First off, I didn't mean that they were the first park to have an attraction based on a movie. I meant that they were the first ones with the solitary goal/business model of putting guests in movies. Its their... "specialty" if you will. I tried to emphasize that by using quotes but after reading it I can see how it could be misleading.
OK next, you think Universal is "selling their own brand short". So do you think Disney is selling their brand short for picking up AVATAR? I just don't think a theme park has to ONLY use ideas and products from their own company to be great. I don't walk off a ride thinking "WOW that was amazing, too bad Universal didn't really produce the movie that attraction was based off of..." Plus, the average park guest doesn't even know, let alone care...
As far as Potter staying at IOA I will say this... I was one of the people who voted that there would NOT be an expansion to WWOHP. :doh: Mostly because of my personal feelings in that I simply didn't want to see it take over the parks. Then, once the expansion was announced and rumors started flowing of it replacing JAWS, I started protesting on how it should at least stay in IOA, and posted an epic rant somewhere (that I think upwards of 2 people read) about all of the reasons why I think it should stay OUT of the Studios, mandatory park hoppers being the main thesis.So believe me when I tell you I understand where you're coming from.
I guess over time I have become more optimistic, partly because lets face it, its happening whether us NERDS want it to happen or not. But mostly because I now fully realize how many doors this is going to open for Universal in the long run. It is going to give them the financial freedom they need to create one of a kind attractions for decades to come, whether Universal produced the movie or not.
Holy crap how long have I been typing?....what year is this?