Disney and Universal: Two very different paths

[bhg469]

In cold reality I believe the focus of WDW is on any adult with the cash, credit or borrowing power to churn Disney revenue. But I'll give ya FLE but unlikely Avatar will be focused on young kids.

As hard as I can take Disney to task I can't say I agree with this statement focus on young kids. Yeah they have dumbed down some attractions but the premise that goes back to 'Families Together' and that was DL & MK, but I can't say it is for young kids, way too much within DL and MK that young kids are not even tall enough to ride. The other 3 parks and DTD along with the waterparks are as much for adults, pre-teens, teens and then areas for young kids for inclusion.

The majority of restaurants that are not 3rd party are themed to adults and even some of the 3rd party venues. Most of the bowling alley is themed adult and certainly most of the places like Atlantic and Jellyrolls can't be focused on young kids. DVC are focused on adults.

I totally forgot avatar. I hope its good but qquite honestly star wars wwould have been a huge win for them.. Its sad knowing its all but squashed.

 

[Mouse Detective]

Pastamore' has a new entrance and it's under that angled awning that says ATM on it. The seating that you see under the large green area adjacent Starbucks is actually seating for Pastamore'. The new Red Oven Pizza or its seating area is not shown in this photo. It's further to the front. Yes, Starbucks has some outdoor seating upstairs but there's just a lot of places to sit upstairs in CityWalk if you walk around. Since Starbucks is moving downstairs next year, their seating situation could change.

 

[1stStarIC2nite]

Pastamore' has a new entrance and it's under that angled awning that says ATM on it. The seating that you see under the large green area adjacent Starbucks is actually seating for Pastamore'. The new Red Oven Pizza or its seating area is not shown in this photo. It's further to the front. Yes, Starbucks has some outdoor seating upstairs but there's just a lot of places to sit upstairs in CityWalk if you walk around. Since Starbucks is moving downstairs next year, their seating situation could change.

Sorry, but you are very wrong my friend. ATM is still ATM services and where the CityWalk Guest Services is located (and always has been). The seating area is for RedOven, which took over the express/quick service Pastamore location (and is VERY good, and extremely well priced). Pastamore, as a table service restaurant, still exists in its entirety and the entrance is across from the sign (seen in the middle of this photo).

 

[GoofGoof]

What reasons/evidence would you say support this statement? Not being trying to be facetious, just want to understand why you have this perspective. I have to say that "making room" is really a poor excuse in WDWs case. They have room to spare. For example, they made room for the Wonders of Life pavilion without removing anything.

It's not just about having physical space. Each ride, show or attraction has operating and maintenance costs. The revenues have to exceed the costs. A park like MK cannot just grow indefinitely without the infrastructure and admission price growing. Eventually once a park hits a certain size it's time for a second gate or a 3rd and 4th. Less popular or efficient attractions or rides with large maintenance issues are often candidates to go. Universal usually gets a pass for removing "classic" rides since they have limited space, but by removing a ride like Jaws to add more Potter they are also reducing their costs vs keeping Jaws and adding Potter as well. It's all a matter of budget and making sure revenues exceed expenses.

Now the one exception for me personally at WDW is EPCOT. It's current state is inexcusable. I have no issue with Mr. Toad being replaced by Pooh or Snow White closing but Mine Train opening, but neutering Imagination or closing pavilions with no replacement is not acceptable.

 

[Gabe1]

I totally forgot avatar. I hope its good but qquite honestly star wars wwould have been a huge win for them.. Its sad knowing its all but squashed.

I'm not a fan of Star Wars anything, I'm from that camp but I do hope they hit a bump and it moves forward, it could greatly improve the park, attendance and future investments. Not everything has to be for me. (FLE certainly isn't lol)

 

[Mike C]

Back to the original title of this thread, now that I've read some rumors about the Jekyll and Hyde club (the Adventurer's Club's spirtual father) possibly coming to CityWalk, and many of the other rumors about, it seems like the type of things that Disney theme park fans have been asking for the last decade or so have a much better chance of actually happening over at Uni.

From things like this club, and monorail-like expansion actually being more likely at Uni than at Disney (based on the current leadership), many of the former Disney imagineers moving over, and general theme park theming and expansion all leaning toward that side, it really shows the concept of two different paths in a light. Actions speak louder than words, even if it takes a while for most to notice. In my opinion, for leadership it's really starting to show who really likes the parks and the one that really could care less.

That said, this could change, and I hope it does.

 

[StageFrenzy]

It's not just about having physical space. Each ride, show or attraction has operating and maintenance costs. The revenues have to exceed the costs. A park like MK cannot just grow indefinitely without the infrastructure and admission price growing. Eventually once a park hits a certain size it's time for a second gate or a 3rd and 4th. Less popular or efficient attractions or rides with large maintenance issues are often candidates to go. Universal usually gets a pass for removing "classic" rides since they have limited space, but by removing a ride like Jaws to add more Potter they are also reducing their costs vs keeping Jaws and adding Potter as well. It's all a matter of budget and making sure revenues exceed expenses.

Now the one exception for me personally at WDW is EPCOT. It's current state is inexcusable. I have no issue with Mr. Toad being replaced by Pooh or Snow White closing but Mine Train opening, but neutering Imagination or closing pavilions with no replacement is not acceptable.

I disagree with the number of attraction argument, DLC (2 parks) and WDW (4 parks) have the same number of attractions, and WDW has capacity issues whereas DLC does not (unless the parks are open 24hrs or you are referring to cast parking.). Not the amount of people that can fit in the parks but the amount there is to do once that many people are in the parks. MK is having record numbers of visitors but the number of attractions are the same as they were twenty years ago. Universal does seem to get a pass so far for removing attractions, as a company they have been hurting in the past though. After Diagon Alley I hope we will no longer give them a pass unless they give us a 2 for 1 ratio of attractions. As the parks get more popular, more stuff is needed to spread out the crowd. That is the main issue facing all theme parks at this time.

 

[StageFrenzy]

Okay, so let me get this straight. A Starbucks in an outdoor entertainment district is being compared to a Starbucks in the middle of a theme park? Wouldn't that comparison be better utilized once one of the two Starbucks locations are complete at DTD?

It would probably be more apt to compare the Starbucks locals in the old fountain view location(Epcot) and the San Fran location(US). Or DTD and CW

 

[marni1971]

If we are comparing WDW to Universal in this thread and criticizing WDW for closing attractions the same criticism should apply to Universal.

Not when the addition is worse than the former. Or simply remove the former with no addition.

 

[WDWDad13]

Not when the addition is worse than the former. Or simply remove the former with no addition.

I think it's likely fair to say the new snow white attraction will be better than the previous though

...and removing toon town for FLE well... I'm ok with that

 

[GoofGoof]

Not when the addition is worse than the former. Or simply remove the former with no addition.

I agree with this. I just think there tends to be a double standard when comparing Universal to WDW.

In some cases: Pooh, Mine Train and Test Track for example, the addition exceeds what it replaced.

 

[danlb_2000]

I disagree with the number of attraction argument, DLC (2 parks) and WDW (4 parks) have the same number of attractions, and WDW has capacity issues whereas DLC does not (unless the parks are open 24hrs or you are referring to cast parking.). Not the amount of people that can fit in the parks but the amount there is to do once that many people are in the parks. MK is having record numbers of visitors but the number of attractions are the same as they were twenty years ago. Universal does seem to get a pass so far for removing attractions, as a company they have been hurting in the past though. After Diagon Alley I hope we will no longer give them a pass unless they give us a 2 for 1 ratio of attractions. As the parks get more popular, more stuff is needed to spread out the crowd. That is the main issue facing all theme parks at this time.

But you don't always have to add rides to increase capacity. If you have 10 rides in a park, 5 of which everyone rides and 5 of which only 20% of guests ride, you can improve your capacity by replacing the 5 that 20% ride with 5 new rides that everyone wants to go on. By doing it this way you get more capacity without increasing your day-to-day operating costs.

 

[flynnibus]

What reasons/evidence would you say support this statement?

It's simple... running two of something costs more than running one of something.

If I start with 10 of something, and add one, and add one, and add on... what happens to the total? It goes up.

Operationally the park wants to git rid of low performers - because they still cost money to run even if no one shows up. So the 'win-win' when adding an attraction from an ops point of view is taking out a bad performer, and adding in a good one.

Yes, there are points when you want to ADD capacity - but that too is not infinite.

 

[flynnibus]

I disagree with the number of attraction argument, DLC (2 parks) and WDW (4 parks) have the same number of attractions, and WDW has capacity issues whereas DLC does not (unless the parks are open 24hrs or you are referring to cast parking.)

You are arguing something entirely different.

The point about the multiple parks is the consequence of segmentation and about where free capacity is available or not relative to a guest.

His point was simply about the core concept of two of something costs more than one of something to run. Needing capacity or not is irrelevant to that point.

 

[asianway]

I think it's likely fair to say the new snow white attraction will be better than the previous though

...and removing toon town for FLE well... I'm ok with that

Toontown in DL or TDL > Storybook Circus. Toontown as a concept is not a bad one, it was just executed horribly in WDW.

 

[marni1971]

I think it's likely fair to say the new snow white attraction will be better than the previous though

...and removing toon town for FLE well... I'm ok with that

Technically, Toon Town went for Storybook Circus. Same thing in different guise. Net gain= not a lot.

FLE was a trade for 20K as attractions go.... its personal choice if Memaid beats the Subs.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

FLE was a trade for 20K as attractions go.... its personal choice if Memaid beats the Subs.

I'd take 20K over mermaid, but I'm not as sure if I'd prefer it over eveything that's now in the area (mermiad + mine train + BatB stuff). Especially since if it were still around today 20K would either be a) the same with no upgrades or b) Finding Nemo themed.

 

[WDWDad13]

Technically, Toon Town went for Storybook Circus. Same thing in different guise. Net gain= not a lot.

FLE was a trade for 20K as attractions go.... its personal choice if Memaid beats the Subs.

IMO - Mermaid, be our guest, and the ambiance of new FLE beats 20k.

 

[doctornick]

But you don't always have to add rides to increase capacity. If you have 10 rides in a park, 5 of which everyone rides and 5 of which only 20% of guests ride, you can improve your capacity by replacing the 5 that 20% ride with 5 new rides that everyone wants to go on. By doing it this way you get more capacity without increasing your day-to-day operating costs.

Also, you can replace rides with different ones with greater capacity (unfortunately, at times Disney has gone to opposite direction with this, e.g WoM to TT, Horizons to M:S). Or you can increase the capacity of existing, popular rides that are always at capacity (e.g Dumbo or the proposed additional theater for Soarin')

 

[StageFrenzy]

You are arguing something entirely different.

The point about the multiple parks is the consequence of segmentation and about where free capacity is available or not relative to a guest.

His point was simply about the core concept of two of something costs more than one of something to run. Needing capacity or not is irrelevant to that point.

Yeah, I took the argument in a different direction. Maybe I should have elaborated on the fact that the number of people and the amount they charge for admission supports a park with twice the number of attractions. @doctornick made another good point about the capacity.

Random question for our world travelers but how long of a wait does TSMM have in TDS on average?