TEA Attendance 2017

[twebber55]

to say it means nothing is something i completely disagree with. its one metric to a parks success. In order for people to spend money on food/bev and merch you have to be in the park. Im gonna assume Universal is more successful with 20 million people in the parks compared to 10 million 10 years ago. Attendance matters at sporting events at movies etc. More people more hotel rooms used. look i get it per person park spending is a big deal and that HP does it better than any other IP in terms of that category but to say attendance means nothing just seems off. Like no other theme park web site is saying anything close to that

 

[Brian G.]

to say it means nothing is something i completely disagree with. its one metric to a parks success. In order for people to spend money on food/bev and merch you have to be in the park. Im gonna assume Universal is more successful with 20 million people in the parks compared to 10 million 10 years ago. Attendance matters at sporting events at movies etc. More people more hotel rooms used. look i get it per person park spending is a big deal and that HP does it better than any other IP in terms of that category but to say attendance means nothing just seems off. Like no other theme park web site is saying anything close to that

Well let’s use another sports analogy.

The Miami Marlins.

They would announce the attendance at the end of every game, just like any other sports team. BUT - because attendance was notoriously low, they included all people who showed up; meaning even people who paid nothing to get in.

Maybe “means nothing” is not the right terminology, but it definitely is not this precious stat some people treat it to be.

(Disclaimer - this is not a hot take saying these numbers are inflated due to TM/CM free admittance - just explaining there are a lot of unknown variables not taken in consideration with the reporting)

 

[shiekra38]

Universal barely broke the top ten worldwide....this should really put fire under their butt.

K, look at where they were in 2008

 

[twebber55]

we re

Well let’s use another sports analogy.

The Miami Marlins.

They would announce the attendance at the end of every game, just like any other sports team. BUT - because attendance was notoriously low, they included all people who showed up; meaning even people who paid nothing to get in.

Maybe “means nothing” is not the right terminology, but it definitely is not this precious stat some people treat it to be.

(Disclaimer - this is not a hot take saying these numbers are inflated due to TM/CM free admittance - just explaining there are a lot of unknown variables not taken in consideration with the reporting)

we rejust gonna disagree lol
those numbers matter its not the only thing that matters but they matter
i mean i get your point but if you own a theme park do you want the park with 12 million people or the one with 7 million no one in the business would take the latter. Again this is the only website ive seen and i look at about 5 different theme park sites where mods are completely dismissing these numbers. Again Brian not a knock on you because i wouldnt be here if i didnt love this site. it just seems odd to not say "man look at what VB did in just 7 months or look at how well Universal Studios Hollywood did."
we certainly can take these numbers and look at quarterly reports and have an idea whats going on

also i looked up John Robinett the VP of AECOM im sure they take this stuff pretty seriously. This guy isnt winging it

 

[Andysol]

You're looking at things from your point of view - the one where you have insiders to talk to who may know actuals. You're basically saying "Hah! Fake numbers, i'm gonna go talk about the real ones with insiders" to an entire forum of people who will most likely never see any numbers beyond the TEA numbers.

This is what we've got publicly and just because they are estimates doesn't mean we can't talk about the interesting aspects that it may show, while also taking it with a grain of salt.

For example, Volcano Bay debuting at 1.5M and all other Orlando water parks seeing declines makes sense and is good for Universal. I don't know how close they were to that actual number, but since the ACTUAL numbers will never make it public, this is what we have to talk about.

Nick- I think even @Joe would tell you he doesn’t have any attendance numbers.
If TEA- who is the industry standard- doesn’t have the correct numbers - which I believe they don’t, as several companies such as universal and disney don’t release- there’s no way some random forum moderator is going to have them. Or even @Marni1971
Ours are guesses, just like theres. Not a single insider has attendance numbers for all the parks. None.

Also remember that TEA is estimating based on clicks. Not first clicks, correct?
So DHS could have “more attendance” than USF- but the average guest stays at DHS for 3 hrs while they stay 6 at USF, etc.
But even those numbers, only a teeny tiny select few at disney know (for disney) and Universal knows (for universal). And they ain’t blabbing.

 

[Nick]

Well let’s use another sports analogy.

The Miami Marlins.

They would announce the attendance at the end of every game, just like any other sports team. BUT - because attendance was notoriously low, they included all people who showed up; meaning even people who paid nothing to get in.

Maybe “means nothing” is not the right terminology, but it definitely is not this precious stat some people treat it to be.

(Disclaimer - this is not a hot take saying these numbers are inflated due to TM/CM free admittance - just explaining there are a lot of unknown variables not taken in consideration with the reporting)

The Boston Red Sox also used that same metric to continue their sellout streak for years on end. But the thing is we know based on common sense and looking at pics of the crowds during that time that they were still pretty damn close every night.

Not saying TEA is “close” but that it follows what makes sense in most cases. DHS is clearly the most off bc they may have had somewhere near those clicks, but people didn’t stay through the day, meaning visits were split with either DS or another Disney park likely.

Nick- I think even @Joe would tell you he doesn’t have any attendance numbers.
If TEA- who is the industry standard- doesn’t have the correct numbers - which I believe they don’t, as several companies such as universal and disney don’t release- there’s no way some random forum moderator is going to have them. Or even @Marni1971
Ours are guesses, just like theres. Not a single insider has attendance numbers for all the parks. None.

Also remember that TEA is estimating based on clicks. Not first clicks, correct?
So DHS could have “more attendance” than USF- but the average guest stays at DHS for 3 hrs while they stay 6 at USF, etc.
But even those numbers, only a teeny tiny select few at disney know (for disney) and Universal knows (for universal). And they ain’t blabbing.

I’ve been around the block more than a time or two. I know what TEA is and how they get their “numbers”. But still just because of all that doesn’t mean we can’t compare to past TEA years as @quinnmac000 did on the last page. This doesn’t need to be that serious of a topic.

And the second sentence here is more what I was referring to in the post you quoted:

Which is why I totally ignore them. The industry overall is doing well. IDGAF about TEA's attendance besides to talk to people in the know and laugh over them.

 

[twebber55]

The Boston Red Sox also used that same metric to continue their sellout streak for years on end. But the thing is we know based on common sense and looking at pics of the crowds during that time that they were still pretty damn close every night.

Not saying TEA is “close” but that it follows what makes sense in most cases. DHS is clearly the most off bc they may have had somewhere near those clicks, but people didn’t stay through the day, meaning visits were split with either DS or another Disney park likely.


I’ve been around the block more than a time or two. I know what TEA is and how they get their “numbers”. But still just because of all that doesn’t mean we can’t compare to past TEA years as @quinnmac000 did on the last page. This doesn’t need to be that serious of a topic.

And the second sentence here is more what I was referring to in the post you quoted:

honest question @Nick or anybody else for that matter....am i supposed to take the word of an anonymous message board guy or the vice-president of a fortune 500 company who's job it is to find this information?
if youre in my shoes what do you do?

 

[Happytycho]

I believe this thread should be labeled 2017 not 2018?

 

[twebber55]

I believe this thread should be labeled 2017 not 2018?

duly noted

 

[Parkscope Joe]

TEA numbers should be treated like F&F Supercharged, best to ignore them and let them whimper away. Which means of course I'm going to do another post on it. (sigh)

Nick- I think even @Joe would tell you he doesn’t have any attendance numbers.
If TEA- who is the industry standard- doesn’t have the correct numbers - which I believe they don’t, as several companies such as universal and disney don’t release- there’s no way some random forum moderator is going to have them. Or even @Marni1971
Ours are guesses, just like theres. Not a single insider has attendance numbers for all the parks. None.

Also remember that TEA is estimating based on clicks. Not first clicks, correct?
So DHS could have “more attendance” than USF- but the average guest stays at DHS for 3 hrs while they stay 6 at USF, etc.
But even those numbers, only a teeny tiny select few at disney know (for disney) and Universal knows (for universal). And they ain’t blabbing.

Actual numbers are a closely guarded competitive intelligence. Closest I've ever gotten was working guest relations at a small park in Philly that rhymes with "Recipe Race" and hearing a few projections.

TEA estimates are based on whatever data they get from the parks. So basically TEA gets some numbers from some parks and then extrapolates the rest using a model. Some over report to make additions look better. Some under report for a competitive advantage/spread out growth over weak years. Some don't even have a say.

I care about how the industry is doing and where the puck is going, TEA numbers don't help with that at all. Unlike NPD video game software and hardware sales figures there is no third party that reports attendance figures.

I’ve been around the block more than a time or two. I know what TEA is and how they get their “numbers”. But still just because of all that doesn’t mean we can’t compare to past TEA years as @quinnmac000 did on the last page. This doesn’t need to be that serious of a topic.

I don't think they're accurate or consistent, so I do not trust comparing year over year growth. The results are not consistent or repeatable.

 

[Cheezbat]

While I laugh at DHS's numbers(can't believe that many people paid to go to that disaster of a park right now), I have to look at Universal and applaud them. They finally did it. Broke 10 million in a USA park. And the other two are over 9 million. Crazy. Next year Islands will most likely break that 10 million number too. Volcano Bay...1.5 million in just over 6 months! The park could be top dog in the USA in 2018 and maybe even the world! Crazy! (Now get going on that expansion already!)

 

[zg44]

The TEA/AECOM numbers are extrapolated from other data, but they're reasonable estimates for the major operators.

Just talking about Disney, Universal, and SeaWorld for example:

I'd say their SeaWorld numbers are by far their most accurate because SeaWorld provides the total chain numbers and revenue numbers to go with them, so it's easy to divide up the total chain number to create good estimates for the specific parks. That's pretty obvious.

For Universal, post-2011, they now have Comcast's earning reports that provide good estimates for the revenue they take in across the parks. The reason why their estimates for Universal are improved now is because most of the Universal Parks revenue comes from the parks themselves (the only extraneous revenue in the equation comes from the profits of the hotel joint-ventures and licensing from Singapore, but those can be estimated and subtracted out).

As far as Disney goes, Disney is the most complicated to calculate because of how many parks they own and how much non-park revenue comes into their parks division (wholly owned cruises, hotels, etc.). That makes year-to-year comparisons tough.

In any case, I'd say the proper way to think of their estimates is to add +/- 3% to their SeaWorld estimates, +/- 6% to their Universal estimates, and +/- 10% to their Disney estimates.

Regardless, the numbers are not objectively bad.

Just looking at Universal for example: Universal parks revenue in 2017 was $5.4 billion on growth of 10%. Their estimate for total Universal attendance is 49.5 million on growth of 4.4%. It's reasonable to think that ARPU went up 5-6% for the parks (if you look at ticket prices, hotel room prices, etc.) which accounts for the remaining %.

That's basically how you estimate these things in a general sense. I was much more skeptical about their Universal numbers pre-Comcast.

 

[Nick]

honest question @Nick or anybody else for that matter....am i supposed to take the word of an anonymous message board guy or the vice-president of a fortune 500 company who's job it is to find this information?
if youre in my shoes what do you do?

I believe they should be treated with a grain of salt tbh since the parks aren’t releasing their numbers.

But my stance on this has always been that. Look at past years threads on them. I’m not promoting them as something we should take as gospel, but the point is at least they are numbers we can compare year to year.

Now do they mean anything? Probably not. But who cares, I like discussion and I think basically shutting discussion down because TEA is fake news is not what we should be doing as a message board community. We should want conversation and opinion to flow as it currently is!

 

[twebber55]

Now do they mean anything? Probably not. But who cares, I like discussion and I think basically shutting discussion down because TEA is fake news is not what we should be doing as a message board community. We should want conversation and opinion to flow as it currently is!

yeah i guess this is how i wished i would have worded my post well done, totally agree

 

[zg44]

honest question @Nick or anybody else for that matter....am i supposed to take the word of an anonymous message board guy or the vice-president of a fortune 500 company who's job it is to find this information?
if youre in my shoes what do you do?

If you care about theme park metrics, the most important metrics are the revenue/profits reported by division or parent company. Those are the most true because there aren't that many accounting gimmicks that can be used to hide whether a park operator is succeeding or failing.

Those also guide things like investment and the like; on earnings calls and such, various executives discuss how much the operators spend or how attendance is doing. And all of that always comes back to how strong/weak revenue growth is, how strong/weak profit growth is, etc.

As far as TEA/AECOM numbers go, they're decent numbers to use to look at how a park operator is doing from year-to-year. The actual numbers are probably not near the true numbers, but based on the publicly available data like revenue/profits, you can judge how good the estimates are.

TEA/AECOM does a pretty good job of making their overall numbers look sensible based on a comparison to the year-to-year revenue changes at the park operators.

 

[GAcoaster]

Every year we do this and every year half of the users on here say "those numbers are accurate" and the other half say "they're way off". I've been in positions where I've seen the numbers from various parks and I can tell you the TEA numbers are fairly close. The problem is always how the parks account for those numbers.

If someone goes to MK, stays for two hours, the goes to DHS, then comes back with a Not So Scary or Christmas Party ticket, is that one click or three clicks? If you go to IOA, take HW to USF, then stay for HHN is that three separate admissions? There is no way to really get those numbers.

Years ago it used to piss me off because they would report Morey's Piers had higher attendance than Six Flags Great Adventure, but there really was no way to know because anyone can walk on and off those piers and not spend a dime, but you had to buy a ticket to Great Adventure. To get real measures you need to look at things like per cap spending. Parks with lower attendance number may be much more profitable than those that pack the guests in cheek by jowl.

 

[Marni1971]

Nick- I think even @Joe would tell you he doesn’t have any attendance numbers.
If TEA- who is the industry standard- doesn’t have the correct numbers - which I believe they don’t, as several companies such as universal and disney don’t release- there’s no way some random forum moderator is going to have them. Or even @Marni1971
Ours are guesses, just like theres. Not a single insider has attendance numbers for all the parks. None.

Also remember that TEA is estimating based on clicks. Not first clicks, correct?
So DHS could have “more attendance” than USF- but the average guest stays at DHS for 3 hrs while they stay 6 at USF, etc.
But even those numbers, only a teeny tiny select few at disney know (for disney) and Universal knows (for universal). And they ain’t blabbing.

I have some WDW figures. The TEA figures for Epcot are slightly out.

 

[Cheezbat]

I have some WDW figures. The TEA figures for Epcot are slightly out.

Just slightly? So we're Studios numbers pretty accurate? Having visited both DHS and Uni a number of times last year I still can't see how either of the Universal parks didn't pass DHS.

 

[Galaxy Defender]

Just slightly? So we're Studios numbers pretty accurate? Having visited both DHS and Uni a number of times last year I still can't see how either of the Universal parks didn't pass DHS.

Keep in mind HHN added to the USO numbers. I think it's very least they passed DHS in attendance.

 

[Cheezbat]

Keep in mind HHN added to the USO numbers. I think it's very least they passed DHS in attendance.

That was my thought as well. Halloween Horror nights really packs them in every year, and last year was no exception. Between that and Mardi Gras, not to mention all the additional millions of tourists that came to Orlando last year, I just can't see how DHS had a higher attendance.