Universal UK

[BrianLo]

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.

My criticism isn’t one of spend, I’m sure this resort will still be very expensive. It’s one of scaling and design philosophies.

Neither major operator knows how to build Disneyland or Efteling anymore. It puts you in an awkward position when you only want to build 75% of Beijing, which obviously was not very good to begin with. Large scale with wedges cut out, quite literally in this case.

Maybe I’m way off the mark with my opinions, but does anyone actually like Beijing?

 

[WoundedDreamer]

My criticism isn’t one of spend, I’m sure this resort will still be very expensive. It’s one of scaling and design philosophies.

Neither major operator knows how to build Disneyland or Efteling anymore. It puts you in an awkward position when you only want to build 75% of Beijing, which obviously was not very good to begin with. Large scale with wedges cut out, quite literally in this case.

Maybe I’m way off the mark with my opinions, but does anyone actually like Beijing?

I see, that's certainly a fair argument that I agree with. I must have conflated your point on not very many hotel rooms with a different point on design philosophy.

A theme park should start with some goal or question to uniquely define it. For example, it might be exploring humanity's relationship with the sea, nature, or cinema. It could be celebrating the possibilities of human capacity and achievement. Or a park may commemorate the life and philosophy of a famous figure or culture. When there is a broader message that binds the subsidiary elements together, a natural harmony emerges. Seemingly disparate environments come together in a delightful way. There's no need for Epic Universe's "portals" to act as an explanation for why you're transitioning from one environment to the other. The lands are a part of a bigger story that they are all contributing to.

Theme parks today exist as a place to leverage intellectual property. The distinct underlying messages that unified theme parks are being ignored or forgotten. Epic Universe is a clear example of this. The gate says "Beyond this gate find gardens green and epic worlds to fill your dreams." So, as long as something qualifies as a "garden" or is an "epic world" it could be put into Epic Universe. There is no bigger unifying principle than that. Could Star Wars Galaxy's Edge be at Epic Universe? Yes! Could Pandora the World of Avatar be at Epic Universe? It's a fantastic world, put it in there! The only real unifying principle behind what appears in a Disney or Universal theme park these days is what the their corporate overlords own. A Simpsons ride makes sense in Universal park if they have the rights, but a Simpsons ride makes sense at a Disney park if they have the rights.

The reason neither operator can build Disneyland is because they're not building a wholistic park. They're building a vehicle to place intellectual property. There are environments in Epic Universe that I think rival the impressiveness of Tokyo Disney Sea. Unfortunately, they are not unified by any message that binds them all together. Universal Beijing and Universal Studios Great Britain are an expression of this march towards disharmony.

None of this should be interpreted as knock on Universal or Epic Universe. I hold Disney in far more contempt than Universal. Universal might be building something I disagree with philosophically, but at least they aren't vandalizing and breaking the harmony of something that was once better. I'm hoping that Universal's foray into the United Kingdom is a smash success!

 

[Centauri Space Station]

You lost me right here. Because, at least in Orlando, Disney is not "expanding." They are "replacing." Except, maybe, Villains (assuming it happens).

Monster inc land is taking a dead area with closed shops, and lackluster restaurants and putting better use plus the door coaster is an expansion to the park. Encanto should be a far more elaborate and handle more capacity than primeval whirl.

 

[Gusey]

Seems like Back to the Future is getting more and more likely

 

[BrianLo]

The reason neither operator can build Disneyland is because they're not building a wholistic park. They're building a vehicle to place intellectual property.

I didn’t mean building a wholistic park. None of us think Universal has the capability to do that, which is why it is always graded on a differing curve.

Rather it is the grandiosity and scaling. Both operators keep spending more and more because they keep going bigger and bigger. If you don’t show up with the appropriate budget to support that, you run into problems.

Universal has been a little more erratic with their spending, often (with the exception of the maintained initially designed 80% of epic), they won’t spend the required amount to develop something that warrants longevity. See Villains Con or Dreamworks land. UK shoots itself in the foot upfront by starting with Beijing and having to take bites out because the budget doesn’t support it.

What’s increasingly proving true is that this isn’t actually the company that built Epic or Secret Life of Pets or even the coasters at IOA. It’s the teams that more recently brought us Villains, Dreamworks and the Werewolf coaster. Though I’m quite certain there is still a solid A team, but they probably are not on Universal’s IP.

I also think the brain drain is going to accelerate. Unless you are on the Nintendo portfolio, you risk participating in very little artistry. Which is strictly a personal complaint, I do irrationally dislike cloning.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

I didn’t mean building a wholistic park. None of us think Universal has the capability to do that, which is why it is always graded on a differing curve.

Rather it is the grandiosity and scaling. Both operators keep spending more and more because they keep going bigger and bigger. If you don’t show up with the appropriate budget to support that, you run into problems.

Universal has been a little more erratic with their spending, often (with the exception of the maintained initially designed 80% of epic), they won’t spend the required amount to develop something that warrants longevity. See Villains Con or Dreamworks land. UK shoots itself in the foot upfront by starting with Beijing and having to take bites out because the budget doesn’t support it.

What’s increasingly proving true is that this isn’t actually the company that built Epic or Secret Life of Pets or even the coasters at IOA. It’s the teams that more recently brought us Villains, Dreamworks and the Werewolf coaster. Though I’m quite certain there is still a solid A team, but they probably are not on Universal’s IP.

I also think the brain drain is going to accelerate. Unless you are on the Nintendo portfolio, you risk participating in very little artistry. Which is strictly a personal complaint, I do irrationally dislike cloning.

I think you’re making several interesting points. Let me see if I’m fully understanding what you mean.

Your core argument seems to be that recently Universal has taken a bigger is better approach. Their newer theme parks feature wide paths, open space, and expansive vistas. That leaves a massive canvas to fill. That’s all well and good, but to actually fill the canvas takes money and careful design. Something that Universal management may balk at.

So, what is Universal Creative to do? They’ll fill the empty space with something, even if it’s poor quality or unsightly. It could be ugly rollercoasters, cheap boxy buildings, or uninspired clones. Instead of building something smaller but more artistically rich, Universal chooses to go big and poor quality.

It’s like if someone decided to host a fancy dinner for a group of 400 guests, but then balked at the price of the catering and alcohol bill. Instead of scaling back the size of the event to make the catering cost more manageable, they just decide to serve everyone grape juice and bad cuts of meat. The ideal of being big got in the way of having a high quality experience.

You’d argue that Universal Beijing was already suffering from this malady when it opened despite its staggering price tag of $7.5 billion (inflation adjusted). Now, Universal Studios Great Britain is using Universal Beijing’s footprint while being given a budget that will be billions less than Universal Beijing. It could take this detrimental effect to the extreme.

Is this roughly the point you’re making?

 

[BrianLo]

I think you’re making several interesting points. Let me see if I’m fully understanding what you mean.

Your core argument seems to be that recently Universal has taken a bigger is better approach. Their newer theme parks feature wide paths, open space, and expansive vistas. That leaves a massive canvas to fill. That’s all well and good, but to actually fill the canvas takes money and careful design. Something that Universal management may balk at.

So, what is Universal Creative to do? They’ll fill the empty space with something, even if it’s poor quality or unsightly. It could be ugly rollercoasters, cheap boxy buildings, or uninspired clones. Instead of building something smaller but more artistically rich, Universal chooses to go big and poor quality.

It’s like if someone decided to host a fancy dinner for a group of 400 guests, but then balked at the price of the catering and alcohol bill. Instead of scaling back the size of the event to make the catering cost more manageable, they just decide to serve everyone grape juice and bad cuts of meat. The ideal of being big got in the way of having a high quality experience.

You’d argue that Universal Beijing was already suffering from this malady when it opened despite its staggering price tag of $7.5 billion (inflation adjusted). Now, Universal Studios Great Britain is using Universal Beijing’s footprint while being given a budget that will be billions less than Universal Beijing. It could take this detrimental effect to the extreme.

Is this roughly the point you’re making?

Yup, you got it!

The hotel rooms, the lack of a City Walk - is all a canary on the ultimate spend on this project. Which other than stomping out claims this was about to be the next Universal’s Tokyo Disney Sea, it alarms and saddens me to see what skeleton they picked. Plus I think it’s generally a poor park layout to begin with.

If they started small, we could have gotten a super enriched small park. Instead of a piecemeal large one. They started with a 7.5B resort and were told to hack 2-3B (?maybe more) off it, instead of the other way around.

The back to the future sounds promising. Sort of assuming that’s the spike coaster. That’s also going to be because it’s custom designed in a park that largely isn’t.

 

[Stevie Amsterdam]

My criticism isn’t one of spend, I’m sure this resort will still be very expensive. It’s one of scaling and design philosophies.

Neither major operator knows how to build Disneyland or Efteling anymore. It puts you in an awkward position when you only want to build 75% of Beijing, which obviously was not very good to begin with. Large scale with wedges cut out, quite literally in this case.

Maybe I’m way off the mark with my opinions, but does anyone actually like Beijing?

I'm going in August and will let you know when I'm back

 

[nickys]

They need to include Harry Potter.

I doubt Warner Bros will allow that to happen. The existing Studios Tour books out in advance year round. Unless they partner up somehow.

 

[JoeCamel]

I doubt Warner Bros will allow that to happen. The existing Studios Tour books out in advance year round. Unless they partner up somehow.

Maybe they buy them?
If WBD sinks much further they could be ripe for takeover

 

[Stevie Amsterdam]

They need to include Harry Potter.

I think they can do without it, if they come up with exclusive alternatives. Lord of the Rings would be a good substitute if you ask me.

Nintendo on the other hand, is an absolute must if they want to compete with DLP. For folks with kids it will be a question of 'Mickey or Mario?' and I'd bet on the latter, especially if the kid has already experienced Mickey one or more times.

 

[CoasterFan27]

While Harry Potter is undeniably popular, as is Nintendo, I don't think the park will reach the visitor numbers suggested without something flagship that is distinct to what's on offer in Florida. Fingers crossed for LOTR but who knows what it could be.

Certainly based on the current park layout it's solid and has great looking coasters that stand out (particularly in the UK), but there's no "wow" factor like a castle. Imagine a shire area, so much opportunity for food, entertainment and "family" fun that works for adults too.

The hotel rooms, the lack of a City Walk - is all a canary on the ultimate spend on this project. Which other than stomping out claims this was about to be the next Universal’s Tokyo Disney Sea, it alarms and saddens me to see what skeleton they picked. Plus I think it’s generally a poor park layout to begin with.

"the lack of a City Walk", that's just not true. In their communication to residents it's stated "Alongside the CityWalk could be a range of hotel and other accommodations, although we expect that many of our guests would also be staying in a
range of different locations across the UK, including within Bedford itself", and they even address concerns it would be a threat to local businesses by stating it offers distinct experiences that wouldn't take away from local restaurant visits. The concept we've seen omits large parts of the land, and has a large path leading off towards what's presumably that plus carpark.

 

[Robbiem]

While Harry Potter is undeniably popular, as is Nintendo, I don't think the park will reach the visitor numbers suggested without something flagship that is distinct to what's on offer in Florida. Fingers crossed for LOTR but who knows what it could be.

Certainly based on the current park layout it's solid and has great looking coasters that stand out (particularly in the UK), but there's no "wow" factor like a castle. Imagine a shire area, so much opportunity for food, entertainment and "family" fun that works for adults too.



"the lack of a City Walk", that's just not true. In their communication to residents it's stated "Alongside the CityWalk could be a range of hotel and other accommodations, although we expect that many of our guests would also be staying in a
range of different locations across the UK, including within Bedford itself", and they even address concerns it would be a threat to local businesses by stating it offers distinct experiences that wouldn't take away from local restaurant visits. The concept we've seen omits large parts of the land, and has a large path leading off towards what's presumably that plus carpark.

I agree that there isn’t a centrepiece icon but that’s a common theme for Universal Studios the icons are the gates and globe at the park entrance and the park is generally a series of competing icons around a lake, like world showcase as a standalone without spaceship earth

 

[coffeefan]

I think they can do without it, if they make sure to come with exclusive alternatives. Lord of the Rings would be a good substitute if you ask me.

Nintendo on the hand, is an absolute must if you want to compete with DLP. For folks with kids it be a question of 'Mickey or Mario?' and I'd bet on the latter, especially if the kid has already experienced Mickey 1 or more times.

Soon we will see if that happens in Florida. In California the bump was temporary, but it's possible.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

"the lack of a City Walk", that's just not true. In their communication to residents it's stated "Alongside the CityWalk could be a range of hotel and other accommodations, although we expect that many of our guests would also be staying in a
range of different locations across the UK, including within Bedford itself", and they even address concerns it would be a threat to local businesses by stating it offers distinct experiences that wouldn't take away from local restaurant visits. The concept we've seen omits large parts of the land, and has a large path leading off towards what's presumably that plus carpark.

That document is leaving open opportunities for the future. It's common for resort operators to share additional information beyond their immediate plans to make sure the government and the surrounding communities are all on the same page. You'll notice that the same document mentions the potential for a "mixed use" area that is not part of any currently announced plans. If/when they decide to build a City Walk in the future, they don't want the community to be surprised or angered. They are also in the process of getting certain areas rezoned. They have to give some justification for why they want the zoning they do. By sharing their longterm vision for the site, they are ensuring they will not face obstacles in the decades ahead. That doesn't mean they'll actually build anything in the short term. Walt Disney World has approval for a fifth theme, but they have no plans at the moment to build it. They still sought the approval because they wanted to preserve their optionality for the future.

In truth, no Universal fan should really be wanting a City Walk in the first stage of the build. Every dollar pound spent on the mall outside of the park means less money on placemaking and the rides. City Walk is a great attraction, but it's not mission critical to the resort's success. By contrast, having great rides and settings is nonnegotiable.

 

[Robbiem]

Toho want more Godzilla rides going forward! I guess this is more geared toward Asia but I would love a Godzilla area and attraction although I guess it might be seen as too similar to Jurassic World

 

[lazyboy97o]

"the lack of a City Walk", that's just not true. In their communication to residents it's stated "Alongside the CityWalk could be a range of hotel and other accommodations, although we expect that many of our guests would also be staying in a
range of different locations across the UK, including within Bedford itself", and they even address concerns it would be a threat to local businesses by stating it offers distinct experiences that wouldn't take away from local restaurant visits. The concept we've seen omits large parts of the land, and has a large path leading off towards what's presumably that plus carpark.

That they are being so open is why you shouldn’t get your hopes up that there is much more not being shown. “CityWalk” isn’t a defined term. You can even see an ornament free Toothsome’s in the art.

 

[BrianLo]

"the lack of a City Walk", that's just not true. In their communication to residents it's stated "Alongside the CityWalk could be a range of hotel and other accommodations, although we expect that many of our guests would also be staying in a
range of different locations across the UK, including within Bedford itself", and they even address concerns it would be a threat to local businesses by stating it offers distinct experiences that wouldn't take away from local restaurant visits. The concept we've seen omits large parts of the land, and has a large path leading off towards what's presumably that plus carpark.

I too was under the impression that wouldn’t be the full scope plan for opening day. Which, like I said is actually fine.

A reduced budget is fine, but start from the beginning with a proper redesign.

 

[Stevie Amsterdam]

Soon we will see if that happens in Florida. In California the bump was temporary, but it's possible.

Florida is an entirely different game than Europe. Imo, you can't compare the two with each other.

 

[Stevie Amsterdam]

I agree that there isn’t a centrepiece icon but that’s a common theme for Universal Studios the icons are the gates and globe at the park entrance and the park is generally a series of competing icons around a lake, like world showcase as a standalone without spaceship earth

Latest concept art suggest otherwise: