Universal Orlando Resort Expansion (Part 1)

[Brian G.]

Apologies if this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but after reviewing this land map again....it's clear that they're going to be basically right NEXT to Sea World.

I wonder if there's any plans to buy Sea World out if the price is right, because they could really re-brand it and turn it into another day for multi-park passes

Let’s not get too ahead of ourselves now...

 

[Happytycho]

Anyone care to take a guess when Universal will start moving dirt at the south property?

Some dirt will be moved as part of the grading/water management plans that were being discussed a couple of pages ago, and I would expect that work to begin sometime in the next few months.

I don't believe that we will see significant dirt moving or construction for the actual new resort until the first half of 2019.

However, I do think they are close to construction on the new temporary parking lots so that could be something to watch for as a sign that they are preparing for resort construction.

 

[Disneyhead]

Some dirt will be moved as part of the grading/water management plans that were being discussed a couple of pages ago, and I would expect that work to begin sometime in the next few months.

I don't believe that we will see significant dirt moving or construction for the actual new resort until the first half of 2019.

However, I do think they are close to construction on the new temporary parking lots so that could be something to watch for as a sign that they are preparing for resort construction.

An army of construction workers have to park somewhere.

 

[Viator]

An army of construction workers have to park somewhere.

I remember we talked about a permit of a new structure to house them near the OCCC...could be wrong though.

 

[JoeCamel]

I remember we talked about a permit of a new structure to house them near the OCCC...could be wrong though.

Yes, they have a permit for 2500 spaces towards the south end of the property.

 

[zg44]

Apologies if this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but after reviewing this land map again....it's clear that they're going to be basically right NEXT to Sea World.

I wonder if there's any plans to buy Sea World out if the price is right, because they could really re-brand it and turn it into another day for multi-park passes

At this point, it's hard to see that happening.

Given that Universal now has enough land to double the current UOR in terms of parks and hotel rooms; it's hard to see how SeaWorld would fit into that strategy.

A 4 dry park, 2 water park, 22000-25000 hotel room Universal Orlando is probably the maximum; I can't imagine they'd want to add SeaWorld to that.

I'd just reiterate that Universal now has enough land to build on for the next 20 years..., that's why it's hard to see SeaWorld in Universal's future.

 

[youhow2]

At this point, it's hard to see that happening.

Given that Universal now has enough land to double the current UOR in terms of parks and hotel rooms; it's hard to see how SeaWorld would fit into that strategy.

A 4 dry park, 2 water park, 22000-25000 hotel room Universal Orlando is probably the maximum; I can't imagine they'd want to add SeaWorld to that.

I'd just reiterate that Universal now has enough land to build on for the next 20 years..., that's why it's hard to see SeaWorld in Universal's future.

If I was a high level exec for Comcast, Evaluating the future landscape of our business... I'd be aggressively moving forward on any and all live entertainment and themepark entertainment opportunities.

The Cable, Phone and Internet Money is there today, But in as little as 5 years it could all be gone. That's not hyperbole either...


Comcast is in a very unique situation to put themselves in a position to be on par with, and go head to head with Disney parks. We're all excited, but I don't think people really understand the gravity of what were seeing here. This is just getting started, and it is a totally unprecedented war where the first shots have just been fired.


If the opportunity to buy Sea World comes up, It will absolutely be considered and I'd wager high it will be aggressively pursued. I would be 100% surprised if Comcast passed on the opportunity to essentially create a duopoly in Orlando. Disney or Universal, No other players. Buying Sea World would put Universal in a place to have the most diverse offerings in Orlando, and capturing families through that diversity in entertainment. I'd expect the animals to all go away, and the primary ride attractions stay and get rethemed.

 

[jrn14]

If I was a high level exec for Comcast, Evaluating the future landscape of our business... I'd be aggressively moving forward on any and all live entertainment and themepark entertainment opportunities.

The Cable, Phone and Internet Money is there today, But in as little as 5 years it could all be gone. That's not hyperbole either...


Comcast is in a very unique situation to put themselves in a position to be on par with, and go head to head with Disney parks. We're all excited, but I don't think people really understand the gravity of what were seeing here. This is just getting started, and it is a totally unprecedented war where the first shots have just been fired.


If the opportunity to buy Sea World comes up, It will absolutely be considered and I'd wager high it will be aggressively pursued. I would be 100% surprised if Comcast passed on the opportunity to essentially create a duopoly in Orlando. Disney or Universal, No other players. Buying Sea World would put Universal in a place to have the most diverse offerings in Orlando, and capturing families through that diversity in entertainment. I'd expect the animals to all go away, and the primary ride attractions stay and get rethemed.

I hope this doesn't happen then.

 

[JungleSkip]

Comcast won't but SeaWorld. Those parks are in a nose dive, and as @SeventyOne always says, guest days are more or less a zero-sum game. Why would universal go through the effort of building a third park if they were going to buy one that would compete with that third park for guest days?

 

[zg44]

If I was a high level exec for Comcast, Evaluating the future landscape of our business... I'd be aggressively moving forward on any and all live entertainment and themepark entertainment opportunities.

The Cable, Phone and Internet Money is there today, But in as little as 5 years it could all be gone. That's not hyperbole either...


Comcast is in a very unique situation to put themselves in a position to be on par with, and go head to head with Disney parks. We're all excited, but I don't think people really understand the gravity of what were seeing here. This is just getting started, and it is a totally unprecedented war where the first shots have just been fired.


If the opportunity to buy Sea World comes up, It will absolutely be considered and I'd wager high it will be aggressively pursued. I would be 100% surprised if Comcast passed on the opportunity to essentially create a duopoly in Orlando. Disney or Universal, No other players. Buying Sea World would put Universal in a place to have the most diverse offerings in Orlando, and capturing families through that diversity in entertainment. I'd expect the animals to all go away, and the primary ride attractions stay and get rethemed.

The problem with that analysis is that it's way too simplistic.

SeaWorld Orlando is not in the same arena as WDW or UOR in terms of the market for vacationers.

Basically, SeaWorld Orlando's typical guest spends somewhere around $70-90 a day on a visit, whereas WDW or UOR have guests that spend around $120-150 a day on a visit. Nearly all of SWO's guests are domestic visitors on annual passes or other discounted rates. WDW and UOR target guests that are more likely to be from farther away and are more likely to be staying in Orlando for at least a weekend if not upwards to a week or two.

The problem with adding SWO to either WDW or UOR is that it would bring down your earnings if you have guests that substitute days at one of their current parks with a day at SWO.

How much money would need to be spent to raise SWO to the quality of the other 6 parks? Universal will likely spend upwards to $2.5 billion on the next dry park.

I can't imagine they'd want to waste any time trying to rebuild the SWO brand and bulk up those theme parks.

In this day and age, SWO is just a regional park drawing 4-5 million guests a year that spend an average of $70-90 a day at the park. Universal's next dry park will be targeting 10-12 million guests a year that spend an average of $120-150 a day on a visit.

I think Universal and Disney would pass on SeaWorld Orlando; it's not a real competitor anymore, it's a regional park that doesn't take away days from either.

 

[youhow2]

Comcast won't but SeaWorld. Those parks are in a nose dive, and as @SeventyOne always says, guest days are more or less a zero-sum game. Why would universal go through the effort of building a third park if they were going to buy one that would compete with that third park for guest days?

I'm not talking about buying all of Sea World. Why would you allow another competitor on your turf? If buying those parks(SWO, Aquatica) becomes an option salvage what you can, scrap what you can't. It's like people believe there aren't enough concepts out there to explore for a Theme park. Buying Sea World is a strategy move, even if they just shut the park down, a la Geauga Lake.


Again, Duopoly. Diversify offerings. Compete. I would like to think if SWO becomes available, Comcast would evaluate the feasibility of turning it into it's 4th or 5th park, or just buying it for the sake of shutting others out. It makes more sense for them to want to control every non Disney park in Orlando. Historically, Universal acquiring SEAS is something that has been on the table before.

Comcast owning the only other Non-Disney competing Theme Park in Orlando, that will be just south of it's new property is a win-win any way you slice it, no matter what they do with the park.

 

[zg44]

I' m not talking about buying all of Sea World. Why would you allow another competitor on your turf? If buying those parks(SWO, Aquatica) becomes an option salvage what you can, scrap what you can't. It's like people believe there aren't enough concepts out there to explore for a Theme park. Buying Sea World is a strategy move, even if they just shut the park down, a la Geauga Lake.


Again, Duopoly. Diversify offerings. Compete. I would like to think if SWO becomes available, Comcast would evaluate the feasibility of turning it into it's 4th or 5th park, or just buying it for the sake of shutting others out. It makes more sense for them to want to control every non Disney park in Orlando. Historically, Universal acquiring SEAS is something that has been on the table before.

Comcast owning the only other Non-Disney competing Theme Park in Orlando, that will be just south of it's new property is a win-win any way you slice it, no matter what they do with the park.

This isn't how it works. The market is not as simple as that. There's multiple different tiers as California shows. You have DL/USH competing for the high end vacationers, then below that you have the Six Flags, Cedar Fair, SWSD parks competing for regional visitors.

Orlando is the same thing: you have WDW/UOR competing for the high end customers, then you have SWO/Legoland competing for the regional visitors.

People going to SWO are most likely not going to be going to a WDW or UOR park instead if the SWO option is removed from the equation. It targets a nearly completely different audience in the market for what is typically a cheaper day visit, i.e. a regional park.

Universal is going to build a 3rd dry park that will expand the overall market and bring in an extra 10+ million visitors a year (largely by expanding the stays of people that already are visiting Universal for USF/IoA, but also adding in some additional people there for Nintendo or LOTR, and possibly by taking away an extra day off of a 1-2 week WDW/UOR visit by a vacationer: i.e. a 7 day guest in Orlando may shift from 5 days of Disney/2 days of Universal to 4 days of Disney/3 days of Universal).

There isn't really a situation where closing down SWO measurably helps UOR. A lot of those guests won't make the move to the pricier WDW/UOR parks. And even if a small portion does... how does it help UOR which is already at 90+% capacity on its hotel rooms and won't go below that number anytime soon?

 

[youhow2]

This isn't how it works. The market is not as simple as that. There's multiple different tiers as California shows. You have DL/USH competing for the high end vacationers, then below that you have the Six Flags, Cedar Fair, SWSD parks competing for regional visitors.

Orlando is the same thing: you have WDW/UOR competing for the high end customers, then you have SWO/Legoland competing for the regional visitors.

People going to SWO are most likely not going to be going to a WDW or UOR park instead if the SWO option is removed from the equation. It targets a nearly completely different audience in the market for what is typically a cheaper day visit, i.e. a regional park.

Universal is going to build a 3rd dry park that will expand the overall market and bring in an extra 10+ million visitors a year (largely by expanding the stays of people that already are visiting Universal for USF/IoA, but also adding in some additional people there for Nintendo or LOTR, and possibly by taking away an extra day off of a 1-2 week WDW/UOR visit by a vacationer: i.e. a 7 day guest in Orlando may shift from 5 days of Disney/2 days of Universal to 4 days of Disney/3 days of Universal).

There isn't really a situation where closing down SWO measurably helps UOR. A lot of those guests won't make the move to the pricier WDW/UOR parks. And even if a small portion does... how does it help UOR which is already at 90+% capacity on its hotel rooms and won't go below that number anytime soon?

Just to be clear, You are arguing that owning the only other Theme Park in Orlando doesn't make sense because it targets a different kind of audience? I'm arguing that it makes sense BECAUSE it targets a different kind of audience.


Ultimately, It doesn't matter what kind of visitors the Seaworld Parks get. The only thing that matters is that it is the only other major player in Orlando and it's proximity to the southern property. Comcast could very well develop a plan for that property if/when it becomes available. I wouldn't be surprised if they buy it, close it down and just reroute all the guest to the current properties. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they build a park and resort area that caters to those Sea World "Regional park" guest that their current resort doesn't. Why leave money/market control on the table? Because those parks don't currently perform at the level of the parks the company buying them does? Redevelop the parks to operate on that level. The fact the park is "Sea World" Doesn't matter. The fact it is a Theme park does.

Sea World might just be a very minor annoyance if anything now, But when you are talking about the possibility of allowing another operator to come in and buy and redevelop the park into something that could become a bit more than an annoyance... It'd just make more sense than anything to spend the money to eliminate the threat and go for total control of the market. I understand your argument, But I fundamentally disagree with the idea that the "minor" amount of money that SWO makes, Or it's place in the market is completely invaluable to Comcast. That kind of "High and mighty" thinking has sunken a lot of business's ships. It's how we got to this point where Universal is able to expand its share of the Orlando market. It's how Disney lost Potter, by underestimating the power of the IP, and underestimating Universal's ability to execute something that would allow it to REALLY compete with it's parks. Right now because of such a small miscalculation, we are the point where Universal could potentially end up with just as many parks as Disney in Orlando. If I told you this in the mid 2000's I'd be laughed off the forum.

With how aggressive Comcast is being in it's parks division I just don't see them passing up such an interesting opportunity. Owning every major park that isn't Disney in Orlando.

 

[Ridgepole]

I will say that UR hotels offer free shuttle service to/from Seaworld, albeit limited. But not to the mouse.:read:,
any idea if the mouse hotels offer a similar shuttle to Seaworld?
somebody must know

 

[Mad Dog]

I will say that UR hotels offer free shuttle service to/from Seaworld, albeit limited. But not to the mouse.:read:

I believe there was a time when you could also get multi park tickets that included both Sea World & Universal....But Potter & Comcast expansions parks/hotels has certainly changed the equation. Universal has a different philosophy then they had back in 2009.

 

[Happytycho]

I could see a long term scenario where Universal buys the Orlando SeaWorld parks as a means of expansion after fully developing the new south site.

However, the capital expenditure to do so would be massive, because not only would they need to buy all three parks (seaworld, aquatica, dicovery cove), but they would also need significant improvements to make the venture profitable. They would need an integrated expansion of the transportation system, multiple new attractions and re-theming at Seaworld, and would probably want to build a couple of hotels on some of the surrounding land.

The total cost would probably be similar to what park 3 will cost, but I could see it be viable by attracting the current SWO demographic along with getting UOR guests to extend their trip another day.

 

[zg44]

Just to be clear, You are arguing that owning the only other Theme Park in Orlando doesn't make sense because it targets a different kind of audience? I'm arguing that it makes sense BECAUSE it targets a different kind of audience.


Ultimately, It doesn't matter what kind of visitors the Seaworld Parks get. The only thing that matters is that it is the only other major player in Orlando and it's proximity to the southern property. Comcast could very well develop a plan for that property if/when it becomes available. I wouldn't be surprised if they buy it, close it down and just reroute all the guest to the current properties. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they build a park and resort area that caters to those Sea World "Regional park" guest that their current resort doesn't. Why leave money/market control on the table? Because those parks don't currently perform at the level of the parks the company buying them does? Redevelop the parks to operate on that level. The fact the park is "Sea World" Doesn't matter. The fact it is a Theme park does.

Sea World might just be a very minor annoyance if anything now, But when you are talking about the possibility of allowing another operator to come in and buy and redevelop the park into something that could become a bit more than an annoyance... It'd just make more sense than anything to spend the money to eliminate the threat and go for total control of the market. I understand your argument, But I fundamentally disagree with the idea that the "minor" amount of money that SWO makes, Or it's place in the market is completely invaluable to Comcast. That kind of "High and mighty" thinking has sunken a lot of business's ships. It's how we got to this point where Universal is able to expand its share of the Orlando market. It's how Disney lost Potter, by underestimating the power of the IP, and underestimating Universal's ability to execute something that would allow it to REALLY compete with it's parks. Right now because of such a small miscalculation, we are the point where Universal could potentially end up with just as many parks as Disney in Orlando. If I told you this in the mid 2000's I'd be laughed off the forum.

With how aggressive Comcast is being in it's parks division I just don't see them passing up such an interesting opportunity. Owning every major park that isn't Disney in Orlando.

The problem is that there isn't really an easy way to "upgrade" SWO to the level of a UOR/WDW park without completely demolishing and rebuilding it..., at that point why not wait until if/when Lockheed decides to leave and get their 340 acres of land that's even easier to integrate into the south resort?

There isn't really another operator that could buy SWO and upgrade it to the level of UOR/WDW. There's no other operator with those kinds of deep pockets or IPs (not Merlin, Six Flags, Cedar Fair, etc.).

And as far as IPs go, I can't see Nintendo or JK Rowling or LOTR wanting to be involved with the current SW brand (hounded as it is by PETA at the moment).

If Blackfish hadn't happened, then maybe there'd be a chance of that kind of scenario as you discuss, but in the context of Blackfish as well as Universal already having enough land to build 2 new dry parks, I don't see how SWO enters their thinking.

Your argument speaks to the importance of Universal securing LOTR from the Tolkien Estate more than it does them trying to buy SWO.

I could see a long term scenario where Universal buys the Orlando SeaWorld parks as a means of expansion after fully developing the new south site.

However, the capital expenditure to do so would be massive, because not only would they need to buy all three parks (seaworld, aquatica, dicovery cove), but they would also need significant improvements to make the venture profitable. They would need an integrated expansion of the transportation system, multiple new attractions and re-theming at Seaworld, and would probably want to build a couple of hotels on some of the surrounding land.

The total cost would probably be similar to what park 3 will cost, but I could see it be viable by attracting the current SWO demographic along with getting UOR guests to extend their trip another day.

I think they'll wait out Lockheed as long as they can; it'd probably require Lockheed saying "we're not leaving this spot in Orlando for another 50 years" for me to think they'd even consider SWO.

 

[Mad Dog]

The problem is that there isn't really an easy way to "upgrade" SWO to the level of a UOR/WDW park without completely demolishing and rebuilding it..., at that point why not wait until if/when Lockheed decides to leave and get their 340 acres of land that's even easier to integrate into the south resort?

There isn't really another operator that could buy SWO and upgrade it to the level of UOR/WDW. There's no other operator with those kinds of deep pockets or IPs (not Merlin, Six Flags, Cedar Fair, etc.).

And as far as IPs go, I can't see Nintendo or JK Rowling or LOTR wanting to be involved with the current SW brand (hounded as it is by PETA at the moment).

If Blackfish hadn't happened, then maybe there'd be a chance of that kind of scenario as you discuss, but in the context of Blackfish as well as Universal already having enough land to build 2 new dry parks, I don't see how SWO enters their thinking.

Your argument speaks to the importance of Universal securing LOTR from the Tolkien Estate more than it does them trying to buy SWO.


I think they'll wait out Lockheed as long as they can; it'd probably require Lockheed saying "we're not leaving this spot in Orlando for another 50 years" for me to think they'd even consider SWO.

Yes. I agree with you. Plus, SeaWorld Orlando has become, for all intents and purposes, a park without a true identity. Better to stay away from it.....Back in 2009 it had a marketable identity, value and good demographics. By SeaWorlds own comments, they used to receive one third of their total attendance from foreign tourists. That was a good heavy spending demographic. But that all disappeared after Blackstone did their management black magic on the chain, plus the emergence of Universal as a monster competitor..

 

[Ridgepole]

Your argument speaks to the importance of Universal securing LOTR from the Tolkien Estate more than it does them trying to buy SWO

That's the kingpin IMO. Timeless IP.

 

[devinp267]

If I was a high level exec for Comcast, Evaluating the future landscape of our business... I'd be aggressively moving forward on any and all live entertainment and themepark entertainment opportunities.

The Cable, Phone and Internet Money is there today, But in as little as 5 years it could all be gone. That's not hyperbole either...


Comcast is in a very unique situation to put themselves in a position to be on par with, and go head to head with Disney parks. We're all excited, but I don't think people really understand the gravity of what were seeing here. This is just getting started, and it is a totally unprecedented war where the first shots have just been fired.


If the opportunity to buy Sea World comes up, It will absolutely be considered and I'd wager high it will be aggressively pursued. I would be 100% surprised if Comcast passed on the opportunity to essentially create a duopoly in Orlando. Disney or Universal, No other players. Buying Sea World would put Universal in a place to have the most diverse offerings in Orlando, and capturing families through that diversity in entertainment. I'd expect the animals to all go away, and the primary ride attractions stay and get rethemed.

Yes! If they did buy SeaWorld, gut it leave the coasters and add more and make it Florida's cedar point. They would then officially excel in every demographic. I'm for it!

But it probably won't happen because sesame street is going to be seaworld's potter.