Universal is taking advantage of Disney's weak spot

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

Don't worry. This competition is only going to make your future experiences that much better when visiting Disney World.

This is exactly what *this* WDW-lover hopes is the end result to all of this!

I couldn't care less about Universal, but hopefully their aggressive expansion and gaining of market share makes Disney take WDW to new places we can't even imagine today.

 

[Cyrano]

...... but hopefully their aggressive expansion and gaining of market share makes Disney take WDW to new places we can't even imagine today.

Competition is definitely good for the customers. I hope WDW, USF and SW continue to bring it on

 

[KatieCharlotte]

Seconding this!

I was just in London, England and had an opportunity to visit an enormous Harry Potter exhibit over at Warner Bros Studios. Several airplane hangers full of props and settings, plus a backlot - it's an entire day's worth of things to see, with a break halfway through for Butterbeer. It's been open for years - and it's still packed! We met people who'd travelled from Texas, especially to see it.

Harry Potter is a lot more than just a series of movies. For us, it was the first novel my daughter fell in love with. I remember her sitting on the couch with the book (before there even was any talk about a movie), saying, "This book makes a Harry Potter movie happen in my head!"

When we first stepped into Hogsmede in Universal, she literally cried. There's nothing else that can even come close, for her, to the experience of a childhood fantasy suddenly made real.

And there's a whole generation of kids, just like her, who grew up with these books. And they'll pass their love on to their kids, and their grandkids. Harry Potter will no more go out of popularity than Mary Poppins or Peter Pan. It's one for the ages!

I have to agree, having two young HP fanatics in my house. DD became an excellent reader by working her way through the first Harry Potter book the summer after first grade, three years after the last book was published. She and DS say no other fantasy series comes close to HP. They will share HP with their kids, just like DH shared Star Wars and I shared Beauty and the Beast and the Little Mermaid. They do not like thrill rides, but they were thrilled by Hogsmead and want to return to see the expansion.

 

[999DoomBuggies]

I love universal..I really do..but........I have a son that is over 300 pounds and he can ride very little at Universal..he can ride EVERYTHING at Disney....I don't get why they will build new attractions that people of size can not ride...Disney can do it..why can't Universal? He can ride Men in Black, but could not ride Dispicable Me. It was brand new at the time..Forget roller coasters, no way he will fit in those..so I guess Disney is my only choice when he is with me...wake up Universal...you are missing a whole lot of paying customers because of this!

Best post of the year. This board is astounding.

 

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

Best post of the year. This board is astounding.

*That* was the "best post of the year"?

Am I missing something?

 

[MichiganDVC]

Once more, I wonder how another "Universal is better" thread is on the WDW Strategies and Attractions board.

 

[Disneychick75]

Once more, I wonder how another "Universal is better" thread is on the WDW Strategies and Attractions board.

It's a thread comparing Universal and Disney. Is there a sticky prohibiting this?

 

[morethananyonex]

Once more, I wonder how another "Universal is better" thread is on the WDW Strategies and Attractions board.

Seems more relevant than another "Yay, I got an Elsa dress!", "My child is so wonderful because they ___________ in the parks" or "What's the funniest thing you've ever overheard in WDW?"

Are those entertaining? Sure. But much less relevant than a thread that is directly comparing WDW to Universal. I wonder why nobody ever complains about the off topic nature of those types of threads.

 

[sethschroeder]

Have these become old news?
Mickey Mouse = 86 years old
Snow White= 77 years old
Cinderella = 64 years old

Snow White - 200 year old story
Cinderella - 300 year old story
Mickey Mouse - over 200 film appearances since 1928

You can't compare harry potter a new kid on the block to any of these. I did see now that Harry Potter is coming out with new movies which will help prolong the timeframe. If the Potter universe keeps gaining content it will survive, my whole premise was prior to knowing about this new content.

To go one further hansel and gretel are both character that will stand the test of time. I would almost put Lord of the Rings in that realm as well and that is really the biggest franchise to lock down. Give Harry 40 more years of fan obsession and possibly it's starts to get outside of pop culture but again it's content that has to keep coming I feel for it not to get lost in history and relegated to just one of those books you read instead of a cult following. Would you say the Simpsons will always be a blockbuster name? As a huge Simpsons fan I find it hard to believe in 50 years it will still really be around.

 

[fairyprincess88]

Snow White - 200 year old story
Cinderella - 300 year old story
Mickey Mouse - over 200 film appearances since 1928

You can't compare harry potter a new kid on the block to any of these. I did see now that Harry Potter is coming out with new movies which will help prolong the timeframe. If the Potter universe keeps gaining content it will survive, my whole premise was prior to knowing about this new content.

To go one further hansel and gretel are both character that will stand the test of time. I would almost put Lord of the Rings in that realm as well and that is really the biggest franchise to lock down. Give Harry 40 more years of fan obsession and possibly it's starts to get outside of pop culture but again it's content that has to keep coming I feel for it not to get lost in history and relegated to just one of those books you read instead of a cult following. Would you say the Simpsons will always be a blockbuster name? As a huge Simpsons fan I find it hard to believe in 50 years it will still really be around.

Potter is not all that new though for as popular as it still is. The first book was released 17 years ago before many of it's current fans were even born. Book two was released 15 years ago. Heck, the first movie was released over a decade ago.

You can't compare Potter to the Simpsons as you are taking away the heart and soul of Potter and that's the books. The books will remain the same brand new awesome story to the new readers picking them up. Just because my generation(the Potter generation) is grown up now doesn't take away from the fact that a new generation is now reading the books for the first time.

Comparing Harry Potter with the Simpsons is just ridiculous. That's like comparing Charles Dickens to Twilight.

 

[clsteve]

Snow White - 200 year old story
Cinderella - 300 year old story
Mickey Mouse - over 200 film appearances since 1928

You can't compare harry potter a new kid on the block to any of these. I did see now that Harry Potter is coming out with new movies which will help prolong the timeframe. If the Potter universe keeps gaining content it will survive, my whole premise was prior to knowing about this new content.

I'm sorry, I'm not quite following your premise in conjunction with your examples ---- so what new content have we had for Cinderella and Snow White in the past 80 years or so.....?

So they can survive, of course

 

[sethschroeder]

Potter is not all that new though for as popular as it still is. The first book was released 17 years ago before many of it's current fans were even born. Book two was released 15 years ago. Heck, the first movie was released over a decade ago.

You can't compare Potter to the Simpsons as you are taking away the heart and soul of Potter and that's the books. The books will remain the same brand new awesome story to the new readers picking them up. Just because my generation(the Potter generation) is grown up now doesn't take away from the fact that a new generation is now reading the books for the first time.

Comparing Harry Potter with the Simpsons is just ridiculous. That's like comparing Charles Dickens to Twilight.

So you think Harry Potter is one of the greatest works of human history? I am sure many of the die hard fans believe this but that was not my inclination.

Also you can't say the book came out 17 years ago thus its got a following that will last the ages, they have released new content pretty much every 1-2 years for the last 17 years. New releases in book/movie (97,98,99,00,01,02,03,04,05,05,07,07,09,10,11) and now with the release of 3 new books/movies its likely to extend out a while before that "stale" state sets in that shows the difference between pop culture and all time great works of literature and culture which from universal's perspective I would never want, I would always want another story or movie around the corner.

Back to my original point do people think Harry Potter will live on like: Lord of the Rings, Catcher in the Rye, Don Quixote, A Tale of Two Cities?

By the way Disney would be LUCKY to have Harry Potter under their banner by no means is having Harry a negative. The reason Mickey works so well for Disney is he is cross-generational-platform-story. Since he lives in shorts originally like Daffy and Bug Bunny they are icons that can be a face of a park and be the calling card for generations.

 

[fairyprincess88]

So you think Harry Potter is one of the greatest works of human history? I am sure many of the die hard fans believe this but that was not my inclination.

Also you can't say the book came out 17 years ago thus its got a following that will last the ages, they have released new content pretty much every 1-2 years for the last 17 years. New releases in book/movie (97,98,99,00,01,02,03,04,05,05,07,07,09,10,11) and now with the release of 3 new books/movies its likely to extend out a while before that "stale" state sets in that shows the difference between pop culture and all time great works of literature and culture which from universal's perspective I would never want, I would always want another story or movie around the corner.

Back to my original point do people think Harry Potter will live on like: Lord of the Rings, Catcher in the Rye, Don Quixote, A Tale of Two Cities?

The question is, why do you think it won't?

It's the biggest selling book series of all time. It is credited for reviving childhood literacy in a way that was unexpected in the digital age. It is the catalyst of new common words(ask most random 13-30 year olds what a Muggle is and they will know the answer), a new college level sport that is gaining Olympic attention(Qudditch). It has been shown in actual live polls and studies that most tweens to 35-year old's can tell you the name of the Minister for Magic during the Mauraders era before they could tell you the names of the US Presidents during the World Wars. Quiz a group of college kids and see which ones know what a thestrial is and which ones know what Catcher in the Rye is about and it will show that just because one is new and one is old does not mean that they both don't have equal value in what they've done for literature.

I'm not saying that Potter is the greatest literary event in history, because it's not, but if you think it has no cultural reverence without it being constantly updated with new content then you would be seriously downplaying it's standing in modern society. There is a reason Universal is selling millions and millions of butterbeer and ice mice and Every Flavor Beans and that reason is those items are a part of this new world post-Potter and everyone knows what they are.

 

[MichiganDVC]

It's a thread comparing Universal and Disney. Is there a sticky prohibiting this?

Seems more relevant than another "Yay, I got an Elsa dress!", "My child is so wonderful because they ___________ in the parks" or "What's the funniest thing you've ever overheard in WDW?" Are those entertaining? Sure. But much less relevant than a thread that is directly comparing WDW to Universal. I wonder why nobody ever complains about the off topic nature of those types of threads.

No one said "prohibited." Just not attractions or strategies. As much as I don't want to read about Elsa dresses, Anna and Elsa are attractions at WDW. Talking about overhearing CMs takes place at WDW. This thread just talks about how Universal is better in some people's opinions.

 

[Magpie]

Back to my original point do people think Harry Potter will live on like: Lord of the Rings, Catcher in the Rye, Don Quixote, A Tale of Two Cities?

Yes, I believe it will. not because it is great literature. It isn't. (Seriously, Rowling, green comes in shades other than 'emerald'!) But because it built a universe and gave it life, and generations of children and adults have happily moved in, to live there in their imaginations.

The Lord of the Rings wasn't great literature, either. (OMG, so much walking!) But the world Tolkien created is glorious. And that book didn't require 'new content' to keep it fresh, either.

 

[999DoomBuggies]

So you think Harry Potter is one of the greatest works of human history? I am sure many of the die hard fans believe this but that was not my inclination. Also you can't say the book came out 17 years ago thus its got a following that will last the ages, they have released new content pretty much every 1-2 years for the last 17 years. New releases in book/movie (97,98,99,00,01,02,03,04,05,05,07,07,09,10,11) and now with the release of 3 new books/movies its likely to extend out a while before that "stale" state sets in that shows the difference between pop culture and all time great works of literature and culture which from universal's perspective I would never want, I would always want another story or movie around the corner. Back to my original point do people think Harry Potter will live on like: Lord of the Rings, Catcher in the Rye, Don Quixote, A Tale of Two Cities? By the way Disney would be LUCKY to have Harry Potter under their banner by no means is having Harry a negative. The reason Mickey works so well for Disney is he is cross-generational-platform-story. Since he lives in shorts originally like Daffy and Bug Bunny they are icons that can be a face of a park and be the calling card for generations.

Name some other series of books that are not religious based that are as profitable as potter.

 

[OnSpaceshipEarth]

Once more, I wonder how another "Universal is better" thread is on the WDW Strategies and Attractions board.

This board is where most things "current" are posted within the WDW Universe(which includes Universal)...that's just what it's become. Yes, there is a Rumours and News board but it doesn't seem to generate a fraction of the response and interaction that this particular board does.

On a personal note...I don't think "Universal is better than Disney"...not by a long shot. I started the thread because it was just announced that Universal has taken away some of WDW's market share for the first time. That's HUGE, and shows how Universal's aggressive strategy of expansion and new headliner attractions is working while Disney is spending billions all over the world leaving WDW on a back-burner. Hence the "weak spot" in the thread title.

WDW is where my HEART is. I hope that Universal's growth ignites another era of great WDW expansion. Sadly, it doesn't seem to be...but I remain catiously optimistic.

 

[Cyrano]

Once more, I wonder how another "Universal is better" thread is on the WDW Strategies and Attractions board.

Because we have allowed it If this topic is not of interest to you join in the many other threads.

By the way this is not an invitation to discuss board moderation in public

 

[NYDisneyKid]

Disney is spending billions on Magic Band technology and Shanghai Disney...as well as their other international parks.

Walt Disney World is getting hardly anything. Sure New Fantasyland and Avatarland(still three years away at least!) are going on but Universal is just growing and adding at an insane pace.

Since Disney is so much more *spread out* around the world with capital expenditures they are exposing their CROWN JEWEL Walt Disney World to insane pilfering from Universal.

I would love to hear froim anyone how WDW can recover from Universal Orlando's onslaught when Disney is spread too thin with their global commitments.

As long as my shares of Disney stock keeps rising (and splitting) I will be a happy camper.

 

[jsilvers]

Name some other series of books that are not religious based that are as profitable as potter.

The Wizard of Oz immediately comes to mind. For decades, a new book came out every year (the "Famous Forty"). Interestingly, Disney long had the rights to the series, but never quite figured out what to do with it (i.e., the abandoned Mouseketeer "Rainbow Road to Oz" in the 1950s and the poorly-received "Return to Oz" in 1985).