AP - Comcast challenging Disney's hold on tourism trade

Captain Neo

Captain Neo

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
http://news.yahoo.com/comcast-challenging-disneys-hold-tourism-trade-194455453.html
"Comcast Corp. will invest hundreds of millions of dollars in California and Florida theme parks, stepping outside its core business of telecommunications in an effort to boost revenue and profits.
In a story published Sunday, The Philadelphia Inquirer said recent moves by the Philadelphia-based, cable-TV company represent a challenge to the Walt Disney Co.'s tourism business in Orlando.

Comcast took over Universal Orlando Resorts as part of its NBCUniversal acquisition in 2011. This summer, it plans a new Harry Potter ride at a second theme park that will share the same 750 acre Universal complex.

Comcast is also financing construction of the 1,800-room Cabana Bay Beach Resort with 50-50 partner Loews Corp., allowing guests to eat, sleep and swim on the same 750-acre Universal complex.

Once fully open later this year, Cabana Bay will boost Universal's hotel room count in Orlando by 75 percent, to 4,200 rooms. The first 600 are scheduled to open this month.

CEO Brian Roberts said Comcast is "doubling down on theme parks" because the investment will pay off for many years to come.
"We think there is a lot there in the theme park business for many years to come, and that we have the low market share and only one way to go," Roberts said at an investor conference in January.

In 2013, Comcast's theme parks and resorts unit, part of NBCUniversal, reported $2.2 billion in revenue and $1 billion in operating cash flow — a measure of the division's profitability.
Between the second Potter attraction and Cabana Bay, the Universal theme park complex is expected to add 3,500 jobs this year, bringing its Orlando-area employment to about 17,000.

Universal executives in Orlando do not say they are targeting Disney, the tourism giant with more than 20,000 hotel rooms and four theme parks. But they believe there is additional revenue — more room stays, more visitors, and more themed merchandise to sell them.
"We don't have to win," Thomas L. Williams, chairman and chief executive officer of Universal Parks & Resorts, said in a recent interview. "We just have to get our share.""
 
Captain Neo

Captain Neo

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
"Comcast has brought a financially disciplined economic model to Universal: Invest heavily in a theme-park attraction in the early years and count turnstile clicks in later years. Before Comcast, "Our mode of operation was that we had to save up for our capital projects," Williams said.

With Comcast, Universal's capital budget has soared about fivefold - to roughly $500 million a year for parks in the United States and overseas, Williams said. "It's been a world of difference since Comcast came along."

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20140309_Comcast__doubling_down__on_theme_park_business.html
 
Goofnut1980

Goofnut1980

Well-Known Member
Then if the merger of Comcast buying TimeWarner Cable... They could run any commercial they wanted. Combined they would reach 1 in 3 homes in america!
 
prberk

prberk

Well-Known Member
Figment2005 said:
This will just end up in more useless Disney vs Universal debate. Nothing of any substance will be obtained from this thread.
Click to expand...

And your comment added to the conversation, or was it also useless?

I mean, really. Do we all ALWAYS have to shut down any discussion with "we've already discussed this"? I followed the "look familiar" comment above to the other thread about a similar but older article -- and guess what? Its first page was bombarded then with people saying it was discussed before and showing the link to an older thread.

I mean, I understand that some things like specific answers to questions can be shown to have already been answered; but in the case of general discussion, why this continuous blunt-force trauma on anyone who sees a contemporary news article about something that might have been discussed previously? There might be something new in the current aritcle, but even if it is not, it is news that it is being heralded in the press again. And I might not have seen the article from six months ago.

But the biggest thing I guess I wonder is this: Isn't this a discussion forum?

I personally like the new threads when a new news article is out there, or when something new about a topic enters the fray. WDW Magic used to be such that I could always count on if there were a new thread about something whenever there had been something recently in the news, even if it were similar to something from last year. The key was either new information or that it were in the news again. This is in opposition to the current tread of very long threads going by the name of the topic. Hard to tell when anything new has been added or that it is really in the news again.

Now if there are completely duplicate threads from a similar time period, I agree that they should be put together or one closed. But only if they are contemporary.

I love the lively discussion... soemtimes even of things we have discusssed before.

Otherwise, we really need to shut down all those pesky "Happy Birthday" threads to members. They really add "nothing of substance" to the conversation and can clearly be linked to an almost identical discussion every year about that time...
 
Figment2005

Figment2005

Well-Known Member
prberk said:
And your comment added to the conversation, or was it also useless?

I mean, really. Do we all ALWAYS have to shut down any discussion with "we've already discussed this"? I followed the "look familiar" comment above to the other thread about a similar but older article -- and guess what? Its first page was bombarded then with people saying it was discussed before and showing the link to an older thread.

I mean, I understand that some things like specific answers to questions can be shown to have already been answered; but in the case of general discussion, why this continuous blunt-force trauma on anyone who sees a contemporary news article about something that might have been discussed previously? There might be something new in the current aritcle, but even if it is not, it is news that it is being heralded in the press again. And I might not have seen the article from six months ago.

But the biggest thing I guess I wonder is this: Isn't this a discussion forum?

I personally like the new threads when a new news article is out there, or when something new about a topic enters the fray. WDW Magic used to be such that I could always count on if there were a new thread about something whenever there had been something recently in the news, even if it were similar to something from last year. The key was either new information or that it were in the news again. This is in opposition to the current tread of very long threads going by the name of the topic. Hard to tell when anything new has been added or that it is really in the news again.

Now if there are completely duplicate threads from a similar time period, I agree that they should be put together or one closed. But only if they are contemporary.

I love the lively discussion... soemtimes even of things we have discusssed before.

Otherwise, we really need to shut down all those pesky "Happy Birthday" threads to members. They really add "nothing of substance" to the conversation and can clearly be linked to an almost identical discussion every year about that time...
Click to expand...
Yup, just like this response to your essay.
 
menamechris

menamechris

Well-Known Member
This is news, folks. Like it or not. I think it will be a topic of discussion for the foreseeable future - and it will continue to be relevant until either Universal backs off aggressively investing in their parks - or Disney starts addressing their blatant issues in a very real way. Expect more news articles and more threads discussing this in the years to come. It is what it is.
 
ABQ

ABQ

Well-Known Member
Though, as many have noted, this is a bit of a rehash of the same article linked here http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/...will-compete-aggressively-with-disney.878827/ it is funny to read the, at the time 57 comments on this new one as most are focused on Comcast's crappy cable services and not the theme park industry at all. Though a number that do mention tourism are not very interested in Universal. It strikes me as a bit ironic that many dislike Disney's use of its money on things like NextGen, while fleecing the guests with room costs, but people are not complaining of Comcast's constant cable premium increases to fund their theme park. I guess it's just the tangible growth that makes that cable bill easier to swallow. But then, I'm lucky they don't offer Comcast in my town....yet. That monopoly to be is just being let grow and grow by a well funded FCC, I assume.
 
T

The Crafty Veteran

Active Member
Comcast is viewed as a cable provider first and foremost, that's where they make the bulk of their revenue for now. I think the theme parks are just something they can build upon until they need them to carry them from a business perspective because Time-Warner or not, cable television has an extremely short lifespan, not to mention the possible Time-Warner acquisition will dilute Comcast stock. It must suck playing catch up, but that's all Comcast is doing.
 
flyerjab

flyerjab

Well-Known Member
http://money.msn.com/technology-inv...-big-on-visitor-tracking-technology#scpshrjmd

Just thought I would through this address in here for some additional discussion on an overly discussed topic. And something is up with this work computer so you might have to just copy and paste the link to get to the article.

EDIT: I also apologize if this article was already posted in the other thread. It's impossible sometimes with the limited time I have at work to do a thorough look-back.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom