TEA Attendance Report Now due June 3rd

[danlb_2000]

The Orlando United boards thread on TEA is highly entertaining tonight. Lots of complaining and many members seem to have the "real" number of theme park clicks.

Potter was their big addition. Nothing in their pipeline comes close. It gave them an increase, but no where near Disney levels. End of story.

Then how do you explain the Studio's 14% increase in 2013?

 

[Disneyhead'71]

This isn't necessarily true. Disney appears to be willing to cede some portion of market share for whatever reason. Universal is doing a good job beginning to force the issue. Uni is still a ways off from directly challenging DAK and DHS in attendance, but while the decline from 2000-2009 can't be overlooked neither can the time period and aggressiveness in which they've recovered it. Disney appears to be very slowly pivoting to maintain the gap, but it may be too slow...or just right. We'll see.

What a very reasoned response. UOR has gained about 5 million since 2008. They are actually more aggressive now than ever. Adding in-park attractions is a given when "making a play". And that is what Universal has done since 2007: Simpson's Ride (2007), Disaster! (2008), Hogsmeade (2010), Minions, Spider-man upgrades, Superstar Parade, Cinematic Spectacular (2012), Transformers, Springfield (2013), Diagonal Alley (2014), Velociraptor Experience (2015).

The "Resort" upgrades started slowly with Hollywood Drive-In Golf (2012), Cabana Bay, and 9 new restaurants in CityWalk (2013-14), NBCSports Grill and Brew (2015), Sapphire Falls Resort (2016), Volcano Bay Water Theme Park (2017).

I don't really care what Disney's gonna do. Disney is the 800 lb. gorilla in the room and Disney is gonna do what Disney is gonna do. What I find interesting is that Universal has gone from the baby monkey eating ticks off of Disney's back to the really cute media darling 200 lb gorilla in the room. And he's hungry.

 

[Bairstow]

I'm sorry, that's just...not true.

The "market" is "how many people are buying paid admission tickets to Orlando theme parks". This is a fluid number.

For years Disney has been under the impression that the market was "saturated" (cannot be grown) so they have gone the route of trying to squeeze more out of the same group already coming. Universal proved this theory wrong, because more net people are now coming to the Orlando area.

Since more people are now coming to the Orlando area, the market has grown. Disney is still top dog in that market, but their share of the market has gone down because the market has grown and most of that new market is going to Universal. The market is not static, it has grown considerably - yet Disney's attendance hasn't grown exponentially with it.

So yes, Disney's share of the paid admission days in Orlando is definitely down percentage wise, in the overall market.

At this point, you two are really just debating semantics, and what constitutes "market share" vs market position.

What still seems to be the case is that despite Universal's growing share of the market, they do not yet seem to be cutting into Disney's actual consumer base.
If anything, Disney is profiting as much from Universal's expansion as Universal is, since a lot of families make the decision to come or return to Orlando because of the new things Universal is offering, but still spend an equal, if not greater percentage of their time in Florida going (back) to Disney World. This is symbiosis, not true competition.

Universal is trying like hell to change that and become their own 3-4 day all inclusive resort destination, and they're about a water park and a monkey from getting there.
When that happens, and assuming Universal can maintain the momentum they gained from the two Potter build-outs, things are going to get really interesting.

 

[GrandRoyale]

At this point, you two are really just debating semantics, and what constitutes "market share" vs market position.

What still seems to be the case is that despite Universal's growing share of the market, they do not yet seem to be cutting into Disney's actual consumer base.
If anything, Disney is profiting as much from Universal's expansion as Universal is, since a lot of families make the decision to come or return to Orlando because of the new things Universal is offering, but still spend an equal, if not greater percentage of their time in Florida going (back) to Disney World.

Universal is trying like hell to change that and become their own 3-4 day all inclusive resort destination, and they're about a water park and a monkey from getting there.
When that happens, and assuming Universal can maintain the momentum they gained from the two Potter build-outs, things are going to get really interesting.

Exactly. Until a significant amount of people actually start choosing Universal IN LIEU OF (rather than "in addition to") Disney, then no market share is being lost by Disney. It's really pretty simple

 

[Bairstow]

Exactly. Until a significant amount of people actually start choosing Universal IN LIEU OF (rather than "in addition to") Disney, then no market share is being lost by Disney. It's really pretty simple

...unless you define "market share" in the generally-accepted sense, which as AEfx pointed out, shifts with a growing market.
Universal isn't drinking Disney's milkshake yet, since thanks to them there's more and more milkshake. For now.

 

[doctornick]

You're right, the first click method may be skewing things, but is that the method that TEA has used all along? If that is the case, the data is still accurately represented, although consistently skewed.

Right. As long as the methodology is unchanged and evenly applied to different places... (1) it allows valid year over year comparisons to look at trends and (2) it affects all parks.

Trying to say the "first click" hurts Uni specifically seems to ignore how significant park hopping is at WDW. MK and Epcot probably have much higher numbers if we talk about how many people walk through the gates as opposed to first click.

That said, first click seems like the best measurements anyway. If Person A goes into USF and then takes the HE to IOA, it's still one person in Uni that day (and same goes for the person who goes to DAK in the AM an visits MK for Wishes at night) so why double count them for each park?

 

[danlb_2000]

You know who is winning? The people who can put aside their blind devotion to one company or the other and enjoy six great theme parks instead of just 2 or 4.

 

[GrandRoyale]

...unless you define "market share" in the generally-accepted sense, which as AEfx pointed out, shifts with a growing market.

Yes, but there is no data to suggest that Disney's growth hasn't coincided with the growth of the market. Universal gained 17%, Disney gained 4%. If you have only the most basic understanding of it, then yes you think Universal bit into Disney's share by 13%. But that's not how it works. How many of those 17% went to Disney as well? What percentage of the population that grew the market skipped Disney for Universal? Until you show me those numbers, your argument holds no ground.

Also keep in mind that 4% growth at Disney is a TON more people numbers-wose than a 4% jump at Universal

 

[andysol]

You know who is winning? The people who can put aside their blind devotion to one company or the other and enjoy six great theme parks instead of just 2 or 4.

5.5. Don't you dare give DHS full credit

 

[SJN1279]

Then how do you explain the Studio's 14% increase in 2013?

I honestly have no idea. Maybe Transformers/Springfield was as almost as big of a draw as Potter was.

What will be the increase in 2015 with no new attractions?

 

[SJN1279]

While I am excited for Kong, I do wonder if a new Jurassic World attraction featuring the I-rex would have been a better option at this point.

 

[mahnamahna101]

Just wait when TEA announces its numbers in 2020, Universal will only be 5 years away from catching up. In 2025, Universal will be sure to catch Disney in 2030. And so it goes.

No one is saying ALL of WDW. Just Hollywood Studios. In 6 years, the odds of DHS still being ahead of both Universal Orlando parks is low. That would require DHS to add over a million visitors in spite of 3-4 more closed attractions and a lack of a new ride since 2008.

USF and IOA being around 11 million in 6 years is far more likely than Hollywood Studios' getting 11 million+ visitors without any new additions. TSPL and SWL aren't supposed to open until 2020/2021. Therefore, the odds of perpetual increase with nothing new, but plenty subtracted over the next 5 years is pretty low.

AK won't be caught. Certainly not until 2025 at the very earliest. Epcot will likely never get caught, especially if TDO invests in an overhaul for Future World or a new country for World Showcase. MK is untouchable. Neither IOA nor USF have the capacity necessary to fit 18-22m guests annually in each park.

But HS and even AK aren't just loony speculation. HS is very plausible, while AK is an outside shot (10-15 years down the line).

And that's more than enough for Universal to be successful.

 

[danlb_2000]

I honestly have no idea. Maybe Transformers/Springfield was as almost as big of a draw as Potter was.

What will be the increase in 2015 with no new attractions?

How can you have no idea? You have been trying to make the case that Uni doesn't have anything to drive attendance but Potter. How can you make that case without understanding Uni's attendance trends?

The increase in 2015 will probably continue to be Diagon Alley since it's only been open six months.

 

[mahnamahna101]

I honestly have no idea. Maybe Transformers/Springfield was as almost as big of a draw as Potter was.

What will be the increase in 2015 with no new attractions?

2015 is Diagon's first full year. The increase will be solid. Not 17%, but probably 9-11%.

...could it be that... GASP... new, quality additions bring in crowds?

So even if the IP isn't Potter-level... they could... potentially get solid attendance increases anyways?

It doesn't matter if the IP is Potter-level. If Kong or F&F or Nintendo end up shocking people with their high quality, attendance will increase. It doesn't matter how popular the IP is - the execution brings guests in.

As Walt would say, "quality will win out"

If Mermaid, BoG and SDMT can add 2 million+ visitors over a 3 year period to MK, I don't see how the countless additions for UO over the next 5 years won't result in 3-4 million more visitors.

 

[SJN1279]

No one is saying ALL of WDW. Just Hollywood Studios. In 6 years, the odds of DHS still being ahead of both Universal Orlando parks is low. That would require DHS to add over a million visitors in spite of 3-4 more closed attractions and a lack of a new ride since 2008.
.

Star Wars.....

 

[AEfx]

Oh but I thought that the numbers were bogus, so how would I be able to truly figure out the market share percentages?

The fact is, Universal is going up but Disney is not going down. The market is growing but Disney is still not having anything taken away from them. They're still growing. Orlando didn't jump 17% in tourism just because Universal did.

Actually, according to the rough and dirty numbers I just ran from the reports (not sure who is saying they are bogus, it's the most accurate data we have access to regarding paid admissions):

From 2009 to 2014 the market in Orlando is up 14.35% (rounding the attendance of the 7 Orlando theme parks to the nearest 100K, including Sea World). That means 14.35% more admission tickets were sold in 2014 than in 2009.

From 2009 to 2014, Universal's attendance has grown 62.38%.

From 2009 to 2014, Disney's attendance has grown 8.21%.

It's pretty clear that Universal has taken the lion's share of the increased Orlando market.

 

[mahnamahna101]

Star Wars.....

Star Tours was a necessary update. I don't recall a new show building for it... for the record, I don't consider Despicable Me or The Simpsons Ride major either (D+ tickets) since both essentially replaced a similar ride.

 

[AEfx]

At this point, you two are really just debating semantics, and what constitutes "market share" vs market position.

No, we are talking about numbers. Market share and market position are completely different things.

But it's OK, you can believe whatever you wish. The S:N ratio in this thread has dropped considerably, and I think those that understand the data have gotten as much as we are going to get. You guys can pixie it out to your heart's content.

 

[SJN1279]

2015 is Diagon's first full year. The increase will be solid. Not 17%, but probably 9-11%.

...could it be that... GASP... new, quality additions bring in crowds?

So even if the IP isn't Potter-level... they could... potentially get solid attendance increases anyways?

It doesn't matter if the IP is Potter-level. If Kong or F&F or Nintendo end up shocking people with their high quality, attendance will increase. It doesn't matter how popular the IP is - the execution brings guests in.

As Walt would say, "quality will win out"

If Mermaid, BoG and SDMT can add 2 million+ visitors over a 3 year period to MK, I don't see how the countless additions for UO over the next 5 years won't result in 3-4 million more visitors.

Transformers is a B level Spiderman knockoff. I love The Simpsons, but The Simpsons land screams cheap to me every time I visit. The food court is cool, the food itself is weak. Diagon Alley is well done, Gringotts not as much.

Universal's best period of new attractions for me was the late 90's with Men In Black and IOA. Nothing touches that.

 

[Andrew C]

No one is saying ALL of WDW. Just Hollywood Studios. In 6 years, the odds of DHS still being ahead of both Universal Orlando parks is low. That would require DHS to add over a million visitors in spite of 3-4 more closed attractions and a lack of a new ride since 2008.

What if Star Wars Land opens in 5 years? Then what?