ROI is the problem for new parks

[Pizza Moon]

I just was thinking—that’s why they do what they do currently, both Disney and Universal in lockstep.

I think it goes:

Build IP rides generally that yield the highest marketing ROI >
Repurpose underutilized space where they can > Build totally new rides/lands >
Add new parks to their existing resorts >
Build new parks in new resorts that don’t cannabilize existing markets >
Build new parks in resorts that do have some over-lap.

If costs of goods and services plummet due to advancements in humanoid robotics + manufacturing and supply chains, 3D printing, and digital intelligence (replacing a lot of admin. overhead and massively increasing productivity for those that remain) like things seem poised to, say in 10 years, does the math start making sense?

Like I think we need to view their expansions as totally uncoupled from current market conditions and think big picture.

Universal UK will slightly cannibalize into their Orlando parks, so I think, despite it being weaker than say Epic or Shanghai, it could potentially reshape the conversation to make sense taking advantage of wealthy locals m, in even cross-over markets, so I’m not saying it’s a sure thing, but I could envision a future where we see more theme parks in America too to take advantage of this.

Either by Disney or Universal, Paramount/Warner now, or even like a ride manufacturer like Mack Ride eventually blowing a small concept into Europa Park, though I think land reclamation and the scale required to do it right like Epic and Shanghai (and not like the Universal Kids Resort), is probably the right approach.

Post-China/UAE/Saudi markets cornered, I think it’ll be time for Disney and Universal to add parks to their existing resorts/markets, build-out a theme park in a stable South American country with a booming middle class (give it 10 years and I think it’ll exist), a resort in India, and of course then place parks in the Northeast US market (New Jersey or a Maryland), and something between the triangle that is Austin/Houston/Dallas.

You’d likely get decades without paying taxes and billions in state investment alongside a favorable zoning environment, as society continues to wake up that NIMBYism is bad, and would likely jump at any mega project like this.

Play devil’s advocate with me, what do you think is possible if these conditions come to pass, and a new ROI and underserved capacity pushes them to start expanding in unexpected ways?

 

[DisneyHead123]

I just was thinking—that’s why they do what they do currently, both Disney and Universal in lockstep.

I think it goes:

Build IP rides generally that yield the highest marketing ROI >
Repurpose underutilized space where they can > Build totally new rides/lands >
Add new parks to their existing resorts >
Build new parks in new resorts that don’t cannabilize existing markets >
Build new parks in resorts that do have some over-lap.

If costs of goods and services plummet due to advancements in humanoid robotics + manufacturing and supply chains, 3D printing, and digital intelligence (replacing a lot of admin. overhead and massively increasing productivity for those that remain) like things seem poised to, say in 10 years, does the math start making sense?

Like I think we need to view their expansions as totally uncoupled from current market conditions and think big picture.

Universal UK will slightly cannibalize into their Orlando parks, so I think, despite it being weaker than say Epic or Shanghai, it could potentially reshape the conversation to make sense taking advantage of wealthy locals m, in even cross-over markets, so I’m not saying it’s a sure thing, but I could envision a future where we see more theme parks in America too to take advantage of this.

Either by Disney or Universal, Paramount/Warner now, or even like a ride manufacturer like Mack Ride eventually blowing a small concept into Europa Park, though I think land reclamation and the scale required to do it right like Epic and Shanghai (and not like the Universal Kids Resort), is probably the right approach.

Post-China/UAE/Saudi markets cornered, I think it’ll be time for Disney and Universal to add parks to their existing resorts/markets, build-out a theme park in a stable South American country with a booming middle class (give it 10 years and I think it’ll exist), a resort in India, and of course then place parks in the Northeast US market (New Jersey or a Maryland), and something between the triangle that is Austin/Houston/Dallas.

You’d likely get decades without paying taxes and billions in state investment alongside a favorable zoning environment, as society continues to wake up that NIMBYism is bad, and would likely jump at any mega project like this.

Play devil’s advocate with me, what do you think is possible if these conditions come to pass, and a new ROI and underserved capacity pushes them to start expanding in unexpected ways?

Looking for the main theme of your post here, I'm surmising "Disney might build like crazy over the next decades"? If that's the case I don't totally disagree but I do think it will be more measured than what you're describing.

I think 10 years is a wildly, wildly optimistic timeline for humanoid robotics. Look at the arc for self driving cars, which is a much simpler technology. And that's the arc for them being created at all, not large scale societal adoption, updates to legal norms to cover situations involving robots, etc. I think 50 years would be a pretty optimistic timescale on that front. (And I only say that because AI will likely boost our rate of technological advancement, otherwise I'd say 50 is unrealistic.)

That said, I do think we will see new technology in the field of specific automated processes in the next 10-20 years. And given ongoing labor shortages that may get worse, we'll probably see those utilized. One area that comes easily to mind, for example, is food production. I could see an automated system where you put in an order and the process for your burger, chicken tenders, fries, etc. getting made is basically entirely machine driven, maybe with some workers in the background restocking supplies as needed and overseeing problems. There are already a few automated fast food restaurants although I have no idea what that type of technology costs at the moment. Once / if it comes down in price enough, it could definitely allow for more expansion by easing labor shortages.

Another trend to consider will be environmental constraints. If we don't come up with novel solutions to problems of nonrenewable resources and pollution that... will not be good. You are foreseeing a future where much of the world has a first world, Western standard of living. Let me emphasize - that would be a wonderful thing. However, our current level of resource consumption is only sustainable because it involves a small fraction of the world. We don't have the nonrenewable resources and capacity to absorb waste / pollution if most of the world was living an American (or probably even European, although their level of consumption is much lower from my understanding) lifestyle. I'm hopeful that we'll find solutions to those problems (fossil fuel replacements, ways of dealing with plastic, ways of managing pollution and ecological impact, the massive number of animals raised and slaughtered to feed populations, etc.) and I certainly am not of the mindset that these problems are insurmountable - but neither do I think it's an absolute given. It's a work hard on it, wait and see, and hope for the best situation.

As far as large pieces of land for new parks - maybe? I don't know, we're likely in for a big population drop in the next few decades, which probably will free up more land. Would Disney want to invest in building gates in other parts of the country? I guess that depends on what demand looks like. They've shown very little inclination to move in that direction for quite some time, but there is a much more parks-forward focus now.

I also think what happens with the media landscape will have a big impact. For much of its history Disney was arguable a media company first. At the moment that has changed significantly with the sudden collapse of cable and movie theaters. That's a relatively new development though. Will we amuse ourselves with social media and internet sites forever? Or will the pendulum swing back to the kind of big budget productions that require large studios? Or, alternately, will entirely new technology (maybe some kind of advanced VR system) force people back into theaters because home use will be prohibitively expensive? If the media wing suddenly sees a strong resurgence that would likely de-emphasize parks a bit. Alternately, if the media landscape just continues to dry up, I could see the opposite being true.

 

[nickys]

I just was thinking—that’s why they do what they do currently, both Disney and Universal in lockstep.

I think it goes:

Build IP rides generally that yield the highest marketing ROI >
Repurpose underutilized space where they can > Build totally new rides/lands >
Add new parks to their existing resorts >
Build new parks in new resorts that don’t cannabilize existing markets >
Build new parks in resorts that do have some over-lap.

If costs of goods and services plummet due to advancements in humanoid robotics + manufacturing and supply chains, 3D printing, and digital intelligence (replacing a lot of admin. overhead and massively increasing productivity for those that remain) like things seem poised to, say in 10 years, does the math start making sense?

Like I think we need to view their expansions as totally uncoupled from current market conditions and think big picture.

Universal UK will slightly cannibalize into their Orlando parks, so I think, despite it being weaker than say Epic or Shanghai, it could potentially reshape the conversation to make sense taking advantage of wealthy locals m, in even cross-over markets, so I’m not saying it’s a sure thing, but I could envision a future where we see more theme parks in America too to take advantage of this.

Either by Disney or Universal, Paramount/Warner now, or even like a ride manufacturer like Mack Ride eventually blowing a small concept into Europa Park, though I think land reclamation and the scale required to do it right like Epic and Shanghai (and not like the Universal Kids Resort), is probably the right approach.

Post-China/UAE/Saudi markets cornered, I think it’ll be time for Disney and Universal to add parks to their existing resorts/markets, build-out a theme park in a stable South American country with a booming middle class (give it 10 years and I think it’ll exist), a resort in India, and of course then place parks in the Northeast US market (New Jersey or a Maryland), and something between the triangle that is Austin/Houston/Dallas.

You’d likely get decades without paying taxes and billions in state investment alongside a favorable zoning environment, as society continues to wake up that NIMBYism is bad, and would likely jump at any mega project like this.

Play devil’s advocate with me, what do you think is possible if these conditions come to pass, and a new ROI and underserved capacity pushes them to start expanding in unexpected ways?

Pardon?

Seriously what are you saying here?

Couple of specifics.

What does “Universal UK will slightly cannibalize into their Orlando parks” mean? Remove the “into” and it makes sense, but we don’t know yet what IPs Universal UK is going to have.

What does “it could potentially reshape the conversation to make sense taking advantage of wealthy locals m, in even cross-over markets” mean?
It’s aimed at Europeans, not just wealthy locals.

 

[Chef Mickey]