I’ve argued Alton -so far- is the UKs best themed park. Of course it’s not in the same division though.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Universal UK
- Thread starter Robbiem
- Start date
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I wonder if the plan is to lease land and/or let a 3rd party put up the cost for one?
Surely others will want to cash in on the park and build their own touristy things nearby with or without Universal's consent.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
La la la la la la Animagique
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Possibly the reason for the early info and art is to spur the approval processes and sway local opinions?
If they have a clear view of what is coming that might allay concerns that the unknown can bring up.
ednamodedarling
Well-Known Member
Hoping the absence of WICKED in the BBC article means they are fast tracking it for the Orlando resort first.
Though I am not convinced that green coaster is Jurassic themed at all.
** it is not lost on me that the green coaster in the concept art is similar to a certain attraction already in existence at the Orlando Resort ... perhaps a redo of MSHI isn't out of the realm of possibility. Though I would prefer WICKED to land at EPIC. **
Though I am not convinced that green coaster is Jurassic themed at all.
** it is not lost on me that the green coaster in the concept art is similar to a certain attraction already in existence at the Orlando Resort ... perhaps a redo of MSHI isn't out of the realm of possibility. Though I would prefer WICKED to land at EPIC. **
- In the Parks
- No
Universal has already done the local opinion part, they were all over the Bedford area when it was first announced, talking to locals gauging interest. they did a poll and got a 92% for people that were happy Universal were coming. And all of the local councils etc have already said they will approve any plans Universal submit (within reason of course)
cjkeating
Well-Known Member
When did you last go? The Merlin parks in the UK have been run like they are going out of business for a number of years now. Closing attractions without replacements, food contracted out to the company that provides food to British prisons, making their entertainment and 'imagineering' departments redundant, reduced park hours and off-peak closures and more...
They’re a mess yes but the general public don’t know any different.
This is a public that as opposed to paying £80 a ticket are more used to waiting for the Sun 2 for 1 offer.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I do wonder whether Universal will have a similar issue as in Hong Kong in that local visitors seemed more familiar with what to expect from a "Disneyland" based on experiences or knowledge of the Tokyo and California resorts than Disney seemed to presume. I remember a lot of the coverage at the time was of locals dismissing the park as an inferior version of those resorts, and I wonder how many people will approach this park with similar visions of Universal Orlando in their heads only to be disappointed.
That seemed a bit of a conundrum at the time for Disney as, while HKDL was certainly under built, I'm not sure the market was big enough to support a park on the scale people expected at opening, and I think it's only really got close through incremental growth over a long period.
I hope the park will be pitched as a day out rather than a full vacation destination to avoid comparisons and allow it to grow hopefully over time.
I’m intrigued by the arena in the concept art, I know people think waterworld but I’m not sure how appropriate that would be for the British climate. I wonder if it will be designed to act as a separate venue for concerts etc that could be popular for local traffic and drive hotel attendances. It looks separated from the rest of the park.
Similarly I guess if the park had down days the entrance corridor could open for hotel or other guests as a mall although I suspect they will at leat try for all year operations.
It will be interesting to see the wider resort plans as they develop
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I don't think the inclusion of Waterworld in the concept art means it's actually going to be Waterworld
It's likely a placeholder to indicate a stunt show of comparable size and quality.
It's likely a placeholder to indicate a stunt show of comparable size and quality.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
Bond.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Or not.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Disney and Universal could not be approaching their growth in a more different way. On one hand, you have Disney's multi-year plan emphasizing a maximization of existing assets. They hope to entice the people who aren't visiting to make the journey to a Disney resort. This approach means Disney is eschewing the flashy theme park launches for tried and true expansion. For the time being, there will be no Disneyland Mumbai, Disneyland Qingdao, or Disneyland São Paulo. We also know that no projects like Aulani are in the works either. Expansion will be at their six existing theme park resorts.
Oh, and of course, Disney has their cruise ships. They are going to be a method for Disney to reach new markets without the fixed theme park investment. A cruise ship provides more flexibility than an immovable theme park ever could. New Disney Cruise Line sailings are the extent of Disney entering new markets for now. Otherwise, Disney fans will need to buy tickets for flights to Orlando, Anaheim, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Paris, or Shanghai.
By contrast, Universal's strategy is taking them in the opposite direction. We have Universal entering at least three new markets imminently. The UK, Las Vegas, and Texas will all have Universal attractions by 2031. These aren't individually massive investments like Epic Universe, but collectively they do present a sizable gamble on new theme parks and attractions.
Land constraints are one obvious reason Universal might have selected this strategy. Both Universal Hollywood and Universal Japan are landlocked with limited expansion opportunity (I know they're doing all they can to creatively use their land, but there's only so much that can be done). Universal Singapore is both land constrained and a franchisee. Investment in Universal Beijing is complicated by the structure of their partnership arrangement. Comcast can't unilaterally move forward with a project in Beijing. I'm sure the partners are working on some deal to expand their Chinese outpost. Even then, Comcast only owns a third of that property. They aren't going to need to mobilize vast sums of money for Beijing until a new park is launched years down the road.
The one existing property where they could make big moves is Universal Orlando Resort. Of course, that resort has just undergone one of its largest expansions since its inception. Universal is probably going to wait and see how the market reacts to Epic Universe before launching huge new projects.
Comcast/Universal is in a bind.
Michael Eisner's tenure saw Disney launch Euro Disney with vast amounts of space for expansion. Even the humble Hong Kong Disneyland Resort is designed to host up to three theme parks and thousands of hotel rooms. Disney's Shanghai partners wanted their version of Disneyland to be world class. That means something that is akin to Walt Disney World with thousands of hotel rooms and multiple theme parks. Both Walt Disney World and Disneyland Resort have many ways to expand or improve their existing parks. Disney has an embarrassment of riches when it comes to land they can develop or redevelop.
Universal Studios has grown rapidly throughout the 2010s and early 2020s. Maintaining that growth is not easy when two of the big growth drivers are nearly maxed out. So, what's Universal Parks and Resorts to do? The answer they've arrived at is to expand into new markets and geographies.
The Universal Kids and haunted house attractions are nontraditional. If they're successful, they could be replicated around the world. Universal Kids seems like it's trying to replicate Legoland New York or Legoland California. They're creating a regional project between their big parks and Six Flags. The park consists of mostly flat rides and simple coasters dressed up in vibrant environments. This must be viable business model or else Legoland wouldn't be open. If this park is successful, I'd expect more of these parks to proliferate. Worst comes to worst this park bombs or fails to make expected returns and it continues on as an oddity like Aulani is to Disney. The haunted house attraction can also be replicated (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Paris, London, etc.). If it bombs or underperforms it can easily be shuttered in a few years. Closing that attraction would be a small write off for a company like Comcast. Its closure will make an interesting blog post on a theme park fan site like Disney Quest or Club Disney do. "Did you know that Universal once had an attraction in Las Vegas?!?!" Balancing the cost of live actors while keeping admission prices reasonable will remain a constant challenge. Still, it might work.
Then, of course, there is Universal Studios Great Britain. This resort is markedly different from their other two developments. This is a resort that seems posed to start more regional, but has the potential to scale and become a multi-day experience. While the initial announcement of a theme park with four lands and 500 room hotel might seem conservative, this resort has plenty of runway. By my imprecise mapping, this park can scale up to about the size of Islands of Adventure or Universal Studios Florida. Admittedly, my estimates are pretty rough. I'm using the following guide to approximate things:
The proposed park area is labelled "TP/TP-S." This master plan might not be their finalized approach, but it gives us a clear idea of what their overall vision is. The initial park is going to start as a more conservative build than something like Epic Universe, but this is them planting the flag in the UK and the continent more broadly and saying "we're here." I'm intrigued by the "mixed use" land to the north of the property. Universal gives us some idea about it in their materials:
"We are also considering other mixed use development at the site that would be complementary to the theme park and resort, but could also be used by other parties, such as conference facilities, exhibition spaces, sport experiences, employment uses, and associated uses."
Universal hotels could easily fit into this mixed use area with a conference center and other amenities. Universal might go the Euro-Disney route and develop it as a non-entertainment project. Of course, random real estate developments in Bedford UK are not really Universal Parks and Resorts' comparative advantage. Making this a hospitality-focused area seems more likely.
Then we have land technically outside the project that seems suspiciously available. I'm referring to the land north and south of the "West Gateway Zone." I might end up making a fool of myself because I know nothing about the facts on the ground, but if those plots are available for development... That's a ton of land. There's enough there to build another park or even two. Regardless, Universal has plenty of opportunity for growth within the project's existing confines.
To give perspective, Universal/Comcast is likely going to invest more into Universal Studios Great Britain than they invested in Universal Studios Beijing before opening. They provided just 30% of the capital for Universal Beijing's $6.5 billion price. So, ~$2.2 billion in invested capital. Universal Studios Great Britain has already been described as a "multi-billion pound investment." That means at least 2 billion GBP (~$2.6 billion) will be invested into this resort. I'd say this is pretty much guaranteed to be the single largest investment Comcast has ever made in a foreign theme park (with the exception of Comcast acquiring the remaining interest in Universal Studios Japan). It should also be among their largest single investments in a theme park to date.
Universal has decided to move forward without a partner in this project. That means the scope is reduced compared to gargantuan projects like Shanghai Disney Resort or Universal Beijing. However, that ownership affords them greater control over their property and allows them to reap the rewards (or failures) more fully.
I do have a nagging worry about their attendance projections. 8.5 million guests in the first year is close to the numbers that Shanghai Disney Resort posted in its opening year. Shanghai Disney Resort cost the Walt Disney Company and Shanghai Shendi ~$7.3 billion in 2025 dollars after inflation adjustment. It should also be noted the price of labor and many goods in 2016 China was much less expensive than in 2025 Britain. We know Universal Studios Great Britain is explicitly being designed to be more affordable than Epic Universe. To approach Shanghai Disney attendance numbers without commensurate spending indicates that you're either much more efficient with money or Disney and Shendi massively overspent on Shanghai Disney. I'm a little worried that they're setting themselves up for failure here. What if Universal Studios Great Britain posts 6 million attendance in the first year? Do they panic? Do they stop investing?
Still, Europe is a natural market for Universal to expand into. With opportunities to grow in California and Japan dwindling, Universal Studios Great Britain opens a new runway. I'm only wondering why they haven't partnered with Royal Caribbean or Carnival to launch Universal Studios Cruise Lines. The possibilities for a minions cruise ship seem like a natural extension of the Universal Studios brand. As bad is a minions cruise ship sounds to me, it still wouldn't be as unattractive a vessel as the Disney Adventure...
Oh, and of course, Disney has their cruise ships. They are going to be a method for Disney to reach new markets without the fixed theme park investment. A cruise ship provides more flexibility than an immovable theme park ever could. New Disney Cruise Line sailings are the extent of Disney entering new markets for now. Otherwise, Disney fans will need to buy tickets for flights to Orlando, Anaheim, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Paris, or Shanghai.
By contrast, Universal's strategy is taking them in the opposite direction. We have Universal entering at least three new markets imminently. The UK, Las Vegas, and Texas will all have Universal attractions by 2031. These aren't individually massive investments like Epic Universe, but collectively they do present a sizable gamble on new theme parks and attractions.
Land constraints are one obvious reason Universal might have selected this strategy. Both Universal Hollywood and Universal Japan are landlocked with limited expansion opportunity (I know they're doing all they can to creatively use their land, but there's only so much that can be done). Universal Singapore is both land constrained and a franchisee. Investment in Universal Beijing is complicated by the structure of their partnership arrangement. Comcast can't unilaterally move forward with a project in Beijing. I'm sure the partners are working on some deal to expand their Chinese outpost. Even then, Comcast only owns a third of that property. They aren't going to need to mobilize vast sums of money for Beijing until a new park is launched years down the road.
The one existing property where they could make big moves is Universal Orlando Resort. Of course, that resort has just undergone one of its largest expansions since its inception. Universal is probably going to wait and see how the market reacts to Epic Universe before launching huge new projects.
Comcast/Universal is in a bind.
Michael Eisner's tenure saw Disney launch Euro Disney with vast amounts of space for expansion. Even the humble Hong Kong Disneyland Resort is designed to host up to three theme parks and thousands of hotel rooms. Disney's Shanghai partners wanted their version of Disneyland to be world class. That means something that is akin to Walt Disney World with thousands of hotel rooms and multiple theme parks. Both Walt Disney World and Disneyland Resort have many ways to expand or improve their existing parks. Disney has an embarrassment of riches when it comes to land they can develop or redevelop.
Universal Studios has grown rapidly throughout the 2010s and early 2020s. Maintaining that growth is not easy when two of the big growth drivers are nearly maxed out. So, what's Universal Parks and Resorts to do? The answer they've arrived at is to expand into new markets and geographies.
The Universal Kids and haunted house attractions are nontraditional. If they're successful, they could be replicated around the world. Universal Kids seems like it's trying to replicate Legoland New York or Legoland California. They're creating a regional project between their big parks and Six Flags. The park consists of mostly flat rides and simple coasters dressed up in vibrant environments. This must be viable business model or else Legoland wouldn't be open. If this park is successful, I'd expect more of these parks to proliferate. Worst comes to worst this park bombs or fails to make expected returns and it continues on as an oddity like Aulani is to Disney. The haunted house attraction can also be replicated (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Paris, London, etc.). If it bombs or underperforms it can easily be shuttered in a few years. Closing that attraction would be a small write off for a company like Comcast. Its closure will make an interesting blog post on a theme park fan site like Disney Quest or Club Disney do. "Did you know that Universal once had an attraction in Las Vegas?!?!" Balancing the cost of live actors while keeping admission prices reasonable will remain a constant challenge. Still, it might work.
Then, of course, there is Universal Studios Great Britain. This resort is markedly different from their other two developments. This is a resort that seems posed to start more regional, but has the potential to scale and become a multi-day experience. While the initial announcement of a theme park with four lands and 500 room hotel might seem conservative, this resort has plenty of runway. By my imprecise mapping, this park can scale up to about the size of Islands of Adventure or Universal Studios Florida. Admittedly, my estimates are pretty rough. I'm using the following guide to approximate things:
The proposed park area is labelled "TP/TP-S." This master plan might not be their finalized approach, but it gives us a clear idea of what their overall vision is. The initial park is going to start as a more conservative build than something like Epic Universe, but this is them planting the flag in the UK and the continent more broadly and saying "we're here." I'm intrigued by the "mixed use" land to the north of the property. Universal gives us some idea about it in their materials:
"We are also considering other mixed use development at the site that would be complementary to the theme park and resort, but could also be used by other parties, such as conference facilities, exhibition spaces, sport experiences, employment uses, and associated uses."
Universal hotels could easily fit into this mixed use area with a conference center and other amenities. Universal might go the Euro-Disney route and develop it as a non-entertainment project. Of course, random real estate developments in Bedford UK are not really Universal Parks and Resorts' comparative advantage. Making this a hospitality-focused area seems more likely.
Then we have land technically outside the project that seems suspiciously available. I'm referring to the land north and south of the "West Gateway Zone." I might end up making a fool of myself because I know nothing about the facts on the ground, but if those plots are available for development... That's a ton of land. There's enough there to build another park or even two. Regardless, Universal has plenty of opportunity for growth within the project's existing confines.
To give perspective, Universal/Comcast is likely going to invest more into Universal Studios Great Britain than they invested in Universal Studios Beijing before opening. They provided just 30% of the capital for Universal Beijing's $6.5 billion price. So, ~$2.2 billion in invested capital. Universal Studios Great Britain has already been described as a "multi-billion pound investment." That means at least 2 billion GBP (~$2.6 billion) will be invested into this resort. I'd say this is pretty much guaranteed to be the single largest investment Comcast has ever made in a foreign theme park (with the exception of Comcast acquiring the remaining interest in Universal Studios Japan). It should also be among their largest single investments in a theme park to date.
Universal has decided to move forward without a partner in this project. That means the scope is reduced compared to gargantuan projects like Shanghai Disney Resort or Universal Beijing. However, that ownership affords them greater control over their property and allows them to reap the rewards (or failures) more fully.
I do have a nagging worry about their attendance projections. 8.5 million guests in the first year is close to the numbers that Shanghai Disney Resort posted in its opening year. Shanghai Disney Resort cost the Walt Disney Company and Shanghai Shendi ~$7.3 billion in 2025 dollars after inflation adjustment. It should also be noted the price of labor and many goods in 2016 China was much less expensive than in 2025 Britain. We know Universal Studios Great Britain is explicitly being designed to be more affordable than Epic Universe. To approach Shanghai Disney attendance numbers without commensurate spending indicates that you're either much more efficient with money or Disney and Shendi massively overspent on Shanghai Disney. I'm a little worried that they're setting themselves up for failure here. What if Universal Studios Great Britain posts 6 million attendance in the first year? Do they panic? Do they stop investing?
Still, Europe is a natural market for Universal to expand into. With opportunities to grow in California and Japan dwindling, Universal Studios Great Britain opens a new runway. I'm only wondering why they haven't partnered with Royal Caribbean or Carnival to launch Universal Studios Cruise Lines. The possibilities for a minions cruise ship seem like a natural extension of the Universal Studios brand. As bad is a minions cruise ship sounds to me, it still wouldn't be as unattractive a vessel as the Disney Adventure...
Last edited:
SirLink
Well-Known Member
When one of your partners need projects to provide economic growth, just saying numbers on TV and newspapers doesn't do a lot. Humans are visual people and its easier to present to people outside of theme park fandom and get them excited about the project.
I will say this though the artwork shown at Beijing initial announcement to when shovels went in ground was fairly different.
HoustonHorn
Premium Member
You lost me right here. Because, at least in Orlando, Disney is not "expanding." They are "replacing." Except, maybe, Villains (assuming it happens).
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
I think Universal is playing it safe because this is 100% their project. They own this thing. Disney and Universal's international expansion strategy has centered around licensing deals and partnerships with governments. The last time Disney opened a theme park in an entirely new geography that was 100% owned by Disney was in 1971. Euro Disney was something of a middle ground, but even there they were insulated by the licensing deal with Euro Disney SCA. Euro Disney SCA could post losses year after year even as licensing and management fees kept coming Disney's way. Then we have the three Asian resorts all based on licensing deals and two of them relying on government largess.
Universal has been no different. Both Universal Studios Beijing and Universal Studios Japan launched with government investment. Universal Studios Singapore is a franchisee. The pattern is well established. Strictly speaking, Universal Kids Resort will be the first 100% wholly owned new theme park Universal has ever launched in a new geography after Universal Studios Hollywood. All their other parks have had some partner, including Universal Studios Florida.
Universal can be a little more daring when they're investing 30% of the capital and walking away with 30% of the profits, merchandise revenue, licensing fees based on revenue, and management fees based on revenue. Even if the park is breaking even or losing money they're still probably making money. Universal Studios Great Britain is 100% Universal's. That means no aid from governments or private equity. It's similar to what Disney did years ago when they decided to self finance all their movies. You increase your exposure to your own product for better or for worse.