Concept for USH's 2nd Gate and How it Could Work

[Viator]

However... Uni could go the water park route as SoCal doesn’t really have a “Water Theme Park”

I am going to say this, it does not make any logical sense to have a Water Theme Park that is only open seasonally (all the other waterparks around close more or less shortly after Labor Day).

It's not like Orlando IMO.

 

[fryoj]

If 2 parks share the same amount of guests that 1 Park can handle, it results in less profit. Unto we see a Universal branded hotel, I don’t see them build a 2nd park.

30,000 guests pay $124 for one park or 30,000 guests pay $179 for a park hopper. Even if they don't all buy hoppers, it's more income. Not to mention spreading the crowds out leads to more spending as restaurants and shops have shorter lines. And it allows for more IP's which means more merch opportunities. After the initial build out cost of the 2nd park, it's going to be more profitable even if it doesn't increase attendance.

 

[Jamesh22]

At some point either a 2nd Gate or massive expansion of the existing park is going to be needed just to keep up with demand/capacity issues.

The main park is way too small for 8+ million guests a year already, Nintendo etc will just drive that even higher to almost unbareable levels. They need a lot more space, not just a lot more attractions.

 

[Chris]

At some point either a 2nd Gate or massive expansion of the existing park is going to be needed just to keep up with demand/capacity issues.

The main park is way too small for 8+ million guests a year already, Nintendo etc will just drive that even higher to almost unbareable levels. They need a lot more space, not just a lot more attractions.

Agreed. And if the lazy way out is chosen to have a water park as a 2nd gate...then that would be the wrong way to go IMO. But, I could see Universal Studios Hollywood doing that in favor if keeping costs down and trying to split crowds only for peak season...but....I hate the idea for many reasons: the noise level of a water park means that this park would have to be indoors, and Universal is better than this and I feel water parks can be very cheap. An indoor Volcano Bay is not a good idea.

Anyway, the problem still remains...one entrance for one massive park is inefficient and will force a 2nd gate!

 

[quinnmac000]

Agreed. And if the lazy way out is chosen to have a water park as a 2nd gate...then that would be the wrong way to go IMO. But, I could see Universal Studios Hollywood doing that in favor if keeping costs down and trying to split crowds only for peak season...but....I hate the idea for many reasons: the noise level of a water park means that this park would have to be indoors, and Universal is better than this and I feel water parks can be very cheap. An indoor Volcano Bay is not a good idea.

Anyway, the problem still remains...one entrance for one massive park is inefficient and will force a 2nd gate!

Whats wrong with indoor water parks...they are essentially the one water park that never has to shut down for weather considerations.

 

[Viator]

Whats wrong with indoor water parks...they are essentially the one water park that never has to shut down for weather considerations.

Honestly, it's something that doesn't make sense for Universal, and that it wouldn't exactly be something that can be easily maintained (or smelling good) for Universal.

Honestly, I can buy a second gate more, especially with how there is so much they can do for attractions and properties nowadays (atleast, as my own outlook on it).

 

[Jamesh22]

Agreed, a waterpark is usually a '3rd park' addition after a 2nd gate anyway, and it's not going to make anywhere near as many people stump up the cash for a park hopper as a 2nd gate would.