Universal has made me a believer

[Pumbas Nakasak]

So effectively the same sort of people who were impacted by Star Wars decades ago. This is their Star Wars, just happens to be a subject you have no interest in.

As for the rest of your "criticisms" you could argue that about any venture in the entertainment industry. Everything fades with time and familiarity unless like Star Wars you reinvent it decades later tweaked and tailored for a new set of consumers. Rowlling has the same sense of commercially driven motivation that Lucas has so theres no reason she too cannot find another way to milk the franchise and its fans.

However even as a non fan I cant see how Potter can be compared to the Twie series given its only popular with sad lonely women, cherry boys and Emos

 

[ScoutN]

So effectively the same sort of people who were impacted by Star Wars decades ago. This is their Star Wars, just happens to be a subject you have no interest in.

As for the rest of your "criticisms" you could argue that about any venture in the entertainment industry. Everything fades with time and familiarity unless like Star Wars you reinvent it decades later tweaked and tailored for a new set of consumers. Rowlling has the same sense of commercially driven motivation that Lucas has so theres no reason she too cannot find another way to milk the franchise and its fans.

However even as a non fan I cant see how Potter can be compared to the Twie series given its only popular with sad lonely women, cherry boys and Emos

Harry Potter appealing more to a young group.

Star Wars appealing to all ages.

That does not come across to me as appealing to the same people.

Saying that she could reinvent something is like saying any other director or writer could reinvent something. Could they? Yes. Do they? No, most of the time or bomb when they do.

If you want to compare her to George Lucas and say they are similar then you are partially correct. The sense that they have of protecting their products and going after anyone who remotely tries to make a dollar off the fandom of the franchise given then yes they are alike.

Comparing the two franchises would require quite a bit of overextending circumstances. If she were to "reinvent" the franchise it would require going a completely different direction than was originally intended. Star Wars was created with the idea of telling the beginning of the story years down the road. Comparing the two franchises are apples to oranges.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Why they are both fantasy story's that appeal to a certain type of people. The fact that one appeals to you while the other doesnt is irrelevant.

We are talking about theme park attractions. I have no loyalty to either yet somehow manage to enjoy both. And regardless of trend diagrams of cluster analysis the majority of park visitors will be like me rather than ubber fans looking for a fix.

 

[ScoutN]

Why they are both fantasy story's that appeal to a certain type of people. The fact that one appeals to you while the other doesnt is irrelevant.

We are talking about theme park attractions. I have no loyalty to either yet somehow manage to enjoy both. And regardless of trend diagrams of cluster analysis the majority of park visitors will be like me rather than ubber fans looking for a fix.

They are two different fantasy stories with two completely different basis. One of which was surrounded by ingenious marketing, new technology, pushing his product, looking for new ways to extend it.

What has Rowling came up with to keep her product pushed? Her publisher brought the idea of a park up and she bit. She is clinging to keep it alive and will more than likely sell out to do it.

I am not an uber Star Wars fanatic where I study the series. I only watch the movies here and there, ride the ride, and that's about it. I saw the first HP movies when I was younger. The one before the last I found myself sitting there waiting for it to end since I have gotten older and seen it remain as a more or so childish series.

As you said the general park goer will the ones to keep visiting there. So the grand scheme of interest is only there because the area is present. That in itself reaffirms that the longevity(so nothing is misconstrued I do not mean it as I think it will be torn down but lose interest of what it "claims" to be unique in" of it will be poor. You want to build something to keep people coming because it interests them and not because "it's there."

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

No they want to build something that will generate the greatest profits either from merchandise and/or visitors. It is all just business that allows creative types to make money for multinationals under the watch of bean counters.

 

[ScoutN]

So build something that is supposedly so good but yet an owner with 50% stake wants to unload it? Hmmm, sounds more like the stability is slipping a bit.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Comedy gold. For someone whos not an ubber fan you do seem rather desperate for Universal to have problems.

 

[ScoutN]

Comedy gold. For someone whos not an ubber fan you do seem rather desperate for Universal to have problems.

As I said before they have made a string of bad choices. Plenty of business networks cover them. I guess you don't have any rebuttal now. Just when I was thinking that was a good debate with you. Just because I don't use British lingo much doesn't mean I don't know what it means.. I do watch UK Top Gear after all

Real note, when I hear about something I would imagine as doing fairly well having problems financially I research it. I am a Nuclear Engineering student and spend a good majority of my time researching something of interest when I hear it.

As Eddie Sotto said in another thread. They have had numerous letdowns for their visitors. Fire And Ice is well themed up until the ride and after that you are on just another steel ride. That has attributed to its problems.

Researching topics of interest once again would not qualify someone as an uber fan. You seem to use that term when you have nothing else to use as an argument.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

You throw in words like research then claim you are not an ubber fan just someone with a keen interest. Hate to argue semantics but that smells of obsession to me no matter how you choose to dress it.

But its a nice attempt at deflection. You do seem to meander but ultimately always come back to a statement to criticise Universal. Again everything you have said about Uni could be said about Disney, and is by some. I think that someone having an open mind to enjoying the difference between the theme parks unnerves you.

But I am interested how you arrive at the conclusion that a shareholder looking to sell spells financial Armageddon for any business. After all I would be foolish not to utilise your research and expertise, as Id hate to think my trip could be impacted by financial meltdown. I can see it being a wish for some of the more extreme Disney fans on this site as they are unnerved by the strides Universal has taken during this period of ownership stability.

 

[ScoutN]

You throw in words like research then claim you are not an ubber fan just someone with a keen interest. Hate to argue semantics but that smells of obsession to me no matter how you choose to dress it.

But its a nice attempt at deflection. You do seem to meander but ultimately always come back to a statement to criticise Universal. Again everything you have said about Uni could be said about Disney, and is by some. I think that someone having an open mind to enjoying the difference between the theme parks unnerves you.

But I am interested how you arrive at the conclusion that a shareholder looking to sell spells financial Armageddon for any business. After all I would be foolish not to utilise your research and expertise, as Id hate to think my trip could be impacted by financial meltdown. I can see it being a wish for some of the more extreme Disney fans on this site as they are unnerved by the strides Universal has taken during this period of ownership stability.

So what you are saying is that because my observations through casual research are void because it is not published then? How does published research begin in that case. Nothing I have stated requires an "obsessive" amount of research yet just cross referencing for fact verification. Forming opinions do not require days or weeks, if it did then it could be considered as obsessive. What did I deflect? I have defended all of my views.

I enjoy the studios side of the park. Don't get me wrong on that aspect and assume I hate Universal as a whole. I still wholeheartedly enjoy the Studios but not so much IoA.

I never said it was headed to a meltdown so don't go adding words to my statement. But if Harryville was so great and the new direction for that park and so profitable then why would a company with an impeccable record try to offload it. The track record of BSG shows anything that has been offloaded by them has soon experienced financial woes. The other major controlling company is having its "tax-free" status reevaluated by Congress. If that is revoked then that could bleed down and spell trouble. I'm sure there could be an opinion derived by an individual of a financial crisis if enough time and research on each parent company was conducted in an adequate fashion. That is something I would not take the time to research because opposite to popular belief I am not obsessed with researching financial aspects of multiple companies other than what is headlined.

You are completely correct on saying some hardcores would wish for the meltdown of that company(although it would hurt Disney as well that Marvel income would be cut). I on the other hand would hate to see company have to fold, file Chapter 13, or cut jobs. That would kill an iconic part of Orlando that has always been a fun rival.

Like I said don't get me wrong I enjoy one of the parks in Universal but not the other. I would criticize some Disney angles if this were a thread about Disney and would also take a stab at Busch angles if this were a thread pertaining to Busch.

::EDIT:: I also love Citywalk! ( I think it is called that)

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

In that case and since there are only you and I interested, how does Busch Gardens Tampa compare to the rest of their parks as it sure as hell isnt in the same league as sea world Orlando. You reference the themeing at Busch yet criticise Universal for a coaster just being a coaster, with themeing at the front. In my experience Busch is just a collection of attractions with no themeing. The attractions however are enjoyable, I just dont follow your criticism.

I dont know much about the company's you mention though I believe they are VCs. From my own business experiences VCs get in get what they want and sell at what they think is a reasonable return versus risk. Sometimes I have known them to sell early because they want funds for a project that they believe will offer returns quicker and /or bigger.

My attraction to Universal is purely as a tourist so I don't look to closely at the FT to gauge how my holiday destination is doing, but working in advertising and marketing Universal is on a role. Here in particular it is getting a far more supportive press than Disney. It will be interesting to see if this emphasis changes once the sets open as an attraction. But then again that would provide one of the brand boosts mentioned earlier.

 

[ScoutN]

In that case and since there are only you and I interested, how does Busch Gardens Tampa compare to the rest of their parks as it sure as hell isnt in the same league as sea world Orlando. You reference the themeing at Busch yet criticise Universal for a coaster just being a coaster, with themeing at the front. In my experience Busch is just a collection of attractions with no themeing. The attractions however are enjoyable, I just dont follow your criticism.

I dont know much about the company's you mention though I believe they are VCs. From my own business experiences VCs get in get what they want and sell at what they think is a reasonable return versus risk. Sometimes I have known them to sell early because they want funds for a project that they believe will offer returns quicker and /or bigger.

My attraction to Universal is purely as a tourist so I don't look to closely at the FT to gauge how my holiday destination is doing, but working in advertising and marketing Universal is on a role. Here in particular it is getting a far more supportive press than Disney. It will be interesting to see if this emphasis changes once the sets open as an attraction. But then again that would provide one of the brand boosts mentioned earlier.

My reference to Busch is I have complaints about how they have carried out expansions and projects. Busch parks are to replicate the atmosphere (mainly horticulturally) in their parks. Their theming is loosely based on mythical creatures or standard animals in correlation to the land that they are in. Busch is not a story themed park(s) in the slightest but more a "beauty" park; hence why BGW has won The Most Beautiful Park in the world since 1990. They replicate the atmosphere of the country in their own manner. IMO they cannot be compared to really any other parks and are in a league of their own. I cannot find an accurate basis for comparison of BGW/BGT vs WDW or Uni.

In you reference of your "holiday" as well as your British slang insult I am going to guess you are from Britain?( I must have missed it if you stated thus far) If so I don't know how often you visit America but I would highly recommend attending a day at Busch Williamsburg. My criticisms though would be losing what each Busch park (mainly BGW) was founded on. With the project 2012 coaster going on it would seem as of right now that it would be themed(name/coloring) more modern day and leave the mythical standard that the attractions there have historically had and some of the methods used.

I do not get a chance to view much television outside of the news (if you can even call it that anymore) and the occasional Netflix viewing. On that note I am clueless on the marketing aspect of each parks other than the ads online and what is off of the interstate on the drive down there.

If you are from Britain I would like to send you a PM on a current event non them park related to try and get a first hand view of the opinion over there though.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Yes I am from the other side of the pond and happy to be called British though prefer to be classed as a Scot.

And feel free to PM away.

 

[ScoutN]

PM'ed. I hope it went through as it does not show in my outbox.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

got two now answered

 

[daikonjam]

Ahahahaha. I love how this thread started with "Oh please, there are no trolls here!" to

"TROOOLOLOLOLOLOL!"
"TROLOLOLOOOOLLOLO?"
"TROLLLLLL!"

To throw my two cents in here (bit biased, being a HP fan, but I'm also a star wars fan and a comic book fan and a "most things nerdy" fan)

This person obviously does not like Harry Potter, and has made that clear.
I didn't read the whole conversation, but I would assume he hasn't realized how much money WWoHP makes right now? Buttloads. And that's not going to die down any time soon.
People who don't even like HP are flocking to this place, because let's face it: It's freaking awesome.
Sure, they used forced perspective, which Disney made popular, but who hasn't used something that Disney invented? If people didn't use what Disney invented first, there would be so many things in this world that would be secular to only WDW and DLR. That would be boring, I like diversity!
Also, Mr. Troll, You don't know IF HP will be a star wars or BTTF or Indiana Jones, because it's still in its prime.
You also obviously just assume that the fan base is mostly young people. I attended opening night of the last movie, and there were people from every age, gender, race, religion, EVERYTHING there. Old people, young people, little kids, teenagers, Middle aged adults, you name it. HP is fixing to be what star wars is now. Saying that, i believe SW will always grow and be bigger than what it is now, and i don't think HP will ever surpass it, but I DO think it will grow to be much, much bigger that what it is.

And that's all she wrote

 

[Orangelake555]

So what you are saying is that because my observations through casual research are void because it is not published then? How does published research begin in that case. Nothing I have stated requires an "obsessive" amount of research yet just cross referencing for fact verification. Forming opinions do not require days or weeks, if it did then it could be considered as obsessive. What did I deflect? I have defended all of my views.

I enjoy the studios side of the park. Don't get me wrong on that aspect and assume I hate Universal as a whole. I still wholeheartedly enjoy the Studios but not so much IoA.

I never said it was headed to a meltdown so don't go adding words to my statement. But if Harryville was so great and the new direction for that park and so profitable then why would a company with an impeccable record try to offload it. The track record of BSG shows anything that has been offloaded by them has soon experienced financial woes. The other major controlling company is having its "tax-free" status reevaluated by Congress. If that is revoked then that could bleed down and spell trouble. I'm sure there could be an opinion derived by an individual of a financial crisis if enough time and research on each parent company was conducted in an adequate fashion. That is something I would not take the time to research because opposite to popular belief I am not obsessed with researching financial aspects of multiple companies other than what is headlined.

You are completely correct on saying some hardcores would wish for the meltdown of that company(although it would hurt Disney as well that Marvel income would be cut). I on the other hand would hate to see company have to fold, file Chapter 13, or cut jobs. That would kill an iconic part of Orlando that has always been a fun rival.

Like I said don't get me wrong I enjoy one of the parks in Universal but not the other. I would criticize some Disney angles if this were a thread about Disney and would also take a stab at Busch angles if this were a thread pertaining to Busch.

::EDIT:: I also love Citywalk! ( I think it is called that)

I would think a VC like the company trying to sell would want the greatest return. In this economy, Universal Orlando set record attendance and profit. This would probably be as good a time as any to sell if you are not in the business of running themeparks. Theoretically there should be plenty of bids from companies looking to have a healthy asset like this for when the economy starts rolling again. The only better time I can remember to sell that property would be just after they opened IOA and citywalk but right before the dot com bubble burst. Im also assuming this isnt like selling a used car that take some research and a short time to sell. This sale probably wont be complete for a while and I would bet that the company selling is betting that the economy will start to take off soon and they will end up selling about as high as they could.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

This whole argument about Harry Potter being classic VS. a fading fad is completely irrelevant and Disney is living proof of that. How many people, myself included, even CARE what Splash Mountain is based on? Moreover, how many people even know those characters at all? Most people haven't seen Song of the South ever, and those that have probably last saw it some decades ago as kids. Yet still Splash Mountain, after over 20 years in existance (counting from the Disneyland opening date) has reigned supreme as one of the best theme park and water ride experiences in the world.

A ride, themed land, theme park doesn't have to stand the test of time based on the franchises it lives on. You could go on and on with the examples. Last time Jurassic Park saw a new movie was 10 years ago but people love dinosaours, hence popular. Dinosaur, the Disney ride, is based off a failed attempt at a Land-Before-Time style movie yet is still drawing in the crowds. Toon Lagoon's use of strip comics most people today know nothing about, Great Movie Ride offering scenes from movies most young people are clueless about. The list goes on and on! It's the rides and themes that have to stand strong through the years. All the rest is irrelevant. WWoHP will stand the test of time, it's only a question if the bar will keep being raised by Universal. If that is the case then Disney will definitely have to start worrying as it seems Universal Creative are slowly creeping up to -once- Disney standard levels of theming and immersion.