Universal becoming more popular than Disney?

[Fun2BFree]

Universal lacks the charm and history of WDW. I briefly stayed at Royal Pacific Resort this week to take advantage of their front-of-the-line pass and I found several things:

1-WDW's own size works against itself. While I enjoy taking resort buses, the waits can often seem too long. It was so convenient to walk to the parks or catch a water-taxi in no time flat.
2-The guests at RPR seemed more relaxed than at the All-Stars, but not as happy-- ASMu seems much more homely while RPR feels like a hotel.
3-Universal's theming often matches (and occasionally surpasses) Disney's. Several areas (Marvel Super-Hero Island, San Francisco, Amity) were extraordinarily layered with great details.
4-Both Universal parks can be done in two days (even without Universal Express), as it suffers from a lack of small attractions-- and even these are highly missable. Even though the TTA is at best a C-Ticket, my trip doesn't seem complete without a few rides on it, whereas the likes of Lucy or Beetlejuice do nothing for me.
5-While Disney at times cannot venture forth into a more adult and scary theme (case in point: AE), Universal relish the chance to be more edgy, and environments like the Hulk benefit greatly from this.
6-Disney can integrate family rides much better than Universal, who have practically a single kids' land in each park (Woody Woodpecker's KidZone; Seuss Landing).
7-While I'm not claiming that Disney parks are without a number of movie tie-ins, Universal seems to be entirely franchised. While Disney can have timeless original classics (BTMRR; IASW; PoTC etc.), Universal's rides need replacing as soon as they are no longer culturally relevant.
8-Universal's employees seem much less motivated than WDW's CMs, and many of them couldn't get their own terminology right (one such employee called Universal Express, FastPass).

A bit of a marathon post, but still valid.

 

[Spike-in-Berlin]

Fair enough. I just see it tossed around so often, as if it "proved" that Disney's popularity was better then Universal because it WAS better.

However, I don't think you can fairly state that Universal has zero chance of defeating Disney ever. While Disney may have the bigger numbers now, it's possible that in many decades it COULD overtake them, should they acquire more expansion space, or Disney continues to be lazy and ultimately destroys what was fun about their parks. Am I saying it's likely? No, it really isn't. But is it possible? Yes. If you need an example of a smaller competitor defeating a larger one, just take a look at Atari vs. Nintendo.

-Skip

Never EVER. They just can't geht enough expansion place. Take a look at the area on virtual earth or google earth. They are surrounded by residential and commercial areas, an expansion would mean they would have to built in a substantial distance from the existing parks. And they could never buy an area the size of WDW because Walt bought it when the area was still swampland and orange groves.
And by the way, WDW offers 4 fullsized theme parks plus 2 water parks, not counting the more than 20 themed hotels and Downtown Disney. US would have to invest an enormous sum to reach this size AND compensate additionally the future disney expansions and additions.
I don't think they want to beat WDW, because they know it's impossible. They want their share and come in second. And as soon as I am able to spend as much time in WDW as I wish AND have some additional days without sacrificing too much Disney-time, I will definitely visit US and give them a chance. There are several attractions I am interested in. Without Disney, US and Sea World would be the only reasons to visit the Orlando area. But without Disney they, of course, wouldn't even be there.

 

[Msully]

In simple words. No. Universal does not and never will have a stonger name than Disney.

 

[ChrisFL]

Never EVER. They just can't geht enough expansion place. Take a look at the area on virtual earth or google earth. They are surrounded by residential and commercial areas, an expansion would mean they would have to built in a substantial distance from the existing parks. And they could never buy an area the size of WDW because Walt bought it when the area was still swampland and orange groves.
And by the way, WDW offers 4 fullsized theme parks plus 2 water parks, not counting the more than 20 themed hotels and Downtown Disney. US would have to invest an enormous sum to reach this size AND compensate additionally the future disney expansions and additions.
I don't think they want to beat WDW, because they know it's impossible. They want their share and come in second. And as soon as I am able to spend as much time in WDW as I wish AND have some additional days without sacrificing too much Disney-time, I will definitely visit US and give them a chance. There are several attractions I am interested in. Without Disney, US and Sea World would be the only reasons to visit the Orlando area. But without Disney they, of course, wouldn't even be there.

FYI, before the 9/11 downturn, Universal had purchased 2,000 acres from Lockheed Martin which were going to be used for 1-2 more theme parks, several hotels, golf courses, etc. but sadly, they decided to sell off that land and now only have what you see on their existing property.

 

[Skip]

FYI, before the 9/11 downturn, Universal had purchased 2,000 acres from Lockheed Martin which were going to be used for 1-2 more theme parks, several hotels, golf courses, etc. but sadly, they decided to sell off that land and now only have what you see on their existing property.

What's being done with the Lockheed site now? If it's still empty, it's possible it could be purchased back at some point. Then Universal would have the potential to add even 2 more theme parks...

-Skip

 

[Legacy]

What's being done with the Lockheed site now? If it's still empty, it's possible it could be purchased back at some point. Then Universal would have the potential to add even 2 more theme parks...

-Skip

The sell-off occurred well before GM/NBC got a hold of Universal, and from the way things are looking the new owners aren't super-interested in massive expansion. There is infrastructure work for something going on one of the old sites, so things don't look good.

It's a shame too, as the concept for the third part had been finalized in 2002.

 

[hack2112]

The one thing that USO does better than Disney definitively (some other things are arguable) is their halloween event. I have been going to Halloween Horror Nights every year since 2004 and I have not found its equal yet. I know that Disney can't do one because of the whole kid-friendly factor, and that some people don't like paying money to get scared, and that some people think that the past few years weren't the strongest, but it has always been one of the most fun things that I do every year. And from how this year seems to be turning out, I think that it may be the best HHN I've ever been to.

I, for one, appreciate what the Universal Art and Design department do.

/rant

 

[Legacy]

The one thing that USO does better than Disney definitively (some other things are arguable) is their halloween event. I have been going to Halloween Horror Nights every year since 2004 and I have not found its equal yet. I know that Disney can't do one because of the whole kid-friendly factor, and that some people don't like paying money to get scared, and that some people think that the past few years weren't the strongest, but it has always been one of the most fun things that I do every year. And from how this year seems to be turning out, I think that it may be the best HHN I've ever been to.

I, for one, appreciate what the Universal Art and Design department do.

/rant

We have names for houses (that may not be legit) and the site just went live this past week with a teaser phrase by Freud. How do you have any idea what's coming?

 

[jorgetheviking]

^ He must be a member of the HHNvault forums where a lot of speculating is going on lately. I love it there. This year is shaping up pretty nice. But we do say that every year. lol

 

[Legacy]

^ He must be a member of the HHNvault forums where a lot of speculating is going on lately. I love it there. This year is shaping up pretty nice. But we do say that every year. lol

I don't start going to the Vault until stuff that's confirmed starts getting announced. There is just too much speculation at this point for me to get into it.

 

[DisneyWood]

Exactly!!!!

I have made 6 trips to Orlando and have never been able, to even for a day, convince myself to waste a single precious Disney day on Universal so from my point of view I am gonna have to say NO! :ROFLOL:

I agree, I can't bring myself to take my family to Universal either. It is not that I dislike Universal, b/c I don't know much about it. I just don't want to waste time anywhere else while in WDW. That list includes SeaWorld, outlet stores, beach, etc.

I am sure that I would enjoy Universal, and I know that the park is gaining a little momentum based on things I have read. However, it really doesn't matter to me, if it becomes more popular, well, I take that back. I think I would like that, so the parks would be less crowded @ WDW.

 

[DisneyWood]

The one thing that USO does better than Disney definitively (some other things are arguable) is their halloween event. I have been going to Halloween Horror Nights every year since 2004 and I have not found its equal yet. I know that Disney can't do one because of the whole kid-friendly factor, and that some people don't like paying money to get scared, and that some people think that the past few years weren't the strongest, but it has always been one of the most fun things that I do every year. And from how this year seems to be turning out, I think that it may be the best HHN I've ever been to.

I, for one, appreciate what the Universal Art and Design department do.

/rant

I have heard that this event is great. I would love to go to this event sometime, but again, I don't see that happening unless I move to Florida, and can go to WDW anytime. So, I wouldn't feel like I am wasting time elsewhere. I know that sounds stupid, but it is true.

 

[ImagineAtl23]

i think they cater to different groups......disney caters to little kids with families etc (and addicts like me) and universal is where teens/young adults go. Disney needs to market different services and attrations to attract that crowd, that is who they are losing i think.

 

[comics101]

I also have to admit that on this trip I noticed more things about Disney that I found a little disappointing (i.e. cast members not as friendly as usual, things left dirty or broken, etc) where Universal tended to exceed my expectations in a lot of areas.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's noticed this, esp. with the cast members. Disney really needs to make sure they emphisize what the "Disney Difference" is to cm's in training, because it seems more and more are forgeting, and Uni has had far better service the last two times we went down.

That said, I personally believe DHS is a better park than Universal Studios. Nothing beats GMR, RnR and ToT, and MV3D. There's also Fantasmic. I happen to like Uni alot, and for the first time ever we're making a special trip to Orlando this to head over to the resort w/out going to Disney. It's been four years since the last trip, so maybe the quality has become better than Disney's.

 

[scotth1224]

im not going to lie, the only thing i like about universal is their thrill rides. i love disney alot more. a.more organized, people are nice, they have variety, and i cant even begin to say how much better disney is. universal charges mega dollars for something disney offers for free...fast passes. disney treats everybody who walk through those gates equally, something universal has a hard time with, at least that is what i noticed. i honestly dont think universal will ever be better than disney in anything.

You are forgetting though.....that if you stay onsite at a Universal resort.....You get Universal Express for free as part of your package!!!

http://www.universalorlando.com/universal_express.html

 

[KaliSplash]

The short answer to the question raised in the thread title:

No.

Not even close. Just look at the annual attendance figures going back ... FOREVER!

Clearly there are different focuses at work at the two locations. Disney is geared to families with children. It is intended at Disney that pretty much everyone can ride everything. That's why there's only one ride that turns people upside down.

Universal is geared to older children and young adults. Some of what it does is done very well.

But for an overall experience, I don't think it's even close.

 

[disneydiva72]

My boys (8 & 11) like Universal and IOA better because its not full of Princesses and bibbity bobbitdy boo boutiques. I do agree with them that from a boys perspective Disney has gone the way of the Princess.

I personally like Disney resorts MUCH better than Universal resorts hands down. I still can not get over that Universal charges you to park at the resort, that burns me to no end, and they have NO food courts, with 2 boys I need a food court.

For Christmas we are staying at the AKL 1 bedroom villa but we are spending most of our days in Universal and IOA ....only one day we will be going to Animal Kingdom.

 

[DisneyGigi]

I agree, I can't bring myself to take my family to Universal either. It is not that I dislike Universal, b/c I don't know much about it. I just don't want to waste time anywhere else while in WDW. That list includes SeaWorld, outlet stores, beach, etc.

I am sure that I would enjoy Universal, and I know that the park is gaining a little momentum based on things I have read. However, it really doesn't matter to me, if it becomes more popular, well, I take that back. I think I would like that, so the parks would be less crowded @ WDW.

I think that if I ever did convince myself to go that I would stress so much over losing a Disney day that I would not enjoy myself anyway. If I lived in the area I am sure I would try it but not until then! :ROFLOL:

 

[agent86]

The short answer to the question raised in the thread title:

No.

Not even close. Just look at the annual attendance figures going back ... FOREVER!

Well as I pointed out in my opening remarks to this thread, I knew that several people would use the argument that people must prefer Disney, because their attendance figures are larger. But as I stated (and as the one guest at Fort Wilderness said to us...and I think he was onto something), Disney's attendance figures are more about the reputation they've built over the years. It doesn't really say anything about what people are enjoying at any given moment, or on any given visit. After all, Disney has a 19-year lead on Universal, and they already had 3 parks open before Universal ever opened it's first park. That's a long time to develop a lasting impression, and for most of Disney's history, they have really set the bar as far as service and quality. It's only in recent years that Disney has started to decline noticeably (though it seems to get worse each year). So it stands to reason that their attendance figures will be higher, based on that reputation. But it seems to me that if you evened the playing field and both resorts were to open today, with no preconceived ideas and no reputations on which to ride, Universal would very likely come away the winner. As many have posted here, Universal has a lot going for it, and a lot of hardcore Disney buffs just don't want to give it a chance. This is evident in many of the remarks made here. When people post comments like, "Disney ALWAYS will be better", that's very telling. How can a person possibly know what something will "always" be? That reflects more of a closed mind, in my opinion. Likewise, when people post comments that indicate Universal (or even IOA) is "just a thrill park", I think that shows they either haven't really visited the park themselves, or they weren't paying attention at all. In reality, IOA is no more of a "thrill park" than DHS. Most of the Jurassic Park section, for example, is mostly for kids and families. It's just the ride itself that is more of a thrill ride (along the lines of Splash Mountain as opposed to a wild thrill ride). It also has the entire Seuss Landing section which is very obviously for kids. One could easily make the argument that DHS is a thrill park because of RnRC, ToT, or even LMA. I think that referring to US or IOA as thrill parks (or even genuinely believing them to be so) also reflects a closed mind.

In terms of attention to detail (something Disney Imagineers pride themselves on, and something that makes all of us huge fans of Disney in the first place), I would say US is outstanding. In particular, the New York, San Francisco, and Hollywood sections are incredible. I love how they each have major areas that are just for show (i.e. no rides or gift shops are set up...they are just there to provide ambiance). A close second might be some of the areas of AK.

 

[dandaman]

After looking over both of my annual passes, I didn't see anything that states that I'm not allowed to enjoy both parks.

By the way, Universal is good, even if you don't like Universal because competition is *always* good for the consumer.

A sane post (among few others) in a sea of bickering. Thank you.