DEBATE: The fifth theme park. Maybe this is the answer?

[manning]

The Battle for Orlando
Disney’s theme-park empire is under attack from Universal, its crosstown rival. Teens are the target. Can Spider-Man topple Cinderella?

By John HornNEWSWEEK

Aug. 12 issue — Christine Roum had a simple request of the front desk at Walt Disney’s Grand Floridian resort. She wanted directions to Universal’s Islands of Adventure, a popular new theme park just a few miles away toward Orlando. Roum might as well have asked the concierge for his kidney. “I can’t give you directions to Islands of Adventure,” he curtly replied, telling Roum, an L.A. screenwriter, to try directory assistance instead.

DISNEY BLAMES THE rude behavior several months ago on an overzealous “cast member.” But there’s good reason Disney doesn’t want to steer anyone toward the competition: Universal is loosening Disney’s stranglehold on Florida tourists, as Universal’s attendance has climbed 11 percent in the past two years while Disney’s has slipped 6 percent.

Once content to subsist on Disney’s table scraps, Universal thinks its expand- ing Orlando compound—centered on two theme parks, Islands of Adventure and Universal Studios Hollywood—now represents an alternative to the larger Walt Disney World Resort. Realizing it has the billion-dollar amenities to do better than poach an afternoon from a family’s five-day Disney visit, Universal is striking back where Mickey is most vulnerable: with teens who have outgrown Dumbo the Flying Elephant. Universal has even produced, but hasn’t yet had the chutzpah to broadcast, a TV spot with an ersatz Mickey wandering up to Universal Studios and saying, “I want to see what I’ve been missing.”

AVOIDING ENEMY SOIL

Disney isn’t laughing, and is pushing harder to sequester its guests. From the second they land at the airport, some of its visitors are whisked away to the four parks, never to set foot on enemy soil. Disney insists some tour operators include Disney tickets in multiday Orlando vacation packages, regardless of traveler interest. Disney is also developing an optional Internet service that aims to keep its guests booked to the minute: click here to reserve lunch at Cinderella Castle! Then it’s a 2:30 p.m. ride on Splash Mountain, a 4 p.m. mud wrap at Disney Institute’s spa and a monorail to Epcot for dinner. “Getting people to Orlando is our first job,” says Paul Pressler, chairman of Disney’s parks-and-resorts division. “Once you’ve arrived in Orlando, my goal is to capture as much of your time as I can.”

The theme-park fight has taken on new urgency. For the past year the scariest thrill ride has been watching the stock of both companies plummet even faster than the overall market. The September 11 attacks have curbed vacations, and the weak economy makes $51 daily tickets difficult to digest. In quarterly earnings announced last week, Disney’s parks-and-resorts profits slipped 17 percent, particularly worrisome since parks can contribute half of Disney’s profits. Universal’s parks, part of Vivendi Universal Entertainment’s film and TV operations, kick in just 5 percent of the bottom line, but delivered better first-quarter growth than any other Universal division. Universal’s two Florida parks sold 12.8 million tickets last year, up 11 percent from 1999. Attendance this year is ahead of 2001’s pace. Disney’s four parks sold 40 million tickets in 2001, down 6 percent from 1999. Disney’s 2002 reservations are off 10 percent. Universal apparently has figured out how to build a better mousetrap. Rather than offer a pale imitation of a Disney park, Universal has created a PG-13 destination. Disney may have rides with more staying power and refined design, but Universal builds attractions linked to hit films; that can make the rides hot. Two of this year’s box-office smashes, “Spider-Man” and “Men in Black II”—have Universal rides based on them. Disney, conversely, wants to turn its theme-park rides into movies, but is off to a bad start: “The Country Bears” was just skinned at the box office.

KIDS VS. TEENS

Disney and Universal aim at different demographics. Disney has well-scrubbed employees, including an endearing waitress in the ’50s Prime Time cafe who calls herself Auntie Claire. Skip ahead a few decades to Universal’s Hard Rock Hotel, where a gift-shop clerk has nine (visible) piercings. “For little kids, who can be better than Disney?” says Ron Meyer, president of Universal Studios. “But once kids get past 10 years old, it’s hard for Disney to change its basic environment.” Universal’s attitude is most palpable when you climb on its attractions—and stagger off them. Seven years before Marvel Comics became a Hollywood franchise, Universal shrewdly licensed the characters for rides, yielding The Incredible Hulk Coaster and The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man 3-D simulation ride.

Disney bristles over comparisons between its secluded 30,000-acre resort and Universal’s 2,300-acre compound, which borders on a highway of strip malls. Disney argues its real competition is destinations like Las Vegas and Paris. While both Disney and Universal have great restaurants and shopping malls, Disney World has such treats as 99 holes of golf and a lodge where giraffes wander by your room.

Even though Disney professes that Universal is no threat, it is building to meet the challenge. Disney-MGM Studios already offers the Rock ‘n’ Roller Coaster Starring Aerosmith, and ride designers will soon add more drops to The Twilight Zone Tower of Terror, where riders plunge 13 floors faster than gravity. Disney will also open next year the $100 million flight-simulator ride Mission: Space at Epcot.

The Magic Kingdom can’t be underestimated. And Universal, which first came to Orlando only 12 years ago, knows it. Not only do Universal hotels stock brochures for Disney theme parks, but Universal employees are all too happy to give out printed directions to them. Perhaps they know, like any good Disney fairy tale advises, a kid doesn’t stay a kid forever. © 2002 Newsweek, Inc.

 

[PKS44]

I have posted about this before, so at the risk of repeating myself-this aritcle points out the importance of population demographics.... the BULK of the market at anytime is actually a certain age...In the 50's 60's 70's and early 80's the Baby Boomers as kids and teens and young adults and were the driving force...then their children became a part of the market thus fueling the success of businesses that cater to families with young children-and thus creating "geniuses" like Eisner for being in the right business at the right time and not screwing it up...what he has failed to do is adequately plan and adjust for the shifting demographics...today's teens don't think Disney is cool and won't until they have families. Their baby boomer parents are not going to buy Disney's product like they did when they were kids or when their kids were little anymore, either..."Cool" places with teen directed thrills and in your face humor are what is hot now- to please the Echo boom-not sweet, senitmental "Disney" but Spongebob and Spiderman and coasters, etc...(or stuff that 50 year olds like-timeshares, beaches, skiing, etc where Disney has a chance to somehow tap into Boomer nostalgia for Disney) Frankly I don't think Disney dares to try to please the teen market sector without alienating their core market...One option is to have an asset without the Disney name (like Touchstone pictures and Miramax)-but I just don't see them creating a "teen" park subsidiary especially since these teens will only be teens for a while and then they will be families looking for family entertainment, just as families have done in the 50's and 60's 80's and 90's--so if Disney can hang in there, concentrate on pleasing their core market-families-- and cut back on the overbuilding they indulged in a mistaken notion that the family market would continue to grow-- things should turn around for them again in 2010 or so...and the "teen' centered parks will be hurting again..."it's the Circle of Life...."

 

[manning]

I see your point. Isn't building a teen oriented park somewhat like having a diversified stock portfolio? while one segment is down the other is up and vice-versa. The cycle keeps repeating.

 

[Miss Park Avenue]

“Getting people to Orlando is our first job,” says Paul Pressler, chairman of Disney’s parks-and-resorts division. “Once you’ve arrived in Orlando, my goal is to capture as much of your time as I can.”

[/B][/QUOTE]

So then explain to me again why park hours are cut?


I must say though that I wouldn't want to see a fifth park devoted to the preteen and teenage market. I always liked the fact that the entire family enjoyed WDW together. No everyone didn't ride everything. My parents watch our kids as DH and I ride ToT and SM, Rockin Rollercoaster etc. I like the mixing in of these rides within the parks. A little bit for everyone.

And am I the only one in the world who thinks simulater rides are lame??? They stick you in a box, shake it up, and let you out. I know I didn't "go" anywhere! I keep thinking people are going to tire of those kinds of attractions but I guess that proves how much I know.

 

[manning]

Like it or not, this seems to be working at Universal. I don't like it but, what else can be done to get the people back? When the kids become teens they want to go off and do their own thing. Maybe a balance of "you do things with the family and you can go off to the park of your choice. What's the answer? I don't know.

 

[hopemax]

And at the same time as the Newsweek article, you have a top Cedar Point official saying

Has the late '90s wave of building new thrill rides peaked?

An official at Cedar Point LP, the Sandusky, Ohio, amusement park that's widely known for its giant coasters, says yes.

"The current trend is toward adding more small rides more often instead of one big attraction every five years or so," said Brian Witherow, investor relations spokesman at Cedar Point, which owns six amusement parks and five water parks in the United States.

Witherow says baby boomers are less likely to be attracted by big coasters -- because of the stress on aging backs and necks. "They want to go on rides they can do with the grandkids," he said.

Orlando Sentinel article

 

[indigo]

In Florida I think Disney needs to stick with their core market -- Families. Teens don't get to other parks without their parents providing money and transportation. As long as Disney continues to build new attractions, new parades and shows, and new resorts that are attractive to families, they will continue to get the most time from visitors to Orlando.

Building a park for the teens, tweens, and 20 somethings hasn't worked in Anaheim and they have 16 million residents to draw from. It won't work in Orlando with much fewer residents (hence the low numbers at IOA for the last few years).

I think Disney has lost this family focus (pop century anyone?, Dino Land?, DCA!). This should be job number one for the current regime.

-indigo

 

[d-r]

Look.

Spider man. Hulk. Dueling Dragons. Men in Black.

Those are four cool rides.

Disney doesn't need to build a 5th gate targeted mainly at teens and tweens - on the contrary, that would be pretty stupid I think, because it would make some families turned off.

All Disney needs to do is about three or four really great cutting edge e-tickets that would appeal to teens and tweens (and us 30 somethings would probably like them too). Where the messed up, IMHO, was settling for the wild mouse in AK and not adding a world class coaster or two to go along with it. That would go along way right there. Add in Mission Space, and put another e-ticket into the studios. A new e-ticket wouldn't hurt MK either. Then you'd be hard to beat.

DCA is another story though. Three or four e-tickets there wouldn't hurt.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by indigo
[
Building a park for the teens, tweens, and 20 somethings hasn't worked in Anaheim and they have 16 million residents to draw from. It won't work in Orlando with much fewer residents (hence the low numbers at IOA for the last few years).
[/B]

Just a couple of points. Not all directed to you specifically... Seems to be working for IOA. As the article mentions their attendance is up over the last two years for that park. Seems that 20-25 years of customers ( Teen, tweens 20 sometings) is enough to build a park around.

I don't buy into the fact that adults with small kids do not like IOA . We have personally recommended IOA to three different families with Kids under 10 and they all came back loving the place. The kids had a great time as well. When I'm at the park there seems to be a wide demographic of people.

Now sure you’re going to have the people that those types of rides just don't appeal to at all. Or that can't see the forest because of the trees. I expect one to post on this thread at any time now. Then again that is really not the audience that Universal is looking for. They understand that Disney has a lock on the 40+ and the 10 and under. That is why there is little attention given to that audience at the parks. That does not mean they have ignored them completely.

BTW I think that IOA and USF is doing exactly what they setout to do. Steal a couple of days away from Disney. They've got us hooked. We are spending three days at US and IOA this Nov, where we would normally spend them at Disney

 

[Tik Tok]

Disney would have to be mad to add a fifth park now -- they can't even fill up the ones they have, much less a fifth one.

But be that as it may, if they did decide to add one, I really hope they don't try for a park with one demographic. What Disney does best (or did best) was building parks that appealed to everyone, be they young or old. Yes, in recent years they've lost touch with teens, but that doesn't mean they can't win them back with a few well placed thrill rides. But whatever they do, I think they would be fools to build a park that only appeals to teens.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by d-r
Look.

Spider man. Hulk. Dueling Dragons. Men in Black.

Those are four cool rides.

Disney doesn't need to build a 5th gate targeted mainly at teens and tweens - on the contrary, that would be pretty stupid I think, because it would make some families turned off.

All Disney needs to do is about three or four really great cutting edge e-tickets that would appeal to teens and tweens (and us 30 somethings would probably like them too). Where the messed up, IMHO, was settling for the wild mouse in AK and not adding a world class coaster or two to go along with it. That would go along way right there. Add in Mission Space, and put another e-ticket into the studios. A new e-ticket wouldn't hurt MK either. Then you'd be hard to beat.

DCA is another story though. Three or four e-tickets there wouldn't hurt.

I'm with d-r on this one. And Disney is capable of putting in such cutting edge e-tickets without having the sound of coasters rumbling through the air and effecting the atmosphere. It just requires the money Disney is unwilling to spend and the long term thinking they seemed to have forgotten about.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by thedscoop

With a few obvious exceptions, IOA and DinoRama are basically decorated in the same vein with IOA simply having much better ride mechanisms than DinoRama.

Umm...I would have disagree with you there. Suess Landing(Everything), Jurassic Park( Encounter, and the River Adventure and the whole feel of the land), Spiderman, The lost Content( Posidens Fury, The Sinbad Show). Toon Lagoon (Billge Rats) all of those in my opnion match what Disney has done with Themeing. So they missed with a couple of things Like the Hulk and Duddley. Disney has had their share of hits and misses too.

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by thedscoop
Europa, I meant more along the lines of is there an overall "theme" or purpose. To me DinoRama was just stuck there and called a roadside carnival. But what does a roadside carnival have to do with a kingdom of animals?

No argument there.

Similarily, at IOA (and yes I have bee there and love the rides at IOA), I don't see how the different "islands" fit together into an overall theme. Some might say Adventure is the theme but I'd argue that is way too broad. There doesn't seem to be any logical connection between Comic Books, Lost Continents and a Land full of Seuss.

Yeah I can see what your saying to an extent. For some reason it does not bother me at IOA like it does at AK. Not sure I can put my finger on it...but sitting in the Hotel room the night before our first trip to IOA with the park guide it all just seemed to fit together. It was going to be a park that had many different "Islands" of Adventure. When we walked in the park we were just amazed with what they had done. So I can overlook the less then cohesive "Islands".

We can't wait until we go back in November

 

[All Aboard]

Similarily, at IOA (and yes I have bee there and love the rides at IOA), I don't see how the different "islands" fit together into an overall theme. Some might say Adventure is the theme but I'd argue that is way too broad. There doesn't seem to be any logical connection between Comic Books, Lost Continents and a Land full of Seuss.

As much as I hate to do this... The same thing can be said about (and just as inappropriately) The Magic Kingdom. What do spaceships and liberty trees and jungle cruises have to do with one another? I just don't get the "theme" of the Magic Kingdom. [that's me talking in another voice (not our AV, but... nevermind). I, of course, "get" the theme of MK]

I like the way IOA is pulled off. I like the way you cross a bridge from one world to another. Some transitions are smooth - Suess to Marvel to Toon plus Lost Continent to Jurassic. And two are not Toon to JP & LC to Suess. But it works for me. I like it. Travelling from one realm to another as you work your way around the lagoon.

 

[The Duchess]

I know my husband is drooling to go to the Universal Studios IOA or whatever it's called, but I'm a Disney girl through and through. So, I think I can successfully put this off at LEAST another 8 or 10 years (when DS is into his teens) and even then I suspect we may be taking separate vacations. I'm not into the amusement park thing. It seems loud and garish.
Plus I don't think Univesal has golf yet, so I'm safe for awhile and I was promised GF full boat for our 10th anniversary.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

Hey scoop!! You can say that again!!!

 

[EUROPA]

Originally posted by DVC-Landbaron
Hey scoop!! You can say that again!!!

POST COUNT +++

 

[Evil Princess]

Disney doesn't need a fifth themepark. Like someone once said (sorry, I'm too lazy to read the thread again!) They must add a few more e-ticket attractions to their exisiting parks.

I know Disney is very family oriented, but lets face it, building a major coaster in one park won't hurt the place. Sure, some of the younger kids will shy away, but what about the teenagers? Teens do go to Disney, and they aren't all Disney obsessed like I am. Personally, I am perfectly content with riding the Haunted Mansion, I love it. But I am also a coaster enthusiast.

Adding one B&M coaster to a Disney park would be wonderful. Could you imagine a completely themed, all done out beemer? It wouldn't have to be the biggest coaster or the wildest, just a step or two above Space Mountain. If anyone could enhance a great coaster, it would be Disney. Give them a beemer, a reasonable budget, and a good theme, and they could blow Hulk or Dueling Dragons out of the water.

 

[raidermatt]

I know Disney is very family oriented, but lets face it, building a major coaster in one park won't hurt the place.

Yes it will. The funds to build the coaster could have been used to instead build and E-ticket ride that has a lower height requirement, or even NO height requirement. Its an opportunity cost.

Yes, attention needs to be focused on the existing parks, but that doesn't mean a 5th park couldn't be added.

I like the idea of diversifying to a certain extent.

My main reason for not really being in favor of a 5th park at this time is that current mgmt hasn't shown the ability to build a successful park, and they don't seem to be learning from their mistakes.

AK had disappointing numbers due to a cutback on the volume of attractions, and to a lesser extent the quality of those attractions. Disney's response? Build fewer, cheaper additions.

In some ways, DCA is an example of the same mistakes, only worse.

I shudder to think what they would give use if they built another park right now.

 

[Evil Princess]

But face it, THEY ARE loosing their teen audience, one who would prefer IOA. It's a reality.

If they built ONE good coaster, one new one, and added it to a park, lets say Animal Kingdom, chances are families wouldn't stop going to Animal Kingdom because there is one ride that their children cannot ride b/c of height, fear, etc.

BUT you will have those teenagers saying "wow, something thrilling!" leading them into the gates.

This is especially good for families who not only have teenagers, but younger children in the family as well. It would offer more options for these types of families.

Keep in mind I'm not saying shove coasters all over the place, I'm just talking about ONE coaster in one park.