"El Gran Magnifico"
Mr Flibble is Very Cross.
EPIC is the size of the existing Universal Orlando resort. Including VB and the existing hotels. It’s not a small property.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
How will Universal's Epic Universe effect Disney?
- Thread starter yensid67
- Start date
EPIC is the size of the existing Universal Orlando resort. Including VB and the existing hotels. It’s not a small property.
"El Gran Magnifico"
Mr Flibble is Very Cross.
This is the key. It’s the “new corridor”. I fully expect the property north of Sandlake on I-Drive to be developed akin to how the south side was. Eventually.
I think (could be wrong) Uni is playing a long game here.
PrinceCharming617
Well-Known Member
I don't think Disney is going to add anything major after they finally complete their projects. But they'll be fine because the parks are usually overcrowded anyways.
Haymarket
Well-Known Member
I told myself that I wouldn't visit either Disney resort in the US until they built a new "major" or "minor" park ("minor": a water park is typical, though Disney technically for regulatory purposes considers ESPN Wide World of Sports to be its third minor park).
I want to play my microscopic role in motivating Disney to build a new park, major or minor. Delusional, but it works for me.
I'm a neophile. Epic Universe would definitely draw me back to Orlando, and I'd stay at a newer Universal resort and at least also go to Volcano Bay. That said, I'd also probably visit Disney's Animal Kingdom for one day, as it's my favorite, but nothing else at WDW unless they've built a new minor or major park by then (impossible).
I want to play my microscopic role in motivating Disney to build a new park, major or minor. Delusional, but it works for me.
I'm a neophile. Epic Universe would definitely draw me back to Orlando, and I'd stay at a newer Universal resort and at least also go to Volcano Bay. That said, I'd also probably visit Disney's Animal Kingdom for one day, as it's my favorite, but nothing else at WDW unless they've built a new minor or major park by then (impossible).
Last edited:
THEMEPARKPIONEER
Well-Known Member
I’ll be there instead of Disney that’s how
epcotWSC
Well-Known Member
That all depends. Disney has a lot of people who own in DVC. Even if 1/3 of the people staying on site are DVC and those people decide to go to the parks less and go to Universal instead, then Disney is losing. Sure, those people may still spend money on property, but they're a pretty much fixed source of stream revenue which is smaller than what someone would pay with cash (due to the upfront charge that was recognized in the books years ago that investors don't care about anymore... obviously new buy-ins for DVC are todays' revenue and look great for the business). Disney expects those people to come and do their 3-5 days in the parks, go to restaurants, buy souvenirs, etc. If those people are doing a day in Universal, Disney can stomach that. If those people are just using Disney as a home base and spending 3+ days at Universal and maybe only doing a single day (or less) at Disney's parks, it will hurt a lot.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
In my opinion, if TWDC can keep DVC owners and get new DVC buy-ins, even if they are going to universal, TWDC wins.
It seems to me TWDC's DVC business is a huge money maker for TWDC no matter what the owners decide to do during their DVC stay.
Some may argue that folks purchase DCV to go to Disney parks, but if the offerings are better at Universal parks, although the DVC owners are committed to the room they stay in, they are NOT committed to what they do during their stay.
Sure, DVC owners will go to WDW parks, but they may now take a few days to enjoy Universal too.
epcotWSC
Well-Known Member
I have no idea how profitable the stream of annual dues are. I'd imagine they're making some money, but they're supposed to be mostly for maintenance (which judging by the price increases and the fact a lot of the rooms have maintenance issues, I question if that's all they're being used for). Past revenues are in the past. So the main thing Disney shoots for (and why they keep building new DVC properties) is for new buy-ins. That's where the big money is with DVC.
For the people who already bought in, Disney is banking on the once or twice a year vacation that they have you locked into for the next 50 years where you're going to be going to their parks, shopping at their stores, dining in their restaurants, etc. The whole point is that you're in Disney World and once you're there, you're there. They want you using their transportation and all that so you aren't so tempted to leave (partly why removing things like Magical Express is a stupid idea since more people will be inclined to rent a car). If people are instead taking their money off property then it's a lot of lost potential revenue. That is something Disney should worry about.
NickMaio
Well-Known Member
Without the Wizarding World at Uni - WDW would NEVER have made Galaxies Edge.
If Epic Universe is a big hit you can count on one thing - - - - WDW will copy one or various aspects of the new park.
WDW has been resting on its laurels for the past decade or more. They are content with being secondary and not real innovators.
Its sad - - - - - the Buck drives the mouse.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately what they will copy is the variability of ticketing options built into this park. By segmenting the lands they can extract as much money as your wallet and desire for experiences can bear. If you only have a little money they will sell you a taste.....
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
I still don't believe this hurts Disney in any meaningful way. If Epic does not bring in MORE people to Orlando, that is an issue for everyone, but Disney will be fine in the end, I'd worry for the other parks.
The real hope is investment like this increases visitors in general, and results in more vacationers for all parks.
The real hope is investment like this increases visitors in general, and results in more vacationers for all parks.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
There are 20 on-site Disney hotels…
And 500+ (Pre Covid) within 15 or so miles outside. You do the math
Orlando isn’t an “international business destination”. Most are there for the tourism or by extension
AMartin7777
Member
Disney parks have recently been on an unprecedented pricing binge over the last few years. Decisions being made at Universal, suggest that the impact to Disney's bottom line from upcoming Universal offerings will be significant. How do the upcoming Universal moves affect Disney parks? In order to truly understand the weight of possible impacts, I believe we have to first process the possible long-term impacts of the decisions that have been made by Disney over the last few years. In particular, the shift to Operational revenue focus and the lack of appreciation for the cost to value proposition mind-set of the typical Middle and Upper Middle-class guest.
Though the Orlando Disney parks are undeniably crowded, the recent Operating Revenue and Cash streams reported suggest guests are primarily focusing their spending on tickets and hotel stays. This is the reason for the recent price increases we have seen on those specific items at the parks. I don't think anyone would argue against the practical fact that Disney Genie is just a fancy way to charge you for an additional park ticket while disguising it behind a smoke-filled, coffee house crap façade of "saving you time". I also believe few would agree that hotel quality and amenities at Disney resorts are typical and reasonably commensurate to their cost? Food, drinks, souvenirs, events, i.e. all the residuals that have the primary profit overhead points are slowly being excluded by those guests with no additional discretionary money left to spend after paying for access. Residuals are one of the key profit basis for the Amusement industry and I believe the exorbitant pricing that Disney has recently adopted will have a negative impact on these financials over the long haul. The base of support for the parks comes from Middle and Upper-Middle class customers, not the wealthy. For many of the base customer set, the increased charges have pushed beyond the point of being reasonable and will create a negative impact on guest spending that will continue and grow with the current pricing conditions in place.
It's important to recognize that attendance numbers do not in and of themselves necessarily equate to revenue and profit totals. Tickets, parking, hotels... these are typically just the access leaders to significant profit lines (i.e. Residuals) but when you squeeze that financial lemon of all it's juice with operational collections, you leave little to nothing left over for additional guest spending on items from which your biggest profits might be derived. When you continue to limit or remove access for a large volume of your customer base through continually increasing access costs, the residuals cannot or will not follow. This is a long-term, acquired result that stretches out and builds over time. Nothing wakes the average Disney guest up from the dream faster than the realization that after you've paid excessive dollars just to come in, corporate Mickey welcomes you, shaking your right hand while holding out his left for your now empty wallet, assuming you'll find more to give. This is compounded by the insult added to injury feeling you get from the ostentatious and conspicuous act of calling you "Pal" with a knowing twinkle in his eye. Disney's leadership has spent years relying on it's popularity combined with a sizable air of smug arrogance in making decisions about what its guests will tolerate when it comes to pricing. They ride heavily and recklessly on the wave of perceived "magic", additionally using the pandemic as justification while seemingly unaware that it's likely the Trojan horse that has now tipped the balance. "Revenge Travel" can only support you for so long before the euphoria wears off and the reality of what a family is willing to afford comes into question. I say "willing" because in the theme park industry, it's all about the value proposition for the customer. Disney is not selling widgets when it comes to the parks, it's selling experiences. Experiences lead to the sale of residuals, products in the form of tangible things. For the customer, It's not a question of affording the cost but rather the perception of the cost to value ratio and if the customer is then willing to spend their money on the experience and hence the tangibles. Most people are perfectly comfortable with paying more than typically expected for something as long as the perceived value justifies the significant cost. This is especially true with theme parks and is where I believe a negative shift in customer thinking has started to take place that is growing in number and accelerating down the wrong road with no braking in site.
Another aspect to this, that I feel Disney has been grossly oblivious to, is the effect of Social Media on customer value perception and feelings related to the parks. The messaging that I have witnessed among social media circles, albeit anecdotally, speaks to the growing and overarching perception of an ever decreasing value vs money spent proposition. This perception is shared inside and outside the fan community, setting a course that is having a pronounced, negative viral effect. The new reputation that Disney has and is building of "Pay more...get less" can be financially devastating over the long term while not necessarily apparent in the moment. This, I believe, is the reason for Bob Iger's recent comments and concerns with increased pricing at the parks. While the 2022 fourth-quarter financials show a clear increase in revenue, Iger seems to be checking the long tail and seeing the impact of current pricing decisions on customer value proposition and perception. Frankly, I am shocked how quickly it has reared it's ugly head with Chapek's removal, not withstanding the company's issues with Disney + losses which seems to have played a large role in the reasoning behind his ouster.
Within this current environment we come to Universal and it's upcoming Epic Universe, particularly the February 2023 Super Nintendo World opening, which are likely to exacerbate these issues in a considerable way. The same perception that is building with such a negative tact about Disney is mirrored by a mostly positive view when applied to Universal parks. Several significant Disney Social Media and Travel business outlets have gone so far as to openly share their recommendations for staying and playing at Universal in addition to and sometimes in lieu of Disney. This reflects an acknowledgment of the value proposition of one vs the other in a powerful way. For many years, Disney stood with Cinderella Castle on the Orlando theme park mountain unchallenged but is now faced with a serious storming of the walls, not the least of which was started by the recognition of monies decisively spent to summon the world of a well known boy wizard. Universal woke up to what Disney parks had known since their inception: Putting the proper amount of money, resources, creativity and attention to detail into a project returns significant profits without the need to demand unreasonable costs to your guests. Ironically, this lesson was likely learned by Disney from the innovative and highly-profitable approach taken by many an impresario at New York's Coney Island in its heyday. Disney was viewed as the innovator, the leader and now is perceived as the follower if not factually. The recent D23 presentations openly put the Disney think-tank on display. However, when carefully examined, it became quickly apparent that the Emperor has no clothes. Lots of pie-in-the-sky, what-ifs and maybes but nothing concrete. Disney is moving far to slowly in an industry that demands innovation and contemporary production. They are slow to produce while ever increasing costs to their guests and ever decreasing offerings to justify them. The announcement of Super Nintendo World, an entire new land in a Universal park with three major attractions, opening after only four years of construction, is an especially stark example when you observe that it has taken Disney almost five years to open Tron and four with Cosmic Rewind. I acknowledge these are not the only attractions that Disney has recently opened (i.e. Remy's) but in an industry which typically builds coasters within a single season or two, they stand out as examples of an over-extended period especially when you take into account Tron being a clone of an already existing ride.
Many have discussed for years about the possibility of Disney "crossing a financial line" with its guests and I think it's becoming patently clear that they have now stepped over that line. The question is, what are they going to do about it? Quick changes are never easy especially with Disney parks and it's operations. Changing ingrained, negative customer perceptions is a challenge not easily met. We are talking about a large ship with a very small rudder and executing a clearly needed turn will take significant effort and time. Meanwhile, Universal continues to barrel forth unabated in its efforts to draw customers to their parks and ultimately away from Disney. Is Disney imminently in any real trouble from Universals actions? Apparently not. But, I would argue that they have already been negatively impacted and that negative trend will continue and grow without a course correction on their part. It's a battle of attrition when it comes to the theme park guest and where they choose to place their discretionary dollar, and I think Disney is currently losing that battle.
Though the Orlando Disney parks are undeniably crowded, the recent Operating Revenue and Cash streams reported suggest guests are primarily focusing their spending on tickets and hotel stays. This is the reason for the recent price increases we have seen on those specific items at the parks. I don't think anyone would argue against the practical fact that Disney Genie is just a fancy way to charge you for an additional park ticket while disguising it behind a smoke-filled, coffee house crap façade of "saving you time". I also believe few would agree that hotel quality and amenities at Disney resorts are typical and reasonably commensurate to their cost? Food, drinks, souvenirs, events, i.e. all the residuals that have the primary profit overhead points are slowly being excluded by those guests with no additional discretionary money left to spend after paying for access. Residuals are one of the key profit basis for the Amusement industry and I believe the exorbitant pricing that Disney has recently adopted will have a negative impact on these financials over the long haul. The base of support for the parks comes from Middle and Upper-Middle class customers, not the wealthy. For many of the base customer set, the increased charges have pushed beyond the point of being reasonable and will create a negative impact on guest spending that will continue and grow with the current pricing conditions in place.
It's important to recognize that attendance numbers do not in and of themselves necessarily equate to revenue and profit totals. Tickets, parking, hotels... these are typically just the access leaders to significant profit lines (i.e. Residuals) but when you squeeze that financial lemon of all it's juice with operational collections, you leave little to nothing left over for additional guest spending on items from which your biggest profits might be derived. When you continue to limit or remove access for a large volume of your customer base through continually increasing access costs, the residuals cannot or will not follow. This is a long-term, acquired result that stretches out and builds over time. Nothing wakes the average Disney guest up from the dream faster than the realization that after you've paid excessive dollars just to come in, corporate Mickey welcomes you, shaking your right hand while holding out his left for your now empty wallet, assuming you'll find more to give. This is compounded by the insult added to injury feeling you get from the ostentatious and conspicuous act of calling you "Pal" with a knowing twinkle in his eye. Disney's leadership has spent years relying on it's popularity combined with a sizable air of smug arrogance in making decisions about what its guests will tolerate when it comes to pricing. They ride heavily and recklessly on the wave of perceived "magic", additionally using the pandemic as justification while seemingly unaware that it's likely the Trojan horse that has now tipped the balance. "Revenge Travel" can only support you for so long before the euphoria wears off and the reality of what a family is willing to afford comes into question. I say "willing" because in the theme park industry, it's all about the value proposition for the customer. Disney is not selling widgets when it comes to the parks, it's selling experiences. Experiences lead to the sale of residuals, products in the form of tangible things. For the customer, It's not a question of affording the cost but rather the perception of the cost to value ratio and if the customer is then willing to spend their money on the experience and hence the tangibles. Most people are perfectly comfortable with paying more than typically expected for something as long as the perceived value justifies the significant cost. This is especially true with theme parks and is where I believe a negative shift in customer thinking has started to take place that is growing in number and accelerating down the wrong road with no braking in site.
Another aspect to this, that I feel Disney has been grossly oblivious to, is the effect of Social Media on customer value perception and feelings related to the parks. The messaging that I have witnessed among social media circles, albeit anecdotally, speaks to the growing and overarching perception of an ever decreasing value vs money spent proposition. This perception is shared inside and outside the fan community, setting a course that is having a pronounced, negative viral effect. The new reputation that Disney has and is building of "Pay more...get less" can be financially devastating over the long term while not necessarily apparent in the moment. This, I believe, is the reason for Bob Iger's recent comments and concerns with increased pricing at the parks. While the 2022 fourth-quarter financials show a clear increase in revenue, Iger seems to be checking the long tail and seeing the impact of current pricing decisions on customer value proposition and perception. Frankly, I am shocked how quickly it has reared it's ugly head with Chapek's removal, not withstanding the company's issues with Disney + losses which seems to have played a large role in the reasoning behind his ouster.
Within this current environment we come to Universal and it's upcoming Epic Universe, particularly the February 2023 Super Nintendo World opening, which are likely to exacerbate these issues in a considerable way. The same perception that is building with such a negative tact about Disney is mirrored by a mostly positive view when applied to Universal parks. Several significant Disney Social Media and Travel business outlets have gone so far as to openly share their recommendations for staying and playing at Universal in addition to and sometimes in lieu of Disney. This reflects an acknowledgment of the value proposition of one vs the other in a powerful way. For many years, Disney stood with Cinderella Castle on the Orlando theme park mountain unchallenged but is now faced with a serious storming of the walls, not the least of which was started by the recognition of monies decisively spent to summon the world of a well known boy wizard. Universal woke up to what Disney parks had known since their inception: Putting the proper amount of money, resources, creativity and attention to detail into a project returns significant profits without the need to demand unreasonable costs to your guests. Ironically, this lesson was likely learned by Disney from the innovative and highly-profitable approach taken by many an impresario at New York's Coney Island in its heyday. Disney was viewed as the innovator, the leader and now is perceived as the follower if not factually. The recent D23 presentations openly put the Disney think-tank on display. However, when carefully examined, it became quickly apparent that the Emperor has no clothes. Lots of pie-in-the-sky, what-ifs and maybes but nothing concrete. Disney is moving far to slowly in an industry that demands innovation and contemporary production. They are slow to produce while ever increasing costs to their guests and ever decreasing offerings to justify them. The announcement of Super Nintendo World, an entire new land in a Universal park with three major attractions, opening after only four years of construction, is an especially stark example when you observe that it has taken Disney almost five years to open Tron and four with Cosmic Rewind. I acknowledge these are not the only attractions that Disney has recently opened (i.e. Remy's) but in an industry which typically builds coasters within a single season or two, they stand out as examples of an over-extended period especially when you take into account Tron being a clone of an already existing ride.
Many have discussed for years about the possibility of Disney "crossing a financial line" with its guests and I think it's becoming patently clear that they have now stepped over that line. The question is, what are they going to do about it? Quick changes are never easy especially with Disney parks and it's operations. Changing ingrained, negative customer perceptions is a challenge not easily met. We are talking about a large ship with a very small rudder and executing a clearly needed turn will take significant effort and time. Meanwhile, Universal continues to barrel forth unabated in its efforts to draw customers to their parks and ultimately away from Disney. Is Disney imminently in any real trouble from Universals actions? Apparently not. But, I would argue that they have already been negatively impacted and that negative trend will continue and grow without a course correction on their part. It's a battle of attrition when it comes to the theme park guest and where they choose to place their discretionary dollar, and I think Disney is currently losing that battle.
TalkToEthan
Well-Known Member
I foresee Disney most definitely feeling it.
I see a painful face slap leaving a sizable welt. No loss of an appendage, no permanent injury and absolutely no death blow. WDW won't be limping after Epic opens but it sure will be rubbing that area for a spell.
just my prediction
el_super
Well-Known Member
Yes. The bigger question is how many are coming to Orlando and where that extra day is going to come from. Counting both resorts, Orlando is going from 6 to 7 parks... and that doesn't seem like it's moving the needle all that much. People coming for Disney will still come for Disney and people coming for Universal are going to still come for Universal. The question will be what experience is the lowest one of the entire Orlando portfolio and which gets cut. Do people cut out an Epcot or DAK day for Epic, or do they cut out a day at IOA? What about Sea World?
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
You think IOA hey? I honestly could see people cutting out USF - that park is stagnant imo.
Do IOA and Epic, Skip USF.
el_super
Well-Known Member
That's actually a really interesting thought. I was thinking back to how cannibalization would usually impact a second gate first before the first gate, but that was really just using Disney as an example, where the first gate was this iconic brand experience immune to a lot of cannibalization. Is USF really that iconic that it couldn't just be skipped for IOA and Epic? Maybe it's not.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
I see them skipping Epcot and AK. I do it shifting to longer stays at Universal and less at Disney.
What Disney has going for it is attractions that have no height requirements, which for families with littles is better then Universal.
el_super
Well-Known Member
Of people who are already going to Disney or people going to Universal?
Honestly I don't see any potential for Universal to capture any of the people who are going for a Disney experience and not already dedicating some extra days to Universal. The people who go to Disney, stay in the bubble and never leave, are going to continue to stay in the bubble and never leave.
The group this has the potential to have the biggest impact on, are the groups of people who are already putting multiple attractions into their Orlando vacation circulation.
Poseidon Quest
Well-Known Member
Despite most theme park people agreeing that IoA is the better park, I believe that TEA reported that USF consistently gets better attendance. I think this is likely due to two factors. The first is that USF is an easily identifiable, iconic brand vessel for Universal. A lot of the people going to the park are the same kind of people who call the Magic Kingdom "Disney World" and are looking for "Harry Potter Land". Second, I believe it's also seen as the more "family" of the parks as opposed to Islands' thrills. I continue to be impressed with the wait times for Despicable Me even if I think it's a rather "meh" attraction that's not worth the wait. I think that's a large part of why another Minions attraction is coming to the park, along with what likely appears to be a Dreamworks retheme of Kid Zone.