shouldnt take nearly that long. But it is what it is.

 

[rteetz]

I'm going to post and I'm sure several will rip into it, but here goes. First, US/IOA has a limited footprint and is only able to expand in a limited manner. As such, they are forced to update existing rides/assets and replace existing attractions. This is why I don't really think Disney is "worried". My family likes US/IOA, but my kids were never thrill riders so 1 or 2 days will always be plenty of time there. It still feels like an amusement park to us, even with the very well done HP stuff. HP was a few hours for us on our first visit, but less time on a second trip. Next, Disney is really putting a lot more effort into the experience than being an amusement park. It is a "destination". To the point where there are some that never enter the parks on some trips. Over the last 10 years they have really focused on expanding the resorts and less on the parks. Basically, how much busier will it actually get by adding a new ride or section to a park? It takes 10's of millions of dollars and years to add attractions. Or they can build a DVC resort that will guarantee visitors for the next 50 years. That has been the focus until recently. Really both companies play off each other. People that visit Disney will sometimes spend a day or two at US/IOA and vise versa. While we go back and forth the Disney is better or US/IOA is better, do you really think either throws their hands up when the other has a new attraction to visit. I doubt it. Each event brings more people into the Orlando area and to both sites. With that said, Disney has started to redirect more $$ towards attractions. FL expansion will be complete this year. They are changing DTD and updating the offerings. Avatarland (not even going to discuss whether I like it or not) will be new and help make AK a full day park open later in the evenings. They will be adding to HS next with Star Wars (when $$ available in the budget) and who knows what else. Epcot unfortunately is a victim of how it was set up in the first place. Most attractions are sponsored and that is the trouble. Disney never had visions that they would have to maintain and create new attractions at their full expense. Hopefully either they will change their approach or find some new sponsors willing to put in the $$ to make a great attraction. US/IOA is doing what they can to draw tourists to their parks. I'm not sure why that means Disney is not doing what they believe is best. I don't see where any increase in crowds to Disney will go. It's already crazy busy. So the solution is to slow new additions and create more rooms to put people. I think the new HP area at US will be a great addition and help US/IOA fund the next redesign or addition and keep the crowds coming in for a few more years. I look forward to what the next development will be, but remember that expansion of the parks is very limited due to land availability. With that I am not sure they can ever compete on the grand scale that Disney is on, but I'd like to see them try so I have more options for my family. Key point: Both raise prices about the same each year. One follows the other. Take that as they both realize it is a relationship, not a competition. Otherwise you would see price competition to get guests to their parks. As much as they both would rather have that individual guest spend the day at their parks, they feed off each other and that is the key. Get people to the area and then hopefully get them to your resort/park. I think our vision of them competing is a little more than the way they see it. Just food for thought. Oh.....and we will be at Disney in August. If the kids decide they want to see the new HP stuff or the transformers ride or ET, we'll head over for a day. I won't feel guilty about visiting either park because it is my vacation and I'll choose where my $$ goes.

very well said!

 

[rteetz]

I have a hard time buying it takes 6 months to move the sound system and floats. That's a project that shouldnt take nearly that long. But it is what it is.

I think hiring all the new people and training them and stuff takes a couple months tho.

 

[Silock]

Next, Disney is really putting a lot more effort into the experience than being an amusement park. It is a "destination".

While this is certainly true, the destination only remains viable so long as the parks remain attractive. There's a balancing act here and Disney is tipping FAR too one side.

Avatarland (not even going to discuss whether I like it or not) will be new and help make AK a full day park open later in the evenings.

But that won't even be open for 3-4 more years. That's a LONG time.

They will be adding to HS next with Star Wars (when $$ available in the budget) and who knows what else.

I hope so, but there has been no announcement, and given the timetable that they've given Avatarland, if they don't announce it this year, it's probably a safe bet to say that it won't be opening until 2019, given their current construction pace.

Hopefully either they will change their approach or find some new sponsors willing to put in the $$ to make a great attraction.

I hope so, too. Epcot is my favorite park in the world, but it desperately needs some love.

I'm not sure why that means Disney is not doing what they believe is best.

Just because they believe it to be best does not make it so. That's a truism from every large corporation that has ever existed. They have all made mistakes and fallen behind at one point. Disney is probably "too big to fail," but that doesn't mean that they will continue to be the clear leader forever.

It's already crazy busy. So the solution is to slow new additions and create more rooms to put people.

No, the solution is to ADD more capacity, not restrict supply. Either that, or raise ticket prices so high that it becomes prohibitively expensive for more people.

I'm not "ripping into you," but simply making some counter-points.

 

[Eoghann]

No, the solution is to ADD more capacity, not restrict supply. Either that, or raise ticket prices so high that it becomes prohibitively expensive for more people.

Well they *have* been raising ticket prices at quite a clip and it doesn't seem to have deterred people very much.

I'm not sure about the adding capacity one either. Because mostly people seem to be demanding more state of the art thrill rides and they tend to be quite short which means they have a minimal effect on capacity. People are back out and looking for something to do in 5 minutes.

The Magic Kingdom for example actually has a lot of ride capacity, but is easily the most crowded of the parks.

And in the case of shows or longer rides... those people aren't spending money so those new rides cost Disney a lot of money and may not show a huge return.

In that respect the Avatarland concept starts to make more sense. If it spreads people out and encourages them to wander and play then they are available for shopping and eating, not standing in lines and not clogging up narrow thoroughfares...

Easily my biggest concern about Diagon Alley (which is going to be really cool thematically) is that those narrow streets are going to be insanely crowded. Though Universal has clearly learned well from Disney because they're only adding one coaster and one "dark ride". The rest are shops and eateries.

 

[Silock]

Well they *have* been raising ticket prices at quite a clip and it doesn't seem to have deterred people very much.

LOL Well, that really only means that they haven't actually found the price that deters people, so there's plenty of room to increase if they want to decrease crowds at the park and maintain the same income.

I'm not sure about the adding capacity one either. Because mostly people seem to be demanding more state of the art thrill rides and they tend to be quite short which means they have a minimal effect on capacity. People are back out and looking for something to do in 5 minutes.

I think that's part of what they're trying to do with the Avatarland attraction. The plans look as though it has more capacity than Soarin', so I think they're trying to find a balance between throughput and waiting in line. Also why they're adding a boat ride. And if people are in and out of an attraction in 5 minutes, I'd like to be in their party.

The Magic Kingdom for example actually has a lot of ride capacity, but is easily the most crowded of the parks.

I would differentiate crowds from wait times. It might be the most crowded, but the rides never reach Soarin' and TT levels. Part of that has to do with there simply being more to do at MK than at Epcot.

And in the case of shows or longer rides... those people aren't spending money so those new rides cost Disney a lot of money and may not show a huge return.

Very possible. However, without them, you may not get the guest in the park to begin with.

Easily my biggest concern about Diagon Alley (which is going to be really cool thematically) is that those narrow streets are going to be insanely crowded. Though Universal has clearly learned well from Disney because they're only adding one coaster and one "dark ride". The rest are shops and eateries.

I wonder about that, too. Narrow streets plus a growing America (and now, Britain) doesn't seem like a good idea. I was so initially excited when listening to the Jim Hill podcast describing the new Diagon Alley, and then a day later, I was like, "Wait a minute . . . he basically just described a bunch of themed shopping." That tempered my enthusiasm quite a bit.

But, at least they got it done in a third of the time it took Disney to do NFL.

 

[beer dave]

Well that was interesting. Was bored on sunday so I went on a fishing trip. Caught 4 fish.

 

[Eoghann]

I would differentiate crowds from wait times. It might be the most crowded, but the rides never reach Soarin' and TT levels. Part of that has to do with there simply being more to do at MK than at Epcot.

I would agree they are different, but I also think the wait line issue is somewhat exaggerated on boards like these. At the risk of invoking the inevitable FF+ discussion, it is entirely possible to ride most of the major rides at Epcot or DHS or Animal Kingdom at least once without experiencing crazy wait times.

DHS is a bit of a different story but I actually think there's a fair plenty to do in Epcot. It's just not rides. Then again someone round here was complaining about looking at animals in Animal Kingdom so peoples expectations are... unique.

And as a counterpoint I'll note that I've seen plenty of 40-60 minute waits posted at places like Kings Dominion too. And that place has no shortage of thrill rides.

Very possible. However, without them, you may not get the guest in the park to begin with.

But as we've already established, this is not a problem Disney currently has. Could it be one in the future? Yes I think there is a risk to the go slow approach.

But honestly the threat of Universal is being overstated (and SeaWorld is no threat at all). Even with their impressive investment they'd need to keep that up for at least the next 10 years with Disney doing nothing to counter it during that entire time period before we're looking at a serious threat. And even then Disney would not be out of the game by a long margin.

I wonder about that, too. Narrow streets plus a growing America (and now, Britain) doesn't seem like a good idea. I was so initially excited when listening to the Jim Hill podcast describing the new Diagon Alley, and then a day later, I was like, "Wait a minute . . . he basically just described a bunch of themed shopping." That tempered my enthusiasm quite a bit.

But, at least they got it done in a third of the time it took Disney to do NFL.

And, credit where it's due, the details on the theming sound wonderful. There seem to be a lot of small interactive elements and to people like me that's a big selling point. I don't do coasters so I won't even be going on Gringotts when I visit in December.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

Well that was interesting. Was bored on sunday so I went on a fishing trip. Caught 4 fish.

Fishing is so expensive these days. And it is all the fault of Cabela's and their raising the prices on fishing tackle. Now Bass Pro Shop is really expanding and doing a far better job. Cabela's sucks now. I hate it.

Fishing isn't what it used to be in the 70's, tackle was cheaper, fish were more plentiful and the streams less crowded. Fish tasted better too.

And I don't believe you caught 4 fish, it couldn't have been more th 3, probably 2. I know because I know everything about fishing.

But I hate it and am going to quit because of Cabela's.

 

[Silock]

I would agree they are different, but I also think the wait line issue is somewhat exaggerated on boards like these. At the risk of invoking the inevitable FF+ discussion, it is entirely possible to ride most of the major rides at Epcot or DHS or Animal Kingdom at least once without experiencing crazy wait times.

I guess that depends on your definition of crazy wait times lol

Those parks also get about half the visitors of the MK, which is probably why it's sometimes less crowded. In any case, I think the larger problem is that while some people are content to just ride the rides and some are content to just experience the parks, there's a huge chunk in the middle (like me) who thoroughly enjoy the rides and attractions, but also enjoy experiencing the park. Super long wait times for rides cuts in to my enjoyment of the rest of the park (which is why I only go in the off-season). I think that's really the crux of the issue.

And as a counterpoint I'll note that I've seen plenty of 40-60 minute waits posted at places like Kings Dominion too. And that place has no shortage of thrill rides.

Yeah, but those guys don't have nearly the throughput that Disney does. They have it down to a science as far as maximizing guests per hour.

But as we've already established, this is not a problem Disney currently has. Could it be one in the future? Yes I think there is a risk to the go slow approach.

Perhaps not a "problem," but if attendance at the non-MK parks slides, they could be overtaken by UO. Universal isn't that far behind DHS and AK in attendance.

 

[beer dave]

Fishing is so expensive these days. And it is all the fault of Cabela's and their raising the prices on fishing tackle. Now Bass Pro Shop is really expanding and doing a far better job. Cabela's sucks now. I hate it.

Fishing isn't what it used to be in the 70's, tackle was cheaper, fish were more plentiful and the streams less crowded. Fish tasted better too.

And I don't believe you caught 4 fish, it couldn't have been more th 3, probably 2. I know because I know everything about fishing.

But I hate it and am going to quit because of Cabela's.

Hey-- do you ever play croquet? I used to.

 

[Eoghann]

Perhaps not a "problem," but if attendance at the non-MK parks slides, they could be overtaken by UO. Universal isn't that far behind DHS and AK in attendance.

Perhaps I'm remembering wrongly but I thought Animal Kingdom and Hollywood Studios were just shy of 10 million in 2012 compared to about 8 million for Islands of Adventure and 6 million for Universal Studios.

To my mind that's a pretty big gap. I figure that Diagon Alley will probably level Universal Orlando with IOA, maybe even push things up a bit. Let's be generous and say they both get around 9 million. That would still leave them a million below the weakest of Disney's Orlando parks.

I'm not arguing that Disney should simply ignore all this and I'd actually really like it if Universal caught up because it would push Disney, I just think the scale of the threat is substantially overstated on these boards.

 

[twebber55]

Perhaps I'm remembering wrongly but I thought Animal Kingdom and Hollywood Studios were just shy of 10 million in 2012 compared to about 8 million for Islands of Adventure and 6 million for Universal Studios. To my mind that's a pretty big gap. I figure that Diagon Alley will probably level Universal Orlando with IOA, maybe even push things up a bit. Let's be generous and say they both get around 9 million. That would still leave them a million below the weakest of Disney's Orlando parks. I'm not arguing that Disney should simply ignore all this and I'd actually really like it if Universal caught up because it would push Disney, I just think the scale of the threat is substantially overstated on these boards.

I agree it will be hard for uni to ever catch a disney park but uni is trying to steal market share and not necessarily trying to catch dak and dhs although dak will get a pretty big boost in 2017 with their makeover