Universal's New Park/Site B Blue Sky Thread

[Nick]

Universals' main demo is millennial...



While families are great, you don't at the same time dismiss your key demo for another demo.

You have to aim for both demos. Somehow Disney is able to do it, so it's not impossible.

Universal is opening a lot of hotel rooms within the next year or so with Aventura and the W&W hotels (and then eventually hotels at Site B). Who's gonna pay to stay there and keep those rooms occupied? Sure some will be millenials, but you NEED families too or you won't be able to keep a high occupancy.

It also affects the per guests spending. Families and older folk who tour the parks who have money to blow don't really care if some things are over priced. The younger demographic (which i'm a part of) is very cautious with their money.

 

[JungleSkip]

Tweens/teens don't pay the bills. I know you're referring to teens/tweens going on vacation with their parents, but...

...if you're Universal, wouldn't you rather grab the families attention while the kids are young so the come back as many times as possible before they turn 18? Point being, Going to Disney has sort of just become a thing you do from generation to generation now. It's ingrained into the culture of America. I think Universal wants to keep digging away at that and, over time, make it so that when you think of Orlando, maybe you should think of Harry Potter instead of Cinderella's Castle.

Okay...but I'd argue Harry Potter is a tween/teen franchise. I don't think Universal is ever going to change Disney's cultural dominance, no matter how many height restrictionless rides they have. Disney has held that place for near 3/4 of a century. A few Shrek dark rides just isn't gonna change that. Aiming for the 8/9/10+ families gave Universal an identity, and one that worked. I'm not convinced throwing their weight into trying to get the younger kids is going to change their fortunes all that much.

 

[Nick]

Okay...but I'd argue Harry Potter is a tween/teen franchise. I don't think Universal is ever going to change Disney's cultural dominance, no matter how many height restrictionless rides they have. Disney has held that place for near 3/4 of a century. A few Shrek dark rides just isn't gonna change that. Aiming for the 8/9/10+ families gave Universal an identity, and one that worked. I'm not convinced throwing their weight into trying to get the younger kids is going to change their fortunes all that much.

Universal doesn't have to change their identity to appeal to a wider audience.

Just say for example, if pesky HRRR wasn't in the way, and they were able to expand the Twister building further. We could've gotten Secret Life of Pets right there. Boom. nice, modern dark ride added and it appeals to families. Again, it doesn't have to be a drastic change from what they're already doing.

 

[Alicia]

Trolls gonna bring in da kiddies. Trolls is where it's at y'all.

Well-rounded variety will do the new park some good. If they get Middle Earth that'll be huge for older kids and obsessed fanboys (and older nerds that read the books and loved it well before the films came out.) If they put Zelda there it will attract kids and adults alike, mixing something millennials enjoy with something adults get nostalgic over. If they have a Trolls boat ride with that song on loop your kids are gonna make you go on it again and again like Frozen at Epcot.

Universal is finally in a place where their back-catalog and licensed IPs aren't limited to classic old films like it was in 1990. They're in a position to do something for everyone. And that's pretty cool.

 

[JungleSkip]

Universal doesn't have to change their identity to appeal to a wider audience.

Just say for example, if pesky HRRR wasn't in the way, and they were able to expand the Twister building further. We could've gotten Secret Life of Pets right there. Boom. nice, modern dark ride added and it appeals to families. Again, it doesn't have to be a drastic change from what they're already doing.

I think we're on a different page here. I'm not saying Universal should have no rides to appeal to families. But the idea of them trying to "take on the Magic Kingdom" seems like folly to me. They should have a family ride here or there to placate the younger set, but they should not be the focus. They should still be focusing on the families with pre-teens and teens, IMO. That's their bread and butter.

 

[Nick]

I think we're on a different page here. I'm not saying Universal should have no rides to appeal to families. But the idea of them trying to "take on the Magic Kingdom" seems like folly to me. They should have a family ride here or there to placate the younger set, but they should not be the focus. They should still be focusing on the families with pre-teens and teens, IMO. That's their bread and butter.

I think if the goal is simply to "take on the MK", it doesn't mean they will overtake it or anything, but it is always good to hear them planning with big ambitions for a new park. I agree with MadDog's post on the last page... they don't want the stroller brigade like Disney does. Once you can walk without one, that's about the age I think Universal wants to be aiming for all the way up to the grandparents and such.

 

[darkridelover]

Guys Millennial's are in their 20's to mid 30's and have careers, families, and kids. Why do people on here keep talking about them like they're kids with no economic resources? The long game here is to make millennial's raving fans of Universal so they bring their kids and make them life long visitors. That is a winning strategy. Much like Disney did back in the day with their TV specials directed at Children who grew up to bring their families to Disney for vacation.

What Universal does want to do with the new park is to make the quality better than MK!

 

[zg44]

The only reason Universal was able to target families with pre-teens in the first place was Harry Potter. The key to continuing that is Nintendo as well as further buildouts of DreamWorks and Illumination.

I suppose the main thing about targeting the stroller crowd is to target their parents. Parents that were born in the mid-80s through early 90s that grew up with Mario, Pokemon, Zelda, etc.

If Universal is serious about wanting a challenger to MK, then just focus on franchises that people in their mid/late 20s and 30s like; it's not that complicated.

If you build a 10 acre Mushroom Kingdom/Bowser's Keep, etc. spread; you'll basically have your <8 year old kids (and their families) everywhere. The same applies to Pokemon...

 

[Nick]

Guys Millennial's are in their 20's to mid 30's and have careers, families, and kids. Why do people on here keep talking about them like they're kids with no economic resources? The long game here is to make millennial's raving fans of Universal so they bring their kids and make them life long visitors. That is a winning strategy. Much like Disney did back in the day with their TV specials directed at Children who grew up to bring their families to Disney for vacation.

What Universal does want to do with the new park is to make the quality better than MK!

I'm fully aware of this, but if Universal only caters to millernnial's they will be in big trouble considering the amount of hotel rooms they will have once Site B is ready.

I'm a millennial, I get it. Just because it's a perception that millennial's are Universal's only target doesn't mean they explicitly market to them. When there's a whole world of people willing to spend money, you don't just target people in their 20's and 30's. That would be bad business.

 

[Magic-Man]

I read somewhere on the web ...that two or three years ago Universal sent out a super long survey and asked questions about how you would like six lands in a new theme park designed. The choices supposedly were pick two: dark rides, hybrids, simulators, coasters etc for each land. Also whether to include entertainment, shows, restaurants etc. ...If this survey truly existed, it would be really interesting to see the results.

Anyone got any links to the info?

 

[JungleSkip]

Anyone got any links to the info?

That’s really all there is. There was nothing concrete/definitive

 

[Mad Dog]

With the South Park, Universal has a unique opportunity to expand their brand. Universal Studios and IOA already caters to the thrill theme park crowd, though it still has opportunities for families in those two parks. The South Park can be more tilted to the family demographic with a larger slate of family attractions, though maintaining a significant number of thrill attractions to satisfy their core constituency....And hearken back to the original Cartoon centric park that eventually evolved into IOA since Universal couldn't agree with Warner on contract terms. Universal's Jay Stein wanted that park to be somewhat like MK so it could compete better against Disney. Jay Stein (from Jaybangs) "While USF competes with Disney/MGM, Cartoon World would aim at Magic Kingdom and Epcot".....So, if indeed, the South Park becomes a bit MK like, it will just be a finalization of what Jay Stein wanted to do in the first place, before he was waylaid by a mere $70,000 difference in negotiations.

 

[Alicia]

With the South Park, Universal has a unique opportunity to expand their brand. Universal Studios and IOA already caters to the thrill theme park crowd, though it still has opportunities for families in those two parks. The South Park can be more tilted to the family demographic with a larger slate of family attractions, though maintaining a significant number of thrill attractions to satisfy their core constituency....And hearken back to the original Cartoon centric park that eventually evolved into IOA since Universal couldn't agree with Warner on contract terms. Universal's Jay Stein wanted that park to be somewhat like MK so it could compete better against Disney. Jay Stein (from Jaybangs) "While USF competes with Disney/MGM, Cartoon World would aim at Magic Kingdom and Epcot".....So, if indeed, the South Park becomes a bit MK like, it will just be a finalization of what Jay Stein wanted to do in the first place, before he was waylaid by a mere $70,000 difference in negotiations.

I just bought that book. Really looking forward to reading it.

 

[Mad Dog]

I just bought that book. Really looking forward to reading it.

You'll love it. There's actually a lot more that Jay Stein says about his concept for Cartoon World. I just pulled that one brief quote....It's so interesting, you'll read it in a couple of days. There's so much real info, I suggest you highlight the significant passages like I did. Makes it easier to go back & find stuff. I also highly recommend the predecessor book, Disney vs. Universal. It's also very good. Significantly, the reason Jay Stein sat for the interview in Jaybangs, is that he wanted to refute what some people said in D vs. U , whereby they were taking credit for things they didn't actually do. He also says a lot of the same things about the thinking behind Cartoon World that you and Nick C. (Next Big Thing) have been saying about the proposed South Park.

 

[Alicia]

You'll love it. There's actually a lot more that Jay Stein says about his concept for Cartoon World. I just pulled that one brief quote....It's so interesting, you'll read it in a couple of days. There's so much real info, I suggest you highlight the significant passages like I did. Makes it easier to go back & find stuff. I also highly recommend the predecessor book, Disney vs. Universal. It's also very good. Significantly, the reason Jay Stein sat for the interview in Jaybangs, is that he wanted to refute what some people said in D vs. U , whereby they were taking credit for things they didn't actually do.

I already read Disney vs Universal. Great book. I’ll definitely get the highlighters out. Good idea.

 

[Magic-Man]

Speaking of Cartoon World.... I've been doing a little reading on the cancelled/concept lands and rides, and there's quite a few interesting ones. Batman in particular. If Uni. were to somehow get into position to build a DC Comics land, would it be smart to build it in its current state? Sure, there are tons of things you could do with the property, but it's not exactly popular right now.

 

[belloq87]

Just chiming in to say that JAYBANGS is absolutely essential reading for Universal fans. And theme park fans in general, really.

 

[Frank Drackman]

Comparatively to pretty much all rides at Universal right now, Jaws is a "relaxing experience" - emphasis on "experience". I like things like Jungle Cruise where there's a guide or things like that. Jaws was certainly more intense than that, but it was a decent length, but packed some adventure.

Maybe "relaxing" isn't the right word to attach to what i'm trying to describe, but "passive".

Thanks, that helps. I think I was stuck on ‘relaxing’ for at UoR, I find it easy to explore/sit in an area that is off the beat and path, I see more entertainment pop up around the resort that break the pace of ride, ride, ride...

I will say that I have noticed a change in visitors to the park over the past two years....maybe it is because I tend to stay on site, but I see more and more families (that have one or two of their kids still in strollers...but, to me, the MK is kind of a bad example because WDW in FL is so spread out, you even have more adults trying to play out Walle’s warnings...I mean, anywhere I have lived in the past 20 years or so, people need to drive to the mailbox...wait until the closest parking spot opens up...so a park that has every ride a mile from the front gate...blocks between experiences...

 

[Ashhanbre]

Classic dark rides are extremely boring though.

 

[Brian G.]

Classic dark rides are extremely boring though.

This is the hottest of takes.

Not everything in a theme park is meant to cater to you. It's meant to cater to grander, general audience. There is a place for fast thrills and a place for slow enjoyment. One of Universal's biggest weaknesses is the lack of attractions where you can just... sit back and take it all in.