Universal announces details on diagon alley

[ChipnDale79]

You're also comparing the two Universal Parks to the 2 least attended Disney Parks at WDW. If they can't catch the 2 lower parks, how much are they really gaining on Disney?

They can't catch the two "lower" parks because of Magic Kingdom and Epcot. Both of those parks draw people to DAK and DHS, their attendance wouldnt be anywhere near what they are now without MK and Epcot.

No one is going to compete against Magic Kingdom, it's a different beast, but what Universal can do is offer alternative attractions to Magic Kingdom that can take away from AK and DHS.

I suspect that without MK or Epcot, AK and DHS would be pretty on par with universal.

You're not getting the market share, all you're seeing is that attendance is going up so all must be good. You're missing the point all together, it's all about how much growth these parks have.

I don't think Disney will lose guests, unless something really drastic happens. However I think they are stemming their growth by sitting on their hands. Short term is really not that big of a deal, but long term it could become a problem for them.

 

[surferdave]

I'm not sure what's gained by keeping up with raw attendance numbers for AK & HS for comparing to other theme parks, other than chest beating rights. In a lot of cases this is people who meander into these parks for a few hours with hoppers, spend little money there and move back to EP or MK. It's a far cry from the people who buy a ticket to Universal and stay there all day. I know lots of people do stay at AK & HS all day but there's a high percentage that don't and that's not a factor at the parks they are compared to.

 

[BlackMagicWoman]

To be fair I don't know that visitors to AK are looking for the same thing that a visitor to Universal is looking for.

I'm not going back to Universal. Even with the train. It's great that they are churning out new rides...but Transformers feels a lot like SpiderMan and Harry Potter. It's starting to be formulaic.

 

[Disneychick75]

To be fair I don't know that visitors to AK are looking for the same thing that a visitor to Universal is looking for.

I'm not going back to Universal. Even with the train. It's great that they are churning out new rides...but Transformers feels a lot like SpiderMan and Harry Potter. It's starting to be formulaic.

Spiderman and Forbidden Journey are not alike other than that they are rides you sit in. I don't get the formulaic??? Do you mean like Nemo and Friends and the Little Mermaid ride? Those are identical except for the characters and waiting area.

 

[twebber55]

Spiderman and Forbidden Journey are not alike other than that they are rides you sit in. I don't get the formulaic??? Do you mean like Nemo and Friends and the Little Mermaid ride? Those are identical except for the characters and waiting area.

Agreed plus gringotts will be a coaster dark ride
Something totally different

 

[ChrisFL]

Spiderman and Forbidden Journey are not alike other than that they are rides you sit in. I don't get the formulaic??? Do you mean like Nemo and Friends and the Little Mermaid ride? Those are identical except for the characters and waiting area.

Formulaic:

Dumbo
Dumbo
Astro Orbiter
Aladdin's Flying Carpets
Triceratops Spin

 

[mvk]

They can't catch the two "lower" parks because of Magic Kingdom and Epcot. Both of those parks draw people to DAK and DHS, their attendance wouldnt be anywhere near what they are now without MK and Epcot.

No one is going to compete against Magic Kingdom, it's a different beast, but what Universal can do is offer alternative attractions to Magic Kingdom that can take away from AK and DHS.

I suspect that without MK or Epcot, AK and DHS would be pretty on par with universal.

You're not getting the market share, all you're seeing is that attendance is going up so all must be good. You're missing the point all together, it's all about how much growth these parks have.

I don't think Disney will lose guests, unless something really drastic happens. However I think they are stemming their growth by sitting on their hands. Short term is really not that big of a deal, but long term it could become a problem for them.

But are they really cutting into market share? Disney theme park revenues are hitting record highs every quarter it seems, and the growth is really high in terms of year over year.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

You're nuts if you think DHS and AK are going to lose a combined 2 million guests at any point in the near future.

I'll make an educated guess based upon the fact that DHS and AK both averaged a 1% increase from 2008 through 2011, then both increased 2% last year (despite neither park opening anything of note in recent times) to 10M for AK and 9.9M for DHS.

AK Attendance
2013 - 10.2M (+2%)
2014 - 10.3M (+1%)
2015 - 10.4M (+1%)
2016 - 10.5M (+1%)
2017 - 11.8M (+12.5%)

DHS Attendance
2013 - 10.1M (+2%)
2014 - 10.2M (+1%)
2015 - 10.3M (+1%)
2016 - 10.4M (+1%)
2017 - 10.7M (+2.5%)

And now an educated guess for Universal -

IOA Attendance
2013 - 8.1M (+3%)
2014 - 8.4M (+3%)
2015 - 8.5M (+2%)
2016 - 8.7M (+2%)
2017 - 8.9M (+2%)

USF Attendance
2013 - 6.4M (+3%)
2014 - 7.7M (+20%)
2015 - 8.0M (+4%)
2016 - 8.2M (+3%)
2017 - 8.4M (+2%)

Combined -
2013 AK + DHS = 20.3M
2013 IOA + USF = 14.5M

2017 AK + DHS = 22.5M
2017 IOA + USF = 17.3M

That's probably being generous to Universal, giving them a 19.3% increase in the next 5 years as opposed to giving the 2 Disney Parks a 10.8% increase over the next 5 years. But that still puts the 2 Disney Parks 5.2M ahead of the 2 Universal Parks (right now they are 5.8M ahead).

If those rates of increase continued every 5 years (basically Universal doubling the 2 Disney Parks in increase percentage), it would still take until about 2035 for those two to surpass AK and DHS.

I think this is a pretty good expectation and generous to Universal. AND, it does show that Universal is not going to catch Disney. It isn't possible for many decades and lots of changes. And only if Disney cancels any future improvements for the next 20 years.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...-at-univerasl-orlando-20140128,0,7345702.post

Universal is doing great and will continue to improve, but they didn't take away from Disney at all, they took from Sea World and other area attractions. We decided to do Disney & Universal this year to visit HP. So we stayed longer at Disney (9 nights) and spent one day at HP. We didn't do less at Disney, we just did Uni, too, and instead of something else.

I'm not sure what's gained by keeping up with raw attendance numbers for AK & HS for comparing to other theme parks, other than chest beating rights. In a lot of cases this is people who meander into these parks for a few hours with hoppers, spend little money there and move back to EP or MK. It's a far cry from the people who buy a ticket to Universal and stay there all day. I know lots of people do stay at AK & HS all day but there's a high percentage that don't and that's not a factor at the parks they are compared to.

While often called "not full day parks" they do fine and people spend a number of hours and spend lots of money. More so at DHS than AK, but both are fine. People will drop a lot more money when AK becomes a nighttime park. But, a lot of people say Uni parks aren't full day either. We did HP and didn't spend a full day at IOA.

There is no better indicator of success than park attendance. Uni will never "compete" directly with Disney, but they don't have to. They only need to attract Disney visitors for a couple of days instead of them going to Sea World, Busch Gardens, Bible Lands, etc., which they are doing with HP.

To be fair I don't know that visitors to AK are looking for the same thing that a visitor to Universal is looking for.

I'm not going back to Universal. Even with the train. It's great that they are churning out new rides...but Transformers feels a lot like SpiderMan and Harry Potter. It's starting to be formulaic.

Spiderman and Forbidden Journey are not alike other than that they are rides you sit in. I don't get the formulaic??? Do you mean like Nemo and Friends and the Little Mermaid ride? Those are identical except for the characters and waiting area.

I agree with Black Magic Woman. I thought Spiderman and HP were very similar. You ride in a vehicle that has motion to go with the story and go to various 3D screens and watch a movie to go with the vehicle movement. Very effective. HP may have more movement and newer technology, but both are similar in experience to me.

 

[ChrisFL]

I agree with Black Magic Woman. I thought Spiderman and HP were very similar. You ride in a vehicle that has motion to go with the story and go to various 3D screens and watch a movie to go with the vehicle movement. Very effective. HP may have more movement and newer technology, but both are similar in experience to me.

There's no 3D screens on HP...the ride vehicle and movements are completely different than Spiderman.

They're both a mixture of live sets and screens...but so is The Great Movie Ride, Universe of Energy, Journey into Imagination, Spaceship Earth, Pirates of the Caribbean...........the list goes on.

 

[Silock]

But are they really cutting into market share? Disney theme park revenues are hitting record highs every quarter it seems, and the growth is really high in terms of year over year.

So is universal. I think that may be due to inflation as well as more disposable income for those inclined to visit theme parks.

 

[mvk]

So is universal. I think that may be due to inflation as well as more disposable income for those inclined to visit theme parks.

But that doesn't mean they are cutting into Disney's market share. They're doing wellbut so is Disney. There is no denying that, no matter how much some people want to.

 

[Disneychick75]

Formulaic:

Dumbo
Dumbo
Astro Orbiter
Aladdin's Flying Carpets
Triceratops Spin

There's no 3D screens on HP...the ride vehicle and movements are completely different than Spiderman.

They're both a mixture of live sets and screens...but so is The Great Movie Ride, Universe of Energy, Journey into Imagination, Spaceship Earth, Pirates of the Caribbean...........the list goes on.

and

Universal won't catch up to Disney as far as numbers go and so what? Universal is maintaining and introducing new rides which appeals to me and others.

I think that if Universal offered real rides to the moon, some Disney apologists would find fault and try to say they were copying Mission to Mars.

Why the competition? Disney has their followers and I think it's fun but my family's hearts are with Universal. Just as some families prefer Disney. All the noise back and forth won't convince either side to believe that one park is better than the other. I think whatever makes you happy, go with it. We are Vacation Club members and start our trips at Disney then we go to Universal because it's more relaxing with front of the line privileges and we go home rested.

 

[Borishack]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/busi...-at-univerasl-orlando-20140128,0,7345702.post

::

 

[Eoghann]

What people don't really seem to be thinking about when they talk about things like cutting into Disney's marketshare is the scale of Disney.

For a start, it's WDW is just a single component of their theme park business. One of the things they look at when they choose to assign their budgets is Return on Investment.

So... do they get better ROI putting Carsland over in California or improving one of the WDW? That was probably an easy call for them.

What about the ROI on investing in Shanghai Disney over WDW? Well they have a partner there so I suspect the ROI is pretty good with Shanghai. Plus it's not a saturated market.

So one of the big things that's happening is not that Disney isn't investing in theme parks. It's that its doing most of that investing somewhere other than Florida.

But they're not oblivious to the competition. They're just doing the minimum they think they need to do in order to stave it off.

Why Avatarland in DAK rather than Star Wars in DHS? Well partly it's a timing thing (but they could easily have made the deal with Lucas instead of Cameron). Primarily though it's because there's more ROI on Avatarland.

Why? DAK has to be a far more expensive park to run than DHS. It's got all those animals after all. It has less merchandising opportunities, less food areas and it doesn't have special draws like Star Wars weekends. The Avatarland investment (by Disney's assessment) will give them the most bang for their buck by giving them a full day park, increasing attendance and giving more shopping/eating areas. DHS may be somewhat neglected, but my guess is it runs at a profit.

Okay so if there's a good ROI on Avatarland, why not till 2017? Well as I've mentioned before they're amortizing costs over multiple years. Again because they've made the assessment that it will be well after 2017 before Universal could actually be a threat to them.

And they're right. Universal is making some major moves, but its gains haven't touche WDW in any noticeable way. Left completely unchecked they will of course. But we're talking a decade or two for that.

Why so long? Because Disney has lock in on multiple fronts. They have more parks, more resorts, more facilities *and* they have DVC. DVC means that people are coming to Disney and spending money at Disney... even when they're not in the parks.

And from Disney's perspective... they've already countered. They'll have their "new" stuff in place before this decade is out.

Of course this leads back to the argument about Avatarland, but honestly a lot of the arguments I see there are personal taste being justified as a business argument.

 

[Yellowstonetim]

There's no 3D screens on HP...the ride vehicle and movements are completely different than Spiderman.

They're both a mixture of live sets and screens...but so is The Great Movie Ride, Universe of Energy, Journey into Imagination, Spaceship Earth, Pirates of the Caribbean...........the list goes on.

Right, no 3D, but still similar in experience motion with multiple moving pictures. Nothing like the other rides you list. Technology may have been different, but my experience felt similar. Very good, but similar.

It is funny that we are arguing either/or, but I think those are correct that are noting that both Disney and Universal are growing. Maybe people are spending more time in Orlando, that is what we did. We spent more time at Disney and made our first visit to Universal. And Disney can cry all the way to the band because I was staying at their resort while visiting Universal.

Besides Sea World, how many other entertainment options are available nearby that Universal could pull from? I do not know and I don't know if we could really know about attendance. Except that Sea World did take a measurable hit.

One thing we can all agree on: Anybody does a good new ride; Disney, Universal, Sea World - it will be good for us.

 

[Silock]

But that doesn't mean they are cutting into Disney's market share. They're doing wellbut so is Disney. There is no denying that, no matter how much some people want to.

No one is saying Disney isn't doing well. We are saying that that may not continue to be the case if they don't start counteracting the Orlando moves of Universal with a little more rapidity.

 

[rteetz]

What people don't really seem to be thinking about when they talk about things like cutting into Disney's marketshare is the scale of Disney. For a start, it's WDW is just a single component of their theme park business. One of the things they look at when they choose to assign their budgets is Return on Investment. So... do they get better ROI putting Carsland over in California or improving one of the WDW? That was probably an easy call for them. What about the ROI on investing in Shanghai Disney over WDW? Well they have a partner there so I suspect the ROI is pretty good with Shanghai. Plus it's not a saturated market. So one of the big things that's happening is not that Disney isn't investing in theme parks. It's that its doing most of that investing somewhere other than Florida. But they're not oblivious to the competition. They're just doing the minimum they think they need to do in order to stave it off. Why Avatarland in DAK rather than Star Wars in DHS? Well partly it's a timing thing (but they could easily have made the deal with Lucas instead of Cameron). Primarily though it's because there's more ROI on Avatarland. Why? DAK has to be a far more expensive park to run than DHS. It's got all those animals after all. It has less merchandising opportunities, less food areas and it doesn't have special draws like Star Wars weekends. The Avatarland investment (by Disney's assessment) will give them the most bang for their buck by giving them a full day park, increasing attendance and giving more shopping/eating areas. DHS may be somewhat neglected, but my guess is it runs at a profit. Okay so if there's a good ROI on Avatarland, why not till 2017? Well as I've mentioned before they're amortizing costs over multiple years. Again because they've made the assessment that it will be well after 2017 before Universal could actually be a threat to them. And they're right. Universal is making some major moves, but its gains haven't touche WDW in any noticeable way. Left completely unchecked they will of course. But we're talking a decade or two for that. Why so long? Because Disney has lock in on multiple fronts. They have more parks, more resorts, more facilities *and* they have DVC. DVC means that people are coming to Disney and spending money at Disney... even when they're not in the parks. And from Disney's perspective... they've already countered. They'll have their "new" stuff in place before this decade is out. Of course this leads back to the argument about Avatarland, but honestly a lot of the arguments I see there are personal taste being justified as a business argument.

very well said I agree with it all yet people will still continue the endless argument.

 

[mbrou24]

Okay. Now I know this topic has been argued constantly and it's probably old to everyone, so let me start with the disclaimer that I enjoy both Disney world and universal. Now that that is out of the way lets get into the meat and potatoes of my argument...

First- lets start with history.... Wdw has been open 20 years longer than universal And therefore has had more time to develop a reputation and relationship with their customer base. In 20 years people could be saying the same thing about universal that they are about Disney world now.

Secondly- Disney world resort is considerably bigger. But universal does have the land to expand as the land they supposedly sold off when they were struggling years ago was sold to holding companies with no history or even employees, quite similar to the way Walt started the Florida project actually

Thirdly- you really can't take I to account anything universal did prior to 2009 at this point because that was under a different ownership who clearly was not committed to guest satisfaction. Since Comcast took over in 2009 the change has been dramatic as evidenced by everyone else's post on this thread that does not need repeating.

Now, to respond to a few other things.... I think the issue is that over the last 5 years universal has shown that quality attractions with great theming and detail can be completed very fast. But just down I drive, Disney is taking forever to complete new attractions. I understand the spreading out of expenses, just when a company less than 20 minutes away is doing the exact opposite, it makes people scratch their head a little.

Universal is succeeding at exactly what their goal is... To slowly grab people away from Disney. They are doing so by providing a commitment to quality.. New rides every year, quality hotel accommodations, overhauling city walk... This is all done in hopes of getting a person that either wouldn't give them the time of day or would only spend one day at universal before while vacationing to Disney world, will now give 2, 3, or 4 days and even stay on site. All this change occurring at universal while certainly helping the short term, is also for long term as it is providing guests who visit with a better overall experience in hopes they will become repeat customers.... And thus help universal over the long haul.

How does this affect Disney? Well it's obvious, say the average family would vacation to Disney 8 days, well they want to try universal now, so that's down 7 days Disney 1 universal. Now say they enjoyed universal, maybe next vacation it's 5 or 6 days Disney, and 2-3 days universal. While it won't greatly affect Disney in terms of attendance because the resort is so wide and they are still visiting for a considerable amount of time, it is costing then money because that's 2-3 days and hundreds maybe thousands lost from one family.

Again I enjoy both parks, I visit both on my trips down there regardless. But I do find the rate at which universal is building these new rides impressive. They are showing a desire and commitment to give their guests a better experience in a n industry where customer satisfaction is everything. But Disney has the reputation, which is why people keep coming back. That's why the argument for this is really 20 years from now. With this flurry of new rides, it will be interesting to see how guest perspective of both parks changes over the next 5-10-15 years.experience

 

[mbrou24]

What people don't really seem to be thinking about when they talk about things like cutting into Disney's marketshare is the scale of Disney. For a start, it's WDW is just a single component of their theme park business. One of the things they look at when they choose to assign their budgets is Return on Investment. So... do they get better ROI putting Carsland over in California or improving one of the WDW? That was probably an easy call for them. What about the ROI on investing in Shanghai Disney over WDW? Well they have a partner there so I suspect the ROI is pretty good with Shanghai. Plus it's not a saturated market. So one of the big things that's happening is not that Disney isn't investing in theme parks. It's that its doing most of that investing somewhere other than Florida. But they're not oblivious to the competition. They're just doing the minimum they think they need to do in order to stave it off. Why Avatarland in DAK rather than Star Wars in DHS? Well partly it's a timing thing (but they could easily have made the deal with Lucas instead of Cameron). Primarily though it's because there's more ROI on Avatarland. Why? DAK has to be a far more expensive park to run than DHS. It's got all those animals after all. It has less merchandising opportunities, less food areas and it doesn't have special draws like Star Wars weekends. The Avatarland investment (by Disney's assessment) will give them the most bang for their buck by giving them a full day park, increasing attendance and giving more shopping/eating areas. DHS may be somewhat neglected, but my guess is it runs at a profit. Okay so if there's a good ROI on Avatarland, why not till 2017? Well as I've mentioned before they're amortizing costs over multiple years. Again because they've made the assessment that it will be well after 2017 before Universal could actually be a threat to them. And they're right. Universal is making some major moves, but its gains haven't touche WDW in any noticeable way. Left completely unchecked they will of course. But we're talking a decade or two for that. Why so long? Because Disney has lock in on multiple fronts. They have more parks, more resorts, more facilities *and* they have DVC. DVC means that people are coming to Disney and spending money at Disney... even when they're not in the parks. And from Disney's perspective... they've already countered. They'll have their "new" stuff in place before this decade is out. Of course this leads back to the argument about Avatarland, but honestly a lot of the arguments I see there are personal taste being justified as a business argument.

See you're missing the point... Universal has universal Hollywood, many major additions coming, universal japan, major additions coming, they are going to build in china, and have other parks as well.... While the argument in this thread is centered on orlando, universal has other parks too that are also in the process of upgrading.

 

[ArthurKing1220]

The elephant in the room for all these claims about how Parks & Resorts continue to have magical growth is that those earnings are being driven by DVC sales, which they continue to refuse to break out in their earnings reports (for the obvious reason that doing so would reveal the exact extent that Disney is now depending on DVC to drive growth). I believe Disney now has 4k+ in DVC housing stock that they've sold and rented. They're becoming a miniature vacation property builder while maintaining that that activity is thematically relevant to a "Parks & Resorts" category. This is why they love building DVC so much. Note also that they include DVC stock in their reports of per room statistics. There is some smoke and mirrors going on.