OMG is it true? IS IT TRUE???

[Disneyglamour]

So I was looking around Screamscape today and one of the updates was that AK's Beastly Kingdom was back on the table....

Does anyone know anything about this? Are we FINALLY getting our Beastly Kingdom?

I'm so excited I'm about to burst!!! :D

[Ian]

I'm pretty sure this rumor originated with a Jim Hill story a month or so ago.

We all know what that means. :shake:

[Buttercup]

I doubt it. Sorry. :(

[Disneyglamour]

Ugh yes...Jim Hill...

Wouldn't this be great though? They really need to think of something amazing like this to compete with IOA with Rip Ride Rockit and Harry Potter coming...

I've always wanted to see Beastly Kingdom come to be!

[Supercali]

I've seen this on other sites besides Jim Hill so there must be at least some truth to it. I hope it's true. I'd say there's about a 40% chance of it being correct. :cool:

[JPL]

Actually from my sources Beastly Kingdom was never really off the table it's more of matter when it will be built and in what form. We might see parts of it incorporated to other areas of the Park much like Expedition Everest with the Mythical Yeti was placed in Asia. It might not be a seperate area of the park like originally planned but more of a storyline in each area of the park. I still wouldn't get over excited about it until Disney actually announces something.

[BrerGnat]

I was just going to say...wouldn't E:E be considered a ride featuring a "mythical" beast? I would expect that, rather than an entire land, they will just probably build more attractions within other lands at AK, perhaps that were originally "designated" for BK.

AK needs more. That is a fact. It's just a matter of time, I think.

[GrumpyFan]

I'm not sure if the rumors that have been posted at Screamscape are true or not, but they are interesting. I will say that Screamscape has a better track record than Jim Hill, but that's not to say that they're 100%.

It will be interesting to see where this one goes. With the economic downturn that we're currently in, and with Universal and Orlando building big new attractions, Disney may have decided to make some big improvements themselves.

[CaptainJessicaSparrow]

I'll never understand why everyone thinks that Disney needs to compete with Universal. Have you guys ever seen the records?

MK - 17 Mil
Epcot - 10.9 Mil
DHS - 9.5 Mil
DAK - 9.6 Mil

vs.

USF - 6.2 Mil
IOA - 5.4 Mil

Together, the two parks just barely beat one of of Disney's. And not for anything, but Disney knows that even if Universal brings more people in, they will visit both resorts, not just one. So Disney WILL benefit to the additions to the parks.

With that in mind, I'll throw this rumor in the trash next to Night Kingdom.

[big blue and hairy]

There is no doubt that WDW is king and Universal picks up the scraps, but it would be cool to see some more additions at AK. I love the park, but hey, more of a good thing is....well....good!

:sulley:

[DizneyFreak2002]

This rumor seems to still have life and just won't die... I am with JPL on this... You keep hearing BK will be in the park in one form or another... Until Disney says something official, I wouldn't hold my breath....

[JPL]

Disney is not competing with Universal in the sense of Theme Park Attendance numbers as most people think. They are competing for Days spent on property. An average adult on Vacation will spend between $50 - $100 above and beyond admission tickets and lodging per day. Every move Disney has made in the past 20 years is to get more of this money in their pockets. All you have to do is look at their track record. It started with adding more hotel rooms to get more of their guest's vacation dollars. They added water Parks to stop people leaving property to go to the beach or other Water Parks in the area. They added Plaesure Island to keep people on property and not go to Church Street Station for an evening. Magical Express is the most recent example get to the airport go right to Disney and get on the bus and go right back to the airport when leaving.
The more days you spend on Disney Property the more profit they make. They don;t want that money in your pocket being spent at Sea World or Universal even for a day.

[big blue and hairy]

I'll never understand why everyone thinks that Disney needs to compete with Universal. Have you guys ever seen the records?

MK - 17 Mil
Epcot - 10.9 Mil
DHS - 9.5 Mil
DAK - 9.6 Mil

vs.

USF - 6.2 Mil
IOA - 5.4 Mil

Together, the two parks just barely beat one of of Disney's. And not for anything, but Disney knows that even if Universal brings more people in, they will visit both resorts, not just one. So Disney WILL benefit to the additions to the parks.

With that in mind, I'll throw this rumor in the trash next to Night Kingdom.

Well of course they compete with Universal, that's how you win! I'm not saying they do everything based on what Universal does, but there are some things. Disney-MGM opened sooner than planned and not as complete as planned because of Universal.

Even if you are the Superbowl Champion, you need to compete with the mediocre team. It keeps you sharp and keeps smacking down the other team.

Disney is by far winning, but you know they'd like to make the disparity even greater.

:sulley:

[shadowden]

...to echo the sentiments noted above, disney is, indeed, competing. any successful company is mindful of their competition's achievements and has contigencies in place to counter them.

[Ian]

Yeah, you may not view Disney as being in competition with Universal, but trust me ... they definitely do.

First off, just because you're currently winning the battle doesn't mean it's not still a battle. Just ask the Flyers ... they've had 2 goal leads and blown them a bunch of times. Maybe an odd comparison, but you get what I mean.

The entire Disney-MGM Studios were built (and rush-built, I might add) solely as a response to Universal coming to Orlando. Many of the new thrill-ride type attractions were also added as a response to Universal's perception as the "thrill park" as compared to Disney being the "family park."

And do not at all underestimate what this Harry Potter park is going to do for Universal. I can virtually guarantee you that if you were to look at the 12 month attendance numbers following the debut of Potterland (or whatever it's called) you'll see Universal narrowing the gap significantly.

Here's the real thing to consider if you're Disney ... economics are kinda tough right now. Gas is up, recession may or may not be here, etc. Which means competing for vacation dollars is even more important.

Now if you're the average family (and I stress average, not Disney dorks like us) and you have to pick where you're going to go for your now suddenly more expensive vacation, where are you gonna go?

Disney World, where nothing significant has changed and you've pretty much seen it all or Universal that just opened a HUGE expansion to their park based on one of your kids' absolute favorite characters?

Makes you think, doesn't it? I think tough times may be headed Disney's way due to their cheapness and stubborn refusal to invest in their parks. Remember ... margins are thin. Even a small dent in their attendance can have a big, big effect. If Universal stole just 10% of their business that would be a major problem for Disney.

[lockedoutlogic]

disney is not in a competition with universal.....

never has been....never will be....

people tend to forget just how massive WDW is as compared to any other amusement destination....

I do have to admit that Sea World has done some nice expansion over the last ten years....

but the notion that anyone else forces disney to expand is silly

[SAHDad]

disney is not in a competition with universal.....

never has been....never will be....

people tend to forget just how massive WDW is as compared to any other amusement destination....

I do have to admit that Sea World has done some nice expansion over the last ten years....

but the notion that anyone else forces disney to expand is silly

Yep. And Microsoft doesn' t worry about Apple, Inc either.

The new Potterville attraction is going to drive traffic, and not towards Disney. While the overall effect might not be huge, it's not something that Disney can just ignore either. That does not mean that Disney is going to bang together a theme park based on Pixar movies or anything like that, but I could see expansion in the AK.

Edit - Pleasure Island was Disney's response to Church Street Station, in addition to the Disney-MGM post above.

[DisneyWizard]

I thought this thread was about Beastly Kingdom....

I don't think it's going to be what you expect if they do make it - mostly likely a ride or two at most. I have a feeling it will be disappointing, especially after the slew of rumors.

[lockedoutlogic]

Yep. And Microsoft doesn' t worry about Apple, Inc either.

The new Potterville attraction is going to drive traffic, and not towards Disney. While the overall effect might not be huge, it's not something that Disney can just ignore either. That does not mean that Disney is going to bang together a theme park based on Pixar movies or anything like that, but I could see expansion in the AK.

Edit - Pleasure Island was Disney's response to Church Street Station, in addition to the Disney-MGM post above.

have you ever been to church street station?

the notion that disney was "responding to it"..completely silly....completely

Disney has stolen ideas and attempted to go down the same road......the mgm park might have been a "response" to universal....hence the rush....

but let's be serious....disney still drives 90% of the bookings into orlando...if not more.....

find somebody who goes to orlando and spends 80% plus of their time at universal....

and if you find one.....find two

And can we stop with the Harry Potter fear?
Harry Potter will be gone the minute....and i mean the minute...the credits role on the last film...

once agan....people are giving americans too much credit for their attention spans.....

In american pop culture....there are staple phenomena....then there is everything else.....

Disney is of the former.....potter the latter....

When IOA and Citywalk opened....they were...and in many ways still are....far better than AK and PI...respectively.....

Did it matter? not one bit.....disney's share is still a ridiculous Lion's share.....

Disney has ownership of the town....as long as they continue to be "disney" to the public and maintain reasonable upgrade/ expansion....they will continue to be the king without dispute

It always seems as though every "threat" from across town is blown up by Disney fans....not because they are in any way threats.....we just hope the Disney moneymen will think they are and then build us some new rollercoasters or a new park in response.....

fear not....they will expand again soon.....but only because they want to...not because universal or anheiser busch is in any way a threat

[Ian]

Sorry, I normally agree with you lockedout (and Jessica, too, for that matter), but you're wrong on this one.

Disney definitely competes with Universal. Read Eisner's book ... he talks in there about how concerned they were over their coming to Orlando.

It's not about how big they are or how many guests they get vs. Universal, it's about keeping guests on Disney property for the length of their stay. Every single day someone takes out of their Disney vacation to visit Unversal or Sea World or whatever costs Disney money. Hotel money, food money, merchandise money, park admission money ... they whatever they can to minimize that.

I mean what do you think Magical Express was all about?? It's a way to get people to Disney property and strand them there. You don't think Disney is giving it away free out of the goodness of their hearts, do you??

Ditto the whole "light rail" plan that Disney helped put the kibosh on a few years ago. They opposed it because it was supposed to also have a stop at ... you guessed it ... Universal.

I mean I know what you're trying to say ... Disney is the Big Dog and Universal is an also ran ... and while that may be true, they are definitely in competition with each other.

[Disneyglamour]

Any company, no matter how large their lead is over their competition, is going to try to think of the next big thing before the other guys do. That's business.

Preach it Ian! Haha I love it!:thumbsup:

[lockedoutlogic]

Sorry, I normally agree with you lockedout (and Jessica, too, for that matter), but you're wrong on this one.

Disney definitely competes with Universal. Read Eisner's book ... he talks in there about how concerned they were over their coming to Orlando.

It's not about how big they are or how many guests they get vs. Universal, it's about keeping guests on Disney property for the length of their stay. Every single day someone takes out of their Disney vacation to visit Unversal or Sea World or whatever costs Disney money. Hotel money, food money, merchandise money, park admission money ... they whatever they can to minimize that.

I mean what do you think Magical Express was all about?? It's a way to get people to Disney property and strand them there. You don't think Disney is giving it away free out of the goodness of their hearts, do you??

Ditto the whole "light rail" plan that Disney helped put the kibosh on a few years ago. They opposed it because it was supposed to also have a stop at ... you guessed it ... Universal.

I mean I know what you're trying to say ... Disney is the Big Dog and Universal is an also ran ... and while that may be true, they are definitely in competition with each other.

Ian,

I see your points....but disney has tracked internally the length of stays since universal and seaworld started to become a "threat" in the 80's....and they have done nothing but add to Disney's coffers....

But they would like it if people would stay on property for their entire stays....

but that is more a function of how disney augments and enhances their experiences more than it is of what goes on up I-4....

universal has been poorly managed....the only way to seriously cut into to Disney is to trump them at every turn....something they haven't been willing to do.....like the 10 years with absolutely no improvement to IOA....or their lengthy attempt to recreate the studios.....or their somewhat half hearted attempt at developing their resorts....

Sea World has been a little better....but without land they will never become much more.....

if you stack sea world and universal together against the mighty mouse.....they still have no hope of closing the gap....this we know....

by the way, Ian.....guess which team from Pa. is winning the Stanlye Cup?

I know.....the one with 2 of the 3 best players on earth....:thumbsup:

[IamBelle]

Im sorry, but what is Beastly Kingdom?

[JPL]

Like I stated earlier for every adult that goes to Universal or Sea World for a day even if they are staying on WDW property Disney loses between $50 and $100 which is above and beyond lodging and admission. So do the math about how much money Disney is losing with people visiting these places and then say they are not in competition. on the low end of the $50 scale with 10 million visitors going to Universal for that's $500 million lost not even counting the lost admission money from those people. Plain and simple the more money people spend visiting other locations for any reasons the less money they have to spend on Disney Property. So anyone who doesn't believe there is a competition for that money going on is not looking at the big picture.

[CaptainJessicaSparrow]

It's okay Ian, I understand.

Personally, I think that if Disney does ANYTHING, they need to focus on increasing the level of service at the parks, increasing the quality of the Cast Members, and refresh/refurb more rides before opening another park or ride.

I think with a shift in the management policies and a good set of retraining, I think Disney can find a lower CM turnover and a positive shift in the way they deliver the service to the Guests. Branding can only take them so far.

[Ian]

by the way, Ian.....guess which team from Pa. is winning the Stanlye Cup?

I know.....the one with 2 of the 3 best players on earth....:thumbsup:Well I'm not sure I'd call Richards and Briere "2 of the best 3 players on Earth" quite yet, but thanks for the vote of confidence!

[lockedoutlogic]

Well I'm not sure I'd call Richards and Briere "2 of the best 3 players on Earth" quite yet, but thanks for the vote of confidence!


you're right....those two twerps aren't even in the same ballpark :secret:

[SurferStitch]

The Beastly Kingdom rumor is one that I would LVE to see come to fruition. That would be awesome.

And, side note.....MGM was not built solely in response to Universal showing up. Disney had plans on the drawing board for a movie/show based park, but Universal DID light a fire under Disney's butt to get moving on it and open before Universal could. Actually, it was going to be a movie based pavilion in Epcot (doesn't really make sense), but the designers determined it should be its own park. The rest, is history.

[JPL]

And, side note.....MGM was not built solely in response to Universal showing up. Disney had plans on the drawing board for a movie/show based park, but Universal DID light a fire under Disney's butt to get moving on it and open before Universal could. Actually, it was going to be a movie based pavilion in Epcot (doesn't really make sense), but the designers determined it should be its own park. The rest, is history.

Yes but many sources place Eisner in the know about Universal planning to build a park in Orlando back in his days with Paramount and it was one of the first projects he green lit when he came to Disney.

Plain and simple when Eisner came to Disney they went from being the "good neighbors" acting for the good of the community to the we want it all company we see today. Just take a look at the expansion and motive behind every addition to WDW since the start of Eisner's reign.

[lockedoutlogic]

Yes but many sources place Eisner in the know about Universal planning to build a park in Orlando back in his days with Paramount and it was one of the first projects he green lit when he came to Disney.

Plain and simple when Eisner came to Disney they went from being the "good neighbors" acting for the good of the community to the we want it all company we see today. Just take a look at the expansion and motive behind every addition to WDW since the start of Eisner's reign.

I think "plain and simple" Eisner's every move was about profit and stock price......

some of those moves turned out well...others....not so much

but you can't say that their moves in orlando were all competition motivated.....i would say most took somekind of competition into account....but few were more than a fleeting thought about what anyone else was doing....

Typhoon...blizzard....Wide World of Sports....pretty much the entire resort expansion.....DVC....Downtown....Animal Kingdom....even MGM....

all those things draw some similarities to the "competition"....but they pretty much are disney doing what they choose to do....adding things that are meant to wind the drumhead tighter around the property and keep people in....

they still have no "thrills" to compete with Universal...or even the Kraken at Sea World.....

and their animal park is vastly different than either sea world or busch gardens Tampa.....there is really not much of a comparison there either.....

I just think that most expansion...fundamentally....was about "increasing WDW's bragging rights....and profits"...not so much about direct responses

[JPL]

Their thrill response to Universal and Sea World is very evident with Test Track, Mission Space, Tower of Terror, RNRC, and EE. These are not the same Caliber of Thrill ride or class but were a direct answer to the thrills other locations had and were adding at the time. The thought process was to recapture the teen and tween market which is the same market Universal is gearing it's ad campaigns to.

Animal Kingdom was also considered a way to prevent from wanting to go see Busch Gardens. Although it is a diferent experience the logic behind the decision was simple if they can see animals here they will not drive and hour and a half to see them at Busch Gardens.

In the end it really is all about profits and the way to increase profits is simple

Keep people on property.

In order to do this you have to compete with outside draws and offer similar experiences. For every single expansion plan Disney did extensive research and there was not just a fleeting thought about any of it. Look at how many times they are taking guest surveys at the parks. I took one a few years back and most of the questions were about my vacation habits when I am in the Orlando area.
Questions I remember:

Did you rent a car?

How many days do you usually stay in the Orlando area?

How many days will you spend in a Disney parks?

How Many days will you spend enjoying other area attractions?

What area attractions are you planning to visit on your trip?

What area attractions have you visited on previous visits?

These are just a sampling of the types of questions. Most of them were concerned about me leaving the Disney Property actually I shouldn;t really say me it was about my money leaving more than me ;)

[lockedoutlogic]

Tower of Terror was a brilliantly constructed "Disney" type ride....really a great mix of imagineering and technology

Test Track ushered in the "new Technological rebirth" of EPCOT...a now 15 year pain in the butt
...for the record....I think Test Track should be renamed "Patience Test"....and Mission: Space should be "Killshot"...

Rock n Roller Coaster is a definite cheapie...but they just got lucky enough to get a good theme and ride on the relative cheap...

Expedition Everest had to be put in that park....they just had no juice to get people in that place....still don't in many ways....


Not to be argumentative.....but for every inferrence that Disney is responding....I can give you one that shows that doesn't really matter or pan out.....

Certainly....they take the competition into account....but I don't really think that the consideration level is more than token.....

I remember those surveys.....

I also remember tracking what the people were doing when i worked at one of the busiest WDW resorts.....

i remember that few stated any plans to go to Universal or Seaworld....I also remember that many people were spending 15 or more nights at WDW spread out over 2 or 3 trips....

so even if they went to Universal every trip....which few did....i would say may one day or two outta every 3 or 4 trips......

they are still spending upwards of 80% of their days in WDW.....

Disney's annual visitors are tracked at around 50 million (that's visitors to the property...not gate numbers...as many don't particularly pound the parks...or skip some on each trip)....

Universals are somewhere around 10 million.....

that's an 5-1 ratio......

the numbers say that universal and sea world and all the junk on I-Drive do well......

but they still aren't anywhere near a legitimate threat to Disney's Table....just dogs looking for scraps.....

Does Disney fight them and try to block them at every turn? Yes...
Why?......I really don't know....I think it's more to just keep the kids in line

[brownie]

I saw a clip of Marty Sklar talking about competition and how they like it because it keeps them on their toes. People only have so much too spend in Orlando, and there's a lot of place vying for that spending. Disney wasn't all that big either for a long time, so to discount places like Universal and Sea World would be a mistake. You need to keep them in mind over the long term so you're not caught flat-footed. Even if they aren't as big as Disney, it's still money not being spent at Disney that could be spent there, and I'm sure Disney would love to see it all spent at Disney.

[Jasper]

To start with add me to the list of those who would love to see the so called Beastly kingdom come true! However, I think based on past experience we are less likely to see an entire new land added and rather see as others have already suggested pieces of the original concept added here and there around the park as time goes on.

Frankly, I don't know what all the uproar is about Disney competing with the other parks or not because obviously ANY company has to keep competing or sooner or later they will fall behind. However, because of what Disney has always been and because of their huge financial abilities they compete differently than other parks do. So when Disney surveys the scene they look at ALL the ways to get another dollar out of our pockets.


Plus, Disney has never put a park in anyplace in the world that was truly a "complete" park when it went in. Oh sure, some have come closer than others but in every case the fans have always clambered for more of what should have been obvious. I definitely think Disney does this on purpose so they hold their costs down initially, get people used to coming to the new park and then add more attractions as they feel the need to do so.

[JPL]

Not to be argumentative.....but for every inferrence that Disney is responding....I can give you one that shows that doesn't really matter or pan out.....

Certainly....they take the competition into account....but I don't really think that the consideration level is more than token.....


Again you can put any spin you want on it but they do take the competition into consideration and take it very seriously. If they didn't WDW would be MK and Epcot they wouldn't have expanded as much as they did if there was no outside pressure. Disney also puts the we don't care about competition spin on themselves to down play it. If you read Eisner's book "Work in Progress" you will see the evidence that leads to this conclusion.

[Ian]

If you read Eisner's book "Work in Progress" you will see the evidence that leads to this conclusion.Yeah, I mean not for nothing here, but I'm not speculating that Disney views Universal as "the competition." I flat out know they do, because I've read commentary from Eisner and other Disney insiders that proves it.

Quite honestly, this debate is pointless and silly because there's only one right answer.

You can say that they're clearly ahead in the competition and that's fine, but to suggest that they're not competing with (and, to a degree, reactive to) other parks in the Orlando area is incorrect.

What do you think Animal Kingdom was for? It was to help draw visitors away from the Busch Gardens Tampa location.

[lockedoutlogic]

Yeah, I mean not for nothing here, but I'm not speculating that Disney views Universal as "the competition." I flat out know they do, because I've read commentary from Eisner and other Disney insiders that proves it.

Quite honestly, this debate is pointless and silly because there's only one right answer.

You can say that they're clearly ahead in the competition and that's fine, but to suggest that they're not competing with (and, to a degree, reactive to) other parks in the Orlando area is incorrect.

What do you think Animal Kingdom was for? It was to help draw visitors away from the Busch Gardens Tampa location.

I'm not debating that the other guys are in fact....competition....

I just think that everyone is overestimating how credible that "threat" is....

All the "when harry potter opens" talk....

what?.....when harry potter opens people will divert from their 8 day trip to go to it a day?

Big deal.....that won't last long....

disney certainly does things to stay current....but they don't directly mirror their competitors as it has been suggested....

Discovery Cove is the one thing they SHOULD counter....and rumors are they might soon

When IOA opened....the thinking around town was "oh no....all the thrillseekers will be gone...they have to counter"

how'd that work out?...10 years and not even a dent....

they added EE....Mission:Death....and Primeval Whirl.....

big response on disney's part...two things that were "added" to a park with nothing....not exaclty a "response"

And Ian,

I'm down with you, Bud....

but please....no matter what Evil Mikey says....AK was built because they thought they could merchandise it into oblivion.....we all know this....

Busch Gardens is too far away to have any real effect on Disney....a small pull....nothing more....like wet n wild or gatorland

What do kids love more than animals? What possibly can we sell more plushies of than the naked mole rat?

Nothing..right?

Wrong....apparently pirates and princesses


Why would disney feel threatened by a zoo park that was 55 miles away and predated the magic kingdom?

seriously? Montu?

(which is a very cool ride by the way)

[Crow]

sure there is competition. and WDW may b downsizing in some aspects like PI, but adding on Flamingo Rd, and a few attrations.
Im in fact thinking of
adding on to my Sept trip w some days at Universal
and/or making this my last WDW for a bit.
Im not sure if they can handle much more right now

[The Flying Dutchman]

Wow, haven't seen a thread get this off topic for a long time!:offtopic:

[MegaDisney]

Im sorry, but what is Beastly Kingdom?

Since everyone else is busy debating Disney competition in the Orlando area, I will answer:

Beastly Kingdom was a land planned for Animal Kingdom that would feature mythical creatures. Unicorns, Dragons, Pegasus' etc.

The original concept of the park was to celebrate all creatures both real and mythical.

[Ian]

I just think that everyone is overestimating how credible that "threat" is....

All the "when harry potter opens" talk....

what?.....when harry potter opens people will divert from their 8 day trip to go to it a day?

Big deal.....that won't last long....Oh boy, do I disagree with this.

Harry Potter is, inarguably, the hottest franchise created in the last 20 years or so. And Universal has him.

I think you're drastically underestimating the effect that new area is going to have on WDW's attendance.

As I said previously, what has Disney got to offer people on tight vacation budgets that's new and exciting? A hepped-up version of Buzz Lightyear? The latest "celebration"?

If you were just a normal family (i.e. not Disney Dweebs) and you had to pick where you were going on your one vacation trip of the year, would you pick Disney where nothing significant has changed in 3 years or would you pick the theme park that just added an entire new area themed to your kids' favorite character of all time?

[GrumpyFan]

Harry Potter is, inarguably, the hottest franchise created in the last 20 years or so. And Universal has him.

As I said previously, what has Disney got to offer people on tight vacation budgets that's new and exciting? A hepped-up version of Buzz Lightyear? The latest "celebration"?


I have to agree with you on this. While Disney may not be severely impacted by this they may feel a slight pinch, and they will probably be at least a little concerned.

Consider, just looking at some raw estimates. If just 1 percent of the people that come to Disney take a single day and go to Universal, that will be around 500,000 people (in a year) with an estimated revenue loss of around $32.5 million, based on an average daily amount per guest of $65. But, I would guess that it would actually be more than 1 percent, probably more like 5 percent and they would probably go for more than 1 day. So, if you base it on that, the actual amount would be over 2 million and the revenue loss would be over $130 million. Of course, to Disney, these are small dollars in comparison to the billions WDW brings in annually, but $100+Million does make an impact.

Consider also, the estimated average annual attendance growth rate for the last 10 years has been between 3-5 pecent. So, an estimated loss of 5 percent of their visitors would cause shareholders/board members to start asking questions that I'm sure WDW management would rather avoid.

[lockedoutlogic]

Once new harry potter material ends.....then it will be quickly forgotten....

everyone is overestimating staying power.....

especially with the average attention span at an all time low...

but i'm not trying to convince anyone....
you'll see

[Ian]

Disney is still having Star Wars weekends over THIRTY YEARS after the first movie debuted.

I would feel very comfortable saying that Star Wars and Harry Potter are similar enough in terms of fanbase and popularity that Potter could easily enjoy a comparable run of popularity.

[lockedoutlogic]

Disney is still having Star Wars weekends over THIRTY YEARS after the first movie debuted.

I would feel very comfortable saying that Star Wars and Harry Potter are similar enough in terms of fanbase and popularity that Potter could easily enjoy a comparable run of popularity.


when star wars was created.....

there were 3 television networks....pbs.....newspapers...magazines...movie s.....and the commodore 64.....

look at the things we have now to distract us....

I like the harry potter stuff....have read 4 or 5 of the books....have seen the movies.....

but there is just too much out there....life moves at a much faster pace....

it is difficult to have a cultural phenomena with any staying power like the things i grew up with....

the next big cultural phenomena will be based on a particular technology....not a group of characters....

eventually we'll have something like a holodeck off of star trek in our homes....or something like that

they talked of "the next star wars" for lord of the rings and spiderman.....

how are those doing?

potter will be much the same....there was just a much different climate for long lasting franchises in the past.....

a kid with mickey mouse in the 30's....or a kid like me with star wars in the 70's and 80's....

frankly....we had to be more creative....we had characters we liked and wrapped ourselves in them...held on to them....because it is what we had.....there wasn't that much else out there.....our minds had to fill in the spaces that entertainment mediums didn't fill....

the average person's mind doesn't have that kind of free space to create fan obsession anymore......

I say this as i chat with a japanese kid over the Wii as I box him.....
later i'm going to watch Russian Cosmonaut home movies on on-demand

[DisneyFanaticDargon]

Harry Potter is, inarguably, the hottest franchise created in the last 20 years or so. And Universal has him.


I agree with you on every point. A lot of people here underestimate the popularity of Harry Potter. You're talking about the highest-grossing film franchise in film HISTORY, and a series of books that not once, but TWICE helped spur revisions of the NY Times Best Seller's List because so many of the books were taking up spots.

This is not some flash in the pan property that 10 years from now nobody is going to remember. Harry Potter will, 50 years from now, be on the shelves next to Narnia and Lord of the Rings among other classic works of fantasy and be regarded as such. Nobody then will remember High School Musical or Finding Nemo or any of the other plethora of Disney-Pixar properties the parks have been pushing lately. Pirates will be remembered more so for the original ride than the films based on them.

When Harry Potter opens at Universal, it's going to hurt Disney badly in attendance figures except in 2 case scenarios:
1. Disney develops something innovative and amazing to compete that's both original yet uniquely Disney
or
2. Universal flubs Harry Potter so badly that it becomes their version of (initial) DCA.

My money is on the first scenario. Grant it, I prefer Disney to Universal but to give credit where credit is due, I find IOA to be a very enjoyable park for a day visit and the rides are very high quality. I, being a huge Harry Potter fan, am not going to pass up a visit when it opens.

The only problem I can foresee is that I honestly think Disney itself is underestimating the popularity of Harry Potter, and with all the money being poured into DCA over the next few years, along with Iger's stance on US park expansion (e.g. a fifth gate), I don't know if Disney has the budget to compete well-enough to make a big difference. I will say that if the only effort they put into competing with Harry Potter is offering more of what they've been putting out recently, they will fail miserably.

[big blue and hairy]

they talked of "the next star wars" for lord of the rings and spiderman.....

how are those doing?


WHAT??!!
Spiderman 3 broke box office records and Lord Of the Rings is so over that they are making 2 more movies! What are you talking about?

:sulley:

[big blue and hairy]

Disney is still having Star Wars weekends over THIRTY YEARS after the first movie debuted.

I would feel very comfortable saying that Star Wars and Harry Potter are similar enough in terms of fanbase and popularity that Potter could easily enjoy a comparable run of popularity.

I agree with Ian (how often does that happen? ;))

The Harry Potter series has both books that all ages read and a movie series that is very good. It's not fading away any time soon.

:sulley:

[lockedoutlogic]

I agree with Ian (how often does that happen? ;))

The Harry Potter series has both books that all ages read and a movie series that is very good. It's not fading away any time soon.

:sulley:


it will

[lockedoutlogic]

WHAT??!!
Spiderman 3 broke box office records and Lord Of the Rings is so over that they are making 2 more movies! What are you talking about?

:sulley:

those movies make 300 million at $10 a ticket.....then in six months or so they sell a couple million DVDs...then the toys are on clearance at wal-mart....

are you seriously comparing their longevity to Star Wars......it's not even close adjusted for inflation......not even in the same galaxy...no pun intended:thumbsup:

[big blue and hairy]

those movies make 300 million at $10 a ticket.....then in six months or so they sell a couple million DVDs...then the toys are on clearance at wal-mart....

are you seriously comparing their longevity to Star Wars......it's not even close adjusted for inflation......not even in the same galaxy...no pun intended:thumbsup:

Amazing, how you minimize $300 million, before DVD sales. Aside from the fact that there have been plenty of Star Wars toys on clearance, if toy sales are your barometer for staying power, boy are "The Wizard Of Oz" and "Gone With The Wind" in trouble.

Am I seriously comparing the longevity of "Star Wars", a phenomenon for 31 years to "Lord Of The Rings", a phenomenon for 55 years? Uhh...yeah. Harry Potter simply has not existed as long. Seven huge selling books, each more anitcipated than the last, and movies that continue to make millions in an era as you said, with many more choices. I love "Star Wars" too, but your assumptions about it vs "Lord Of The Rings" and Harry Potter are baseless.

:sulley:

[lockedoutlogic]

WHAT??!!
Spiderman 3 broke box office records and Lord Of the Rings is so over that they are making 2 more movies! What are you talking about?

:sulley:

spiderman and LOTR make 300 million million at $10.00 a ticket...then they sell a couple of million DVDs a few months later......then the toys are on clearance at wal-mart....

None have come close to the merchandising and longterm profits that Star Wars produced....not even in the ballpark.....Lucas had made over a billion on Star Wars franchise by the early 1990's.....that's mostly in 70's and 80's dollars.....and that was before he made 3 ****** prequels

you can't be serious....you are not even attempting to suggest that the current "blockbuster" franchises come anywhere close.....potter included

We can back and forth on this all day.....i say the "star wars" type longevity is a thing of the past......you guys claim potter is it.....

we'll see....we need only wait a few years and we'll have out answer

[lockedoutlogic]

Star Wars had made about 200 million by 1980.....

LOTR: Return of the King made about 350 million in 2003.....

you can's seriously be suggesting that those monetary figures come even close to equating...

it's not even close.....

I don't doubt that there are very successful franchises in the last 20 or so years....but the longevity and staying power is not there.....

that is the whole point of this debate....

Even Disney/Pixar animation is not holding onto kids imaginations now like they did in the early 90's......though they are still very impressive...

Remember how long the Lion King seemed to stick around?

And that wasn't even that good of a movie!

there are too many things to divert attention these days.....really

[big blue and hairy]

I don't doubt that there are very successful franchises in the last 20 or so years....but the longevity and staying power is not there.....

that is the whole point of this debate.... That's right it is the point and on two out of three you've already been proven wrong LOTR has been a huge franchise for 55 YEARS! It's not all about the movie grosses, even though LOTR did phenomenonly well, thank you. Spiderman has been a money-making machine since the 1960's! Spiderman has been selling toys like crazy for years.


Even Disney/Pixar animation is not holding onto kids imaginations now like they did in the early 90's......though they are still very impressive...

Remember how long the Lion King seemed to stick around?

And that wasn't even that good of a movie!
:jaw:

Now you've gone around the bend.....:simba:
Lion King is a classic Disney movie.

:sulley:

[lockedoutlogic]

That's right it is the point and on two out of three you've already been proven wrong LOTR has been a huge franchise for 55 YEARS! It's not all about the movie grosses, even though LOTR did phenomenonly well, thank you. Spiderman has been a money-making machine since the 1960's! Spiderman has been selling toys like crazy for years.

:jaw:

Now you've gone around the bend.....:simba:
Lion King is a classic Disney movie.

:sulley:

if you read anything about entertainment franchises.....star wars is really in a class by itself.....and it has gone downhill since the prequels....

mickey mouse...disney....are also in a class by themselves.....

coca-cola.....macdonalds....

these are cultural icons.....they don't have "competition" in the traditional sense....

again.....i'm not discounting the success of franchises.....especially the "big three" (Supe, Spidey, Batty) comic book franchises....but it's not quite the same....

the original angle was that WDW "needed" to compete with the Potter juggernaut....

I think the juggernaut will quickly go away....you don't....neither is right or wrong at this point....we shall see...

As far as the the Lion King goes....I enjoyed it.....but the plot is really weak.....the songs were not nearly as good as the films that preceeded it...no good villian (irons aside)....the whole "circle of life" thing was a little choppy as far as the story goes.....it really wasn't a great movie.....it was the result of the incredible buildup from 3 excellent movies that preceeded it.....Mermaid, Aladdin (maybe the best ever), and Beauty and the Beast.....

And isn't it a coincidence that the animateds slid after Lion King....the momentum was broken.....

but that discussion is for another day :secret:

[Ian]

the original angle was that WDW "needed" to compete with the Potter juggernaut....

I think the juggernaut will quickly go away....you don't....neither is right or wrong at this point....we shall see...Even if the juggernaut does quickly go away (which I highly doubt), Disney still needs to compete with it in the short-term. And maybe even for reasons that aren't immediately obvious ...

Disney has a vested interest in keeping people away from Universal and IOA, not just for immediate monetary reasons, but also for long-term reasons. Guests that visit Universal or IOA for the first time because of Harry Potter could turn into loyal customers of Universal's theme parks.

What if the people who go just to check out Harry Potter actually end up liking Universal and decide to go there for a visit each and every time they're in Orlando. Maybe they find they like the other rides and attractions that are there enough to go even after the shine is off the Harry Potter apple?

I mean honestly it's so patently obvious that Disney does everything they possibly can to keep people on property, I'm not even sure why we're having this conversation. And do you think they do that just for the heck of it? No ... they do it to keep people away from the competition. Be it Universal, Sea World, Wet 'n' Wild, Busch Gardens ... whatever.

They're all competing with Disney for tourist dollars in the Orlando area. Disney knows it and they know they need to respond to what is, up to this point at least, the single most dangerous threat they've ever faced.

[big blue and hairy]

Right-o Ian. I just don't understand why it's so hard to see that if you stop competing when you're number one, you don't stay number one.

Like it or not, Disney is a business. A very large profitable business with a lot of stock holders. They don't want to hear, "oh we had a dip because of Harry Potter, it'll even out". The response will be, "why didn't you do something to keep people here?"

You always compete whether you're in first place, middle of the pack or dead last. It just makes sense.

:sulley:

[DisneyFanaticDargon]

Star Wars had made about 200 million by 1980.....

LOTR: Return of the King made about 350 million in 2003.....

That doesn't suggest the franchise doesn't have staying power. Believe it or not, Lord of the Rings was actually based on a book that had existed for decades prior to the films and was already considered a literary classic (not to mention the magnum opus of J.R.R. Tolkien's literary career) in the minds of many individuals which is what in turn caused the initial film to do well. Seeing the high production quality and (mostly) faithfulness to the book caused the subsequent films to gross even more. The fact that Return of the King also won as many Oscars as Titanic will only further cement its legacy (I believe the Star Wars saga's combined Oscar count is in the single digits).

My point? They took what some people called, when it was written, a flash-in-the-pan and made it into a successful film franchise 50 years after its publication. Not only that, but the books always had a following long before the films. If this shows anything, its that Harry Potter, which has shown even more phenomenal success than Lord of the Rings following its initial publication, can and will have just as much staying power. It may not be the unmitigated fervor that exists right now, but it will always have that following of fans. What makes it dangerous to Disney now is that Pottermania will not even begin to subside until at least late 2010 after the final film has been released. And now with the announcement that the final book will be made into two films, one in winter 2009 and one in summer 2010, which is around the time Universal is supposed to open the Potter section, it will only be reignited and the desire to visit Universal will be even stronger.

[lockedoutlogic]

Right-o Ian. I just don't understand why it's so hard to see that if you stop competing when you're number one, you don't stay number one.

Like it or not, Disney is a business. A very large profitable business with a lot of stock holders. They don't want to hear, "oh we had a dip because of Harry Potter, it'll even out". The response will be, "why didn't you do something to keep people here?"

You always compete whether you're in first place, middle of the pack or dead last. It just makes sense.

:sulley:

I think you two are kinda being guilty of just being overzealous disney fans here....

sure we'd all like them to "counter".....

but the reality is that if they don't....we all know that very little will change.....they would lose some days and revenue....

but just like any other creature of habit....the people will come on back home at Lake Buena Vista.....

I hope they obliterate indiana jones and star tours and put real....quality....attractions in there places....

but disney will do what it wants.....

and they will be fine....

if they just continue to add to DHS and Ak.....through some new things into MK and EPCOT.....that will be more than enough for me

[DisneyFanaticDargon]

I hope they obliterate indiana jones and star tours and put real....quality....attractions in there places....

I personally thought that both Star Tours and Indiana Jones were much better than the supposed "real...quality...attractions" that were cloned from them: Body Wars and Dinosaur. The theming and ambiance as well as overall experience are far better in the originals than Disney's attempt at originality using identical ride systems.

[lockedoutlogic]

I personally thought that both Star Tours and Indiana Jones were much better than the supposed "real...quality...attractions" that were cloned from them: Body Wars and Dinosaur. The theming and ambiance as well as overall experience are far better in the originals than Disney's attempt at originality using identical ride systems.

Are we talking DisneyWorld here?

Because the Stunt Show at DHS is far different from the Indiana Jones Adventure at Disneyland....that's the CTX clone....

Star Tours....is...was....and always will be an embarassment, in my opinion....

Star Wars is one of the more recogniable and lasting entertainment franchises of the 20th century.....and instead of doing something imaginative....

they use the nasty 1980's motion simulator technology to attempt a "fun for the whole family....don't scare the kids type thing"....

they watered it down to dull.....and any attraction where you sit in a dodge caravan and rock back and forth with a screen in front of you has long outlived it's usefullness.....

Just compare Soarin to Star Tours....and see the difference of a what a "good" simulator ride is as compared to a "bad" one

[Ian]

Star Tours....is...was....and always will be an embarassment, in my opinion....That's something we definitely agree on. I've always found it completely and totally baffling that, with all the creative resources of ILM, Lucas, WDI, etc. at their disposal, the best thing Disney could up with for arguably the greatest movie franchise in history was that lame-o motion simulator.

There are so many incredible things they could have done for a Star Wars attraction ... the fact that they settled on this dull, antiquated disaster is mind boggling to me.

What's even more mind boggling is the fact that it's over 20 years old now and it's still there!

[lockedoutlogic]

That's something we definitely agree on. I've always found it completely and totally baffling that, with all the creative resources of ILM, Lucas, WDI, etc. at their disposal, the best thing Disney could up with for arguably the greatest movie franchise in history was that lame-o motion simulator.

There are so many incredible things they could have done for a Star Wars attraction ... the fact that they settled on this dull, antiquated disaster is mind boggling to me.

What's even more mind boggling is the fact that it's over 20 years old now and it's still there!


that was a kid friendly cop out with some star wars window dressing....and is really still there for crowd flow only.....

we know how disney is loathe to take anything out of service that will seat a couple of thousand an hour....

If Disney had gotten serious about expanding and improving MGM 15 years ago....as they should have.....then I don't think Star Wars or the Stunt show would still be there....

[jjramsey]

As far as the original topic of this thread goes, I personally feel that whatever would happen, Disney should build a 5th park. I have heard a lot of people swear off visiting Disney during peak seasons due to the crowds. We prefer to visit during off seasons, but have noticed over the years a drastic increase of attendance during those times.

A 5th park would make it possible to:
:mickey: Get more people onto the properties (hotel rooms, food, etc.)
:mickey: Keep them for more days
:mickey: Keep them happier with the 'crowd control' experience
:mickey: Add more thrill rides to add interest to some teens and more thrill ride oriented adults
:mickey: Bring back people who feel 'Been there done that.'

In the process of doing the above, they would reinvigorate all the parks with U.S. and international travelers.

Disney should consider the downturn in the economy to be an opportunity to market themselves as the not to be missed one stop vacation shop ;) (not that it isn't already!). The perks that have been offered to Florida residents or international visitors should be thrown wide open to all U.S. residents...then talk about crowds! They would need one or two more parks and another couple of waterparks to contain the crowds :D

[lockedoutlogic]

As far as the original topic of this thread goes, I personally feel that whatever would happen, Disney should build a 5th park. I have heard a lot of people swear off visiting Disney during peak seasons due to the crowds. We prefer to visit during off seasons, but have noticed over the years a drastic increase of attendance during those times.

A 5th park would make it possible to:
:mickey: Get more people onto the properties (hotel rooms, food, etc.)
:mickey: Keep them for more days
:mickey: Keep them happier with the 'crowd control' experience
:mickey: Add more thrill rides to add interest to some teens and more thrill ride oriented adults
:mickey: Bring back people who feel 'Been there done that.'

In the process of doing the above, they would reinvigorate all the parks with U.S. and international travelers.

Disney should consider the downturn in the economy to be an opportunity to market themselves as the not to be missed one stop vacation shop ;) (not that it isn't already!). The perks that have been offered to Florida residents or international visitors should be thrown wide open to all U.S. residents...then talk about crowds! They would need one or two more parks and another couple of waterparks to contain the crowds :D

you have a well thought out post...but i have to point out 2 very important things....

As it currently stands...disney cannot find the labor to staff another park...they have had significant problems over the last 10 years just keeping enough staffing to keep what they've had going....big problem for WDW....they seem to be outsourcing more in an attempt to downsize their labor committment to allow for future development....but we're early in that game

Second, the US and world economy will have to go into a fairly large slide in the next year or two....our resources and monetary system are overextended.
In 2008...all the economic moves out of Washington are designed with one goal: don't dump the election applecart.
That's the way it is in a big year....but next year...after votes are cast.....our government will have to start increasing interests rates, restore the value of the dollar, and decrease fuel prices......
this must happen....and when it does the consumer credit crunch...including the ridiculous subprime mortgages....will get worse.

This will happen....and when it does.....travel will be one of the first spending areas that will be reduced...as it should be.

Disney knows this....why did they start running the "Disney/affordable" ads last year? Because they know travel in Orlando is tied to the country and world economic picture and it's going to start to slide.....

Both of these things make a 5 Park almost impossible....

the better course is to improve and strenghthen their parks and resorts....then perhaps the time will be right in the near future

[jjramsey]

LockedOutLogic, that is very logical...though hope the growth comes sooner than later :mickey:

[Ian]

As far as the original topic of this thread goes, I personally feel that whatever would happen, Disney should build a 5th park. I have heard a lot of people swear off visiting Disney during peak seasons due to the crowds. We prefer to visit during off seasons, but have noticed over the years a drastic increase of attendance during those times.You've mentioned a few reasons it might be a good idea to explore a 5th gate, but you've left out the multitude of reasons why it would be a bad idea.

Some of them have already been mentioned above, like the inability to staff the parks they already have. There's also the fact that developing a 5th gate would effectively leave the four existing parks stagnating with no new development.

Additionally, all the added overhead and infrastructure required to support a 5th gate would further tax Disney's already over-extended resources in that area. Why do you think things like maintenance, merchandise, etc. have slipped so badly in the last 10 years while prices have climbed at an astounding rate? Disney's set themselves up with an untenable situation in terms of their ability to support everything they've built in Orlando. Rising energy and food costs are only making that worse. And the revenue increase associated with a new park wouldn't even come close to offsetting the increase in expenses. That's basically been proven already with the addition of Animal Kingdom.

I'm totally opposed to adding a 5th gate in WDW ... at least in the traditional sense, anyway. No villains park or thrill ride park or anything like that ... I could see the benefits of adding a new waterpark (highly themed, a la the new Sea World park) or maybe a small, highly immersive park similar to the fabled "Night Kingdom." But a full blown 5th theme park? No way ... no thanks ... I think that would further reduce the quality of the resort even beyond what it's sunk to today.

Fortunately, I'm 99.9% certain that Disney is aware of this and has no intention of ever adding a new park like this to the WDW stable.


Second, the US and world economy will have to go into a fairly large slide in the next year or two....our resources and monetary system are overextended.
In 2008...all the economic moves out of Washington are designed with one goal: don't dump the election applecart.
That's the way it is in a big year....but next year...after votes are cast.....our government will have to start increasing interests rates, restore the value of the dollar, and decrease fuel prices......
this must happen....and when it does the consumer credit crunch...including the ridiculous subprime mortgages....will get worse.I'm having trouble following this logic. I work in the mortgage industry and I can 100% assure you that there's no way that the "subprime crisis" (which is a complete misnomer anyway ... only a small part of the current mortgage issues are subprime related) is going to get any worse if the Fed raises interest rates.

First off, no one is originating subprime mortgages anymore. The runoff of bad mortgages is well past the midpoint and with no new ones being originated, it's impossible that the crisis will worsen next year.

Lastly, a good portion of the instability we've seen in the market is due in no small part to the fact that this is an election year.

Historically speaking, Presidential election years are often accompanied by economic uncertainty. Investors aren't clear on who's going to be running the country, what the economic policy of the new administration is going to be, etc. and uncertainty is the thing that guys on the Street fear the most.

The markets will stabilize greatly and take a big step towards recovery once this election is over. And it doesn't matter who wins ... it's the absence of the uncertainty that initiates the stablization.

[Goofster]

Wow! This thread has gone so far off-topic, I'm not even sure what the current topic is!

In a nutshell, Universal/IOA/Sea World are all collectively the 'competition' when it comes to new rides and imagination. Disney does not need to compete with them directly on a ride to ride basis, but should always keep them in mind to make sure WDW is always one step ahead of the game (i.e. bragging rights).

If Universal opens a new attraction, I don't believe Disney needs to immediately follow suit - akin to Wal-Mart having a sale on TVs and Target follows suit. IMO, the Harry Potter attraction is merely a response to everything Disney. Disney need only refocus on its branding and customer service to easily outdo Universal's temporary, flash pot HP attraction.

As for Harry Potter, I tend to agree with LockedOut on this one. I love the movies (never read the books), but as kids grow older and move on to other interests, Harry Potter will fade. And yes, I see the comparisons with Star Wars - but where is there a Star Wars theme park? Star Wars is delegated to an annual Weekend Event and a single ride - nothing more. The same should apply with Harry Potter - it's worthy of a ride, but not an entire "side" park. It will fade away just like any other franchise. I imagine in 10-15-years it will resemble a silly, dated attraction and will fall the way of the Back to the Future ride.

[mjstaceyuofm]

Second, the US and world economy will have to go into a fairly large slide in the next year or two....our resources and monetary system are overextended.
In 2008...all the economic moves out of Washington are designed with one goal: don't dump the election applecart.
That's the way it is in a big year....but next year...after votes are cast.....our government will have to start increasing interests rates, restore the value of the dollar, and decrease fuel prices......
this must happen....and when it does the consumer credit crunch...including the ridiculous subprime mortgages....will get worse.

This will happen....and when it does.....travel will be one of the first spending areas that will be reduced...as it should be.

Disney knows this....why did they start running the "Disney/affordable" ads last year? Because they know travel in Orlando is tied to the country and world economic picture and it's going to start to slide.....



I'm having trouble following this logic. I work in the mortgage industry and I can 100% assure you that there's no way that the "subprime crisis" (which is a complete misnomer anyway ... only a small part of the current mortgage issues are subprime related) is going to get any worse if the Fed raises interest rates.

First off, no one is originating subprime mortgages anymore. The runoff of bad mortgages is well past the midpoint and with no new ones being originated, it's impossible that the crisis will worsen next year.

Lastly, a good portion of the instability we've seen in the market is due in no small part to the fact that this is an election year.

Historically speaking, Presidential election years are often accompanied by economic uncertainty. Investors aren't clear on who's going to be running the country, what the economic policy of the new administration is going to be, etc. and uncertainty is the thing that guys on the Street fear the most.

The markets will stabilize greatly and take a big step towards recovery once this election is over. And it doesn't matter who wins ... it's the absence of the uncertainty that initiates the stablization.I tend to agree with Ian on this point. If you look at election cycles and how the market has fared decade upon decade there's a definite pattern. This is no different. When Obama/Clinton/McCain get in office things will settle down.

There's also been a myriad of articles showing that the real estate bubble is almost finished bursting and house prices have come down to what they should have risen to without the bubble. Yes this eats into people's equity, but when you're using equity in your home to finance your lifestyle - that's a problem and a behavior that needed corrected in America. That correction has taken place.

Disney will also have to figure out how to live within their means too. And hopefully do it without negatively impacting customer service inside their parks. People on Wall Street seem to think that Disney is diversified enough to weather this recession. Check out this article (http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/05/news/companies/simons_disney.fortune/?postversion=2008050517") from Money magazine about a recession-proof Disney.

[Ian]

As for Harry Potter, I tend to agree with LockedOut on this one. I love the movies (never read the books), but as kids grow older and move on to other interests, Harry Potter will fade. And yes, I see the comparisons with Star Wars - but where there is a Star Wars theme park? Star Wars is delegated to an annual Weekend Event and a single ride - nothing more.I won't argue with your basic premise, even though I disagree, because it is a matter of opinion and certainly open to speculation either way.

However, what I will point out is that just because there isn't a Star Wars theme park doesn't mean there couldn't be one and that it wouldn't be very successful. Look at the crowds Star Wars weekends draw ... if you've never been down for them DHS is mobbed. And this is 30+ years after the first film was released!

And Star Tours, which is an absolutely horrid attraction, still has lines all the time. I personally believe that, if someone chose to build an entire theme park or land around Star Wars, it would turn a handsome profit.

Anyway, the one thing that remains to be seen is how good a job Universal will do with it. I've been bitterly disappointed with their execution on most of their attractions, so it wouldn't surprise me a bit if this new HP land comes off as cheesy and cheap looking.

[Goofster]

However, what I will point out is that just because there isn't a Star Wars theme park doesn't mean there couldn't be one and that it wouldn't be very successful. Look at the crowds Star Wars weekends draw ... if you've never been down for them DHS is mobbed. And this is 30+ years after the first film was released!

And Star Tours, which is an absolutely horrid attraction, still has lines all the time. I personally believe that, if someone chose to build an entire theme park or land around Star Wars, it would turn a handsome profit.



I imagine there isn't one because it wouldn't be profitable or generate long term, sustainable attendance. Yes, one weekend in a year probably generates a sizeable crowd - but spread that across 365 days a year....

Yes, Star Tours still generates a decent line, but it's not the Flagship attraction of MGM nor is it designed to draw the 'competition' away from other parks. Unlike Harry Potter, which, in my opinion, is given too much credit in this regard. I believe it will be a temporary draw, but I don't believe it will have long term implications. It will end up being like any other attraction at Universal.

[lockedoutlogic]

The reason that there isn't a larger star wars area/ park is that both Lucas and Disney are creative control nuts.....

You can't have 2 nuts on the same sundae....know what i mean?

I'm still a little shocked they could agree on anything in the first place....



As far as the mortgage crisis goes.....i didn't mean to make that a "selling point" in this discussion....it's not my area of expertise....

the subprime thing is horrible...and the equivalent of modern day piracy....similar to the real estate prospecting in florida swampland after WWI....but that's a different story...

the dollar is as weak as it has been since.....well....ever

the price of oil has been driven up largely because of the weak dollar....

that weakness in the dollar is extending our horrible trade deficit.....

the lowering of prime rates weakens the purchasing power of the dollar further....


All of these things will come to a head.....and we will enter and economic adjustment period.....it should and will happen....

I know that many people on this board work in money-based....post industrial....white collar jobs.....

but deep down...we all know that things have to slow down....

that's not even getting to our econimic/imperial/political quagmire that is draining our economy significantly without anyone at home really noticing....

But not to get too political....

we need a downshift.....and when that happens.....TRAVEL will feel it the hardest.....

Anyone who has worked in a tourist dominated area...like say....orlando.....will back me up on this.

That affects Disney.....they have seen it before....they know it's coming....

That was my issue.....sorry to go down the mortgage bubble talk.....i'm sure every bank and realtor will be back to overvaluing homes in no time.....

...oh come on....that was too easy:D

by the way.....politics 101 is not to mess with the economy during a presidential cycle....because there already is so much uncertainty....

in this case...not messing means "hold the line"

the reds control the white house....the blues the hill.....

neither will risk any perception that they've made a wrong move during such an important time....too much at stake

it would be like a gymnast fattening up on donuts before the olympics.....

economic stimulus packages..i.e. CASH FOR EVERYONE! and 2.00% prime rates?

That seem weird to anyone else?

The pied piper is playing....we're al just following the beaten path behind him

Yeah Disney!

[lockedoutlogic]

I imagine there isn't one because it wouldn't be profitable or generate long term, sustainable attendance. Yes, one weekend in a year probably generates a sizeable crowd - but spread that across 365 days a year....

Yes, Star Tours still generates a decent line, but it's not the Flagship attraction of MGM nor is it designed to draw the 'competition' away from other parks. Unlike Harry Potter, which, in my opinion, is given too much credit in this regard. I believe it will be a temporary draw, but I don't believe it will have long term implications. It will end up being like any other attraction at Universal.

This post is correct.....for all my longwindedness.....

this is it in a nutshell...bravo

[goofyluva9293]

Well, since this started out being a thread about The Beastly Kingdom, I would like to say I would LOVE to see it happen. Even if it were only a few rides here and there dealing with mythical creatures, it would be great!

As far as Disney competing with Universal, I'm not saying that Universal is ever going to catch up to Disney in any way but I have noticed a trend with people I've talked to here in Ohio. Lately I've been hearing so many families that I've talked to say that their kid's are "too old for Disney", which is something I can't imagine ever happening in my family. Now I'm not saying that this group of people I've talked to is going to hurt Disney that much but I've never heard so many people say that they are going to Universal, Sea World or Busch Gardens instead of Disney. Keep in mind that these kid's that are "too old" are somewhere between 7 & 10 years old. I just hope it isn't a growing trend in other states as wel.

On the subject of Star Wars, LOTR and Harry Potter, I'm not sure what to think about it. I'm a HUGE Star Wars and LOTR fan. So much so that we usually hit the Star Wars Conventions and we even dress up. :blush: But I also love Harry Potter. My daughters are 14 & 16 and they love all of them too but I think that they identify the most with Harry Potter. I'm not going to say that Harry Potter will ever be bigger than Star Wars but more of the kids that my daughters are friends with like Harry Potter better. Back in 1977 when Star Wars was released, I was 9 years old and I remember seeing it in the theater and I was instantly hooked. But I doubt anyone realized how big it would become and how long it would be around. So maybe Harry Potter could be the Star Wars of my kid's generation. No one knows! My family makes a trip to Orlando every other year and we always stay at Disney and sometimes we spend 1 day at Universal. But I do know that the year that the Harry Potter area at Universal is to be completed is an off year for us and my girls have already put in a request to make a special trip to Universal that year. And we, like many other families, will! (Maybe spending one day at Disney this time.) Only time will tell what kind of impact it will have on Disney.