universal going unfair on their website

[MickeyJman06]

i saw their "compare to disney" page on universal's site, it was toatlly unfair
like universal's called one of their section's "today's hottest enteratamint" (surely none of them is aquired with universal) tha called disney's "yesterday's classic fariytales" monster's inc isn't that old. pets universal=yes disney=no. disney cares about safety, say like a dog goes nuts in one of the hotel's and it is half ruined, universal wants thier hotels destroyed (they might). on the water ride section they missed two (malstrom and backlot tour) disney had more thrill rides than universal, but universal counted their's as "better". and more importantly the unfair thing is universal's rides have "clicks" disney dosen't. people said on one of my other threads "they don't compete" why lie and go on their website and see that mean page about disney? i think disney should sue that page !!!!

 

[Champion]

Thats their shtick, don't worry about it.

Outdrawing them over 4 to 1 is plenty for Disney.

Notice Disney NEVER mentions Universal. Universal is just a leech off the success of WDW, and thats all it will ever be. They know that, which is why they make comparisons like you mention.

 

[ilovepluto23]

I can see why you're annoyed by this, but it isn't really anything to worry about. If people want to believe that and go to Universal instead...let them. I don't mind WDW being a few families short b/c of Universal's advertising technique. I don't think Disney is really worried about this either. They'd lose more money suing them than they do ignoring it and losing a couple of visitors.

 

[ilovepluto23]

Thats their shtick, don't worry about it.

Outdrawing them over 4 to 1 is plenty for Disney.

Notice Disney NEVER mentions Universal. Universal is just a leech off the success of WDW, and thats all it will ever be. They know that, which is why they make comparisons like you mention.

I agree. They're just jealous .

 

[doop]

Don't worry about it, they're just doing so poorly on attendance that they need to make comparisons like this.

 

[raven]

Universal will always compare themselves to Disney because Disney was there first. Orlando was a tiny town when Disney started buying land in the area. They don't have to compare to anyone because they know they are the biggest and best.

 

[Foolish Mortal]

And people wonder why Disney fans mock/trash Uni. on these sites :lookaroun

 

[kcnole]

That has been on their site for years, its not a new thing. Its just called marketing, if you live in America I'm certain you've seen other companies do it on those things that air during television episodes called commercials.

 

[disney_nutter]

All i will say is pepsi/coke is the same as disney/universal we will never have one without the other both disney and universal bring the tourists in and they give people jobs, so stop your complaning its called bussiness

 

[Champion]

All i will say is pepsi/coke is the same as disney/universal we will never have one without the other both disney and universal bring the tourists in and they give people jobs, so stop your complaning its called bussiness

Not entirely accurate. Coke and Pepsi are much closer in market share (40% each, roughly) than Disney and Universal (in Orlando, Disney has about 70% marketshare, Universal 17%, and SeaWorld 9%)

It is 'just business' but its hardly an even playing field. Universal is hoping for table scraps.

 

[pheneix]

Universal should just put in their little comparison that they have Harry Potter and Disney doesn't. That's about the only thing that they have going for them right now.

 

[TrickMouse]

its like wwe/tna.

 

[ToTBellHop]

yeah...Universal is very aware that the most they can really hope for is a day or two from guests away from their Disney vacations. Who actually stays at the Universal resorts? Hahahaha...I would never...

When that comparison was originally made, the statement that Universal uses such "modern" enterprises as ET, An American Tale, Twister, the Blues Brothers, Jaws, Beetlejuice, Men in Black, and Lucy compared to Disney's "older" offerings still wasn't really accurate, however back then, the 32 new Finding Nemo attractions that now exist around the world along with the Monsters, Inc. attractions did not exist. So, then it was more the recently-released film Jaws versus ancient franchises like Star Wars, Indy, and Toy Story.

/sarcasm off

 

[mrerk]

Not entirely accurate. Coke and Pepsi are much closer in market share (40% each, roughly) than Disney and Universal (in Orlando, Disney has about 70% marketshare, Universal 17%, and SeaWorld 9%)

It is 'just business' but its hardly an even playing field. Universal is hoping for table scraps.

More like 43% Coke, 31% Pepsi but whatever. True, they are closer than Disney/Universal but still not that close. Wasn't the whole new Coke thing because Coke lost like a half of a point of market share?

http://www.beverage-digest.com/pdf/top-10_2007.pdf

 

[DisneyPirate85]

i saw their "compare to disney" page on universal's site, it was toatlly unfair
like universal's called one of their section's "today's hottest enteratamint" (surely none of them is aquired with universal) tha called disney's "yesterday's classic fariytales" monster's inc isn't that old. pets universal=yes disney=no. disney cares about safety, say like a dog goes nuts in one of the hotel's and it is half ruined, universal wants thier hotels destroyed (they might). on the water ride section they missed two (malstrom and backlot tour) disney had more thrill rides than universal, but universal counted their's as "better". and more importantly the unfair thing is universal's rides have "clicks" disney dosen't. people said on one of my other threads "they don't compete" why lie and go on their website and see that mean page about disney? i think disney should sue that page !!!!

My advice....quit looking at Uni-WHO's page....:shrug:

 

[scpergj]

More like 43% Coke, 31% Pepsi but whatever. True, they are closer than Disney/Universal but still not that close. Wasn't the whole new Coke thing because Coke lost like a half of a point of market share?

http://www.beverage-digest.com/pdf/top-10_2007.pdf

Close...actually, the New Coke thing was to disguise the change from a sugar sweetener to High Fructose Corn Syrup. Coke introduced the New Coke so that there would be no regular "old Coke" on the shelves when the new "Classic Coke" came out.

I should know...I used to work for the company that sold Coke on HFCS.

 

[unkadug]

Close...actually, the New Coke thing was to disguise the change from a sugar sweetener to High Fructose Corn Syrup. Coke introduced the New Coke so that there would be no regular "old Coke" on the shelves when the new "Classic Coke" came out.

I should know...I used to work for the company that sold Coke on HFCS.

I thought it was the "largest marketing blunder in history" ?

 

[KeithVH]

Actually, I'll be the first to encurage people to go to that other place. Means less waiting in lines and less crowds for me at the World . . .

 

[bryPOD]

My favorite part is that Shrek is "new" and Monster's Inc. is "old", when both came out the same exact year...

 

[jasondiff]

Universal should just put in their little comparison that they have Harry Potter and Disney doesn't. That's about the only thing that they have going for them right now.

But they don't have Harry Potter, they have the rights to it and are planning to build HPland. They can't advertise it just yet because people will come looking for it and it won't be there for years. But I am assuming there will be a huge marketing blitz when HPland opens.