TEA 2016 Theme Park Index
- Thread starter AlexanderMBush
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
For real though at what point does SeaWorld just accept they aren't in the same class as their neighbors WDW or UO and make a real change?
Let's talk hypothetical here just for the sake of discussion. They have three world class roller coasters already... at one point does an investor come in and just scrap the whole animal aspect and go thrill park (think cedar point). It would fill a void in the Central Florida market for a high octane thrill park that neither WDW or UO seem interested in doing.
Let's talk hypothetical here just for the sake of discussion. They have three world class roller coasters already... at one point does an investor come in and just scrap the whole animal aspect and go thrill park (think cedar point). It would fill a void in the Central Florida market for a high octane thrill park that neither WDW or UO seem interested in doing.
My anecdotal experience with attendance at various parks (as in once in a while I'll know the number for a day or something) says..
MK estimate is low.
Epcot is low, but closer than MK.
AK is high.
IOA is low.
And Disney waterparks seems wrong - if you consider their yearly rehab blocks it puts them right at their capacity levels for a daily avg... which would have to be wrong.
New Fantasyland and the new parking changed MK's phase closing thresholds. Not by that much, but I think TEA doesn't see those closings and says "oh, so it must be down" when in reality it has days where it would of been phase closed under the old system. Most peak periods spend a lot of time in that new gray area.
MK estimate is low.
Epcot is low, but closer than MK.
AK is high.
IOA is low.
And Disney waterparks seems wrong - if you consider their yearly rehab blocks it puts them right at their capacity levels for a daily avg... which would have to be wrong.
New Fantasyland and the new parking changed MK's phase closing thresholds. Not by that much, but I think TEA doesn't see those closings and says "oh, so it must be down" when in reality it has days where it would of been phase closed under the old system. Most peak periods spend a lot of time in that new gray area.
I just meant that Wet 'N Wild's last year represented the least amount of people that park will ever see. I find it very hard to believe that Volcano Bay will have a smaller attendance than Wet 'N Wild's last year. So, we can have a rough idea of how many people will go to Volcano Bay in the absolute worst case
(The fact that VB's only open for half a year might make this difficult to prove)
I think they've already accepted that. They've at least acknowledged it publicly, but I don't know if any real change has come of it yet. They price themselves as the inferior and cheaper alternative or addition to WDW and UOR.
I honestly think they would have dumped it if they had the option. Transporting the animals alone makes certain people angry, which would not help their cause. You can't just get rid of all the animals that SEAS owns. Many could be taken to local zoos and aquariums, but the orcas for instance aren't going anywhere because they really can't. Contrary to what some claim, if they release those animals into the ocean they will die, and if they they place them into sea pens they will suffer, which would not help the marketing of the newly re-branded SEAS. On a non-business note, SEAS would leave a big hole in the rescue and rehabilitation efforts on both coasts (especially the west coast). While I bet they wish they could get rid of the animals, it isn't much of an option, at least in the short term.
I don't think SeaWorld will ever get rid of the marine/animal side of the parks. Even Six Flags still has animals at some (one?) of their parks. It's a core part of their brand and their company. SeaWorld does do a lot of rehabilitation work and I don't think the world would be better if SeaWorld gave that up.
SeaWorld is still a powerful brand. I think they're going to end up taking a two-prong approach. Use their brand and establish well-respected animal-based parks abroad (where animal parks in those countries either don't exist or aren't well respected thanks to lax regulation). They can be major players in those markets. Meanwhile, start acting like a regional chain and focus on a good value and rides in the USA.
SeaWorld is still a powerful brand. I think they're going to end up taking a two-prong approach. Use their brand and establish well-respected animal-based parks abroad (where animal parks in those countries either don't exist or aren't well respected thanks to lax regulation). They can be major players in those markets. Meanwhile, start acting like a regional chain and focus on a good value and rides in the USA.
I don't know - being a Florida native I've seen parks come and go.
Seaworld - outside of my dislike of them as a company - seems to be distinctly on the cusp of shutting down.
Seaworld - outside of my dislike of them as a company - seems to be distinctly on the cusp of shutting down.
I always take this report with a grain of salt, but what I did find interesting was that in roughly 6.5-7 months of last year SHDL took in 5.6M supposedly. So if they stay on that pace or greater for a full year, they would likely end up somewhere around 10.5-11M for the year I would think, no?
Yep, that is what is projected. Big a** park for studios numbers at a reduced rate compared to WDW
There are a lot of Shanghai expansions either in construction already (TSL) or close to being announced (Everest, etc) to keep guests coming so unlike Paris and HK, i'd expect the numbers for Shanghai to continue to gradually rise instead of fall. No park opens with MK/DL/USJ numbers. Hell, USJ didn't get to where it's gotten until just the past few years.
But of course the Chinese economy is a much bigger worry than say Orlando or Japan.
Yeah, they need the word of mouth to spread to the countryside and develop a habit of going. Gonna be a long time til they start making money on that 6B investment
Eh, they should break about even if anything, probably make a decent profit.
Eddie Sotto told me ages ago that Epcot Center, as designed and opened, needed 10k guests per day to justify being open and stay in the black.
Even if you double that for Shanghai (which is about what it cost vompared to Epcot's 1982 cost) they're on track to be fine. Only if guest spending is abysmal should they be worried.
Eddie Sotto told me ages ago that Epcot Center, as designed and opened, needed 10k guests per day to justify being open and stay in the black.
Even if you double that for Shanghai (which is about what it cost vompared to Epcot's 1982 cost) they're on track to be fine. Only if guest spending is abysmal should they be worried.
The possible issue with Shanghai's attendance is threefold
*They charge considerably less for tickets, so their attendance ticket intake money per guest doesn't equal that of the USA parks
* Guest spending on food purchases has been disappointing from accounts.
* Guest purchases on merchandise have been disappointing from accounts
The major factor in business is revenue, more so than actual attendance numbers. Revenue & Spending per Guest is looking like it could be a long term issue.
*They charge considerably less for tickets, so their attendance ticket intake money per guest doesn't equal that of the USA parks
* Guest spending on food purchases has been disappointing from accounts.
* Guest purchases on merchandise have been disappointing from accounts
The major factor in business is revenue, more so than actual attendance numbers. Revenue & Spending per Guest is looking like it could be a long term issue.
The problem, imo, is they are charging too much for F&B and too little for park tickets. From what i've heard, guests are scoffing at the over-inflated costs of food and instead opting to just bring in lunch and snack of their own on their visits.
I don't think there's any one simple answer though. The Chinese market is a fickle one compared to US and Japan as I said.
The problem is that the income of the so called Chinese Middle Class(?) would be equal to someone in "extreme" poverty in the western world. A day in the park is a very difficult cost for a typical Chinese family. And the really wealthy Chinese like going to places outside of China. They probably couldn't afford the food & merch even if they cut the price in half.
Disney, in their quarterly reports last year,said their WDW attendance was flat to a small loss (They don't list actual attendance per park but they do make statements concerning percentage loss or gain of attendance). So TEA's guess estimate is probably based on those Disney reports of flat & small decreases in attendance in every quarter last year.
I mean, I still think a bit of fudging went into making that 20 mil last year but maybe that's just me.
