New Water Park coming to Universal Orlando?

[Nick]

You are saying exactly what I said you said. Blizzard Beach has no need to add Frozen.

No, i'm saying water parks have no need to add IPs ever. It has nothing to do with being cheap, it's that there's no benefit to it.

I'm looking forward to seeing Universal's water park because it will be original. UO rarely builds originals attractions, so to build an entire park based off their creativity is exciting.

As I said, there simply is no need for a water park to ever be based around IPs. It's a waste of capital that could be better spent elsewhere. Water parks have a ceiling on how high their attendance can/will get and it isn't much past 2.5 Million. I don't believe any water park has ever hit 3M in a year. Now you could argue adding Frozen to BB could get them close, but to me, it's not even about the money or attendance numbers.

Frozen doesn't fit BB in the same way it doesn't fit Norway. Sure, the movie may have a lot of ice/snow in it so automatically you jump to the conclusion BB = Frozen... No. There's an actual theme to the park. There's a story. A good one too. EVERYTHING would need to be changed. BB is themed to "Florida's first ski resort", Frozen is based in a fictional town in Norway. It doesn't fit. It would actually be worse than Maelstrom technically since the setting of BB is Florida.

Frozen doesn't need to be in every corner of WDW, let alone have it's own park.

 

[Cheezbat]

The one thing I still like at WDW is their waterparks. I get a season pass to them every year, and if Frozen was brought in to Blizzard Beach, they'd lose a handful of us passholders. I'm so sick of Frozen (i used to like it) and Disney trying to shoehorn it into everything and every park. Enough is enough.

Water parks don't need IPs. If they use them that's fine, but there's really no need for them. Especially Blizzard Beach and Frozen. It's already one of the most crowded and highly attended waterparks. No need to make things worse.

 

[fryoj]

It has nothing to do with being cheap, it's that there's no benefit to it.

I don't believe any water park has ever hit 3M in a year. Now you could argue adding Frozen to BB could get them close, but to me, it's not even about the money or attendance numbers.

You are contradicting yourself now. If it increases attendance there is a benefit to it.

If you want to argue that it doesn't fit, or you don't like the idea, or BB is fine like it is, or that you are just sick of Frozen, go ahead, I have no reason to argue with that. But you spent something like 3 posts saying it makes no sense financially just to say it could increase attendance in this post. 500,000 people at $53 ahead is $26 million and thats before merch and food sales. Granted, a lot of that increased attendance would be people just adding the water park option to existing multi day passes so its not the same math, but it's increased revenue nonetheless.

 

[ralphoutloud]

Just came back from my HHN trip and stayed at Cabana...drove around this area a few times and it is VERY small. I'm very curious as to how they are going to fit everything, much less a 160-200ft volcano on that tiny plot.

 

[IzzyB]

You are contradicting yourself now. If it increases attendance there is a benefit to it.

If you want to argue that it doesn't fit, or you don't like the idea, or BB is fine like it is, or that you are just sick of Frozen, go ahead, I have no reason to argue with that. But you spent something like 3 posts saying it makes no sense financially just to say it could increase attendance in this post. 500,000 people at $53 ahead is $26 million and thats before merch and food sales. Granted, a lot of that increased attendance would be people just adding the water park option to existing multi day passes so its not the same math, but it's increased revenue nonetheless.

Actually, it can increase attendance by a little, but the cost to make the change would be more than the increase in attendance would benefit them. Some people are just never going to go to a water park no matter what is in that water park. That population is pretty high because of the number of people who can't swim or don't want to deal with young kids who can't swim. Others just don't like to be in a bathing suit in public or live in climates where a bathing suit is not something they even own. Some just don't like the thrill of a slide or being wet all day. Just too many factors and Frozen won't entice enough of these people to change that. That is why water park attendance is so much lower than normal park attendance.

It is funny, I was at Myrtle Beach for two weeks at the Marriott resort. In the summertime (when families with kids go) the pools are packed, the beach is packed, etc. When I went you would have thought the resort was dead, because there were times it was only my family at the pool or maybe us and one other family. Yet the resort was at 100% occupancy the entire time we were there. The reason being (after talking with the activity folks) is that the summer are all people who were looking for the beach type of vacation. In Fall/Spring they are still at 100% because of the older crowd, golfers, etc that are looking for the shopping and entertainment part of Myrtle Beach. They don't care about going to the pool or beach. They might once sit out there to relax, but overall they are doing the other stuff. It was in the 80s for many days and those days were even dead at times, so it wasn't a temperature thing. It was a they are not into the whole water thing and just go there for the other stuff. This kind of tells you about different people want different things and nothing was going to attract the people to the pool. Even the night they played Frozen as a dive & movie. There was 3 families in the pool (us, one other one with kids, and a lady) and the rest were sitting by the pool. There was probably 25 people (if that) at the Frozen movie for a resort with 5 buildings (with only 2 and 3 bedrooms units) at 100% occupancy.

 

[Mad Dog]

Just came back from my HHN trip and stayed at Cabana...drove around this area a few times and it is VERY small. I'm very curious as to how they are going to fit everything, much less a 160-200ft volcano on that tiny plot.

I believe it's apx. the same size as Typhoon Lagoon or Blizzard Beach, not including their parking lots. Since there are reportedly no parking lots for the park it should be ok for size. As a side note, I believe the whole of Universal Singapore theme park is less than twice the size of that plot.Property generally seems much larger once it's developed.

 

[shiekra38]

I believe it's apx. the same size as Typhoon Lagoon or Blizzard Beach, not including their parking lots. Since there are reportedly no parking lots for the park it should be ok for size. As a side note, I believe the whole of Universal Singapore theme park is less than twice the size of that plot.Property generally seems much larger once it's developed.

As stated before, water parks can have multiple attractions(slides) branching off from a central location..they may also get away with a lot of crossover points

 

[Nick]

You are contradicting yourself now. If it increases attendance there is a benefit to it.

If you want to argue that it doesn't fit, or you don't like the idea, or BB is fine like it is, or that you are just sick of Frozen, go ahead, I have no reason to argue with that. But you spent something like 3 posts saying it makes no sense financially just to say it could increase attendance in this post. 500,000 people at $53 ahead is $26 million and thats before merch and food sales. Granted, a lot of that increased attendance would be people just adding the water park option to existing multi day passes so its not the same math, but it's increased revenue nonetheless.

There's a lot of work that would need to go into changing the park to solely Frozen Based. it may have a slight benefit to it, but Disney would have to see hard proof. They haven't actually invested something new in their waterparks since 2005.

And you conveniently clipped out everything about how the theme fits worse than Frozen fits in Epcots Maelstrom. It's pa pointless debate because it's never going to happen.

 

[Nick]

You are contradicting yourself now. If it increases attendance there is a benefit to it.

If you want to argue that it doesn't fit, or you don't like the idea, or BB is fine like it is, or that you are just sick of Frozen, go ahead, I have no reason to argue with that. But you spent something like 3 posts saying it makes no sense financially just to say it could increase attendance in this post. 500,000 people at $53 ahead is $26 million and thats before merch and food sales. Granted, a lot of that increased attendance would be people just adding the water park option to existing multi day passes so its not the same math, but it's increased revenue nonetheless.

There's a lot of work that would need to go into changing the park to solely Frozen Based. it may have a slight benefit to it, but Disney would have to see hard proof. They haven't actually invested something new in their waterparks since 2005.

And you conveniently clipped out everything about how the theme fits worse than Frozen fits in Epcots Maelstrom. It's pa pointless debate because it's never going to happen.

 

[JungleSkip]

What does Frozen and Blizzard Beach have to do with the Universal water park? Nothing? Okay.

And we are...moving on.

 

[Nick]

What does Frozen and Blizzard Beach have to do with the Universal water park? Nothing? Okay.

And we are...moving on.

I don't get it either.

 

[Disneyhead]

Universal is building a "Frozen" Water Park?

 

[Cole]

Universal is building a "Frozen" Water Park?

Y'all insiders be hintin

 

[Cheezbat]

More like there may be 'frozen' elements to the park...but this thing having a big volcano/mountain structure may indicate heat too...

Ugh I can't wait to find out more about this water park!

 

[darkridelover]

There's so more activity happening on this site. Trucks are offloading equipment. Not sure what it's for but it's definitely not for Saphire Falls

 

[Teebin]

There's so more activity happening on this site. Trucks are offloading equipment. Not sure what it's for but it's definitely not for Saphire Falls

Why do you think that it is definitely not for Sapphire Falls??

 

[Hatetofly]

Why do you think that it is definitely not for Sapphire Falls??

The Falls side had their equipment delivered right on their side of the site and there isn't any direct access from the sapphire site to this site without having to damage any of the pretty greenery between them. Has to be for the new site Imo but hey you never know right lol.

 

[Teebin]

The Falls side had their equipment delivered right on their side of the site and there isn't any direct access from the sapphire site to this site without having to damage any of the pretty greenery between them. Has to be for the new site Imo but hey you never know right lol.

Correct, you never know. But I maintain that this equipment could be on hold for Kong and or demolition of some other area within the resort.

I would estimate the water park to be an 18 month project based on other projects I have witnessed.

 

[UNIrd]

Correct, you never know. But I maintain that this equipment could be on hold for Kong and or demolition of some other area within the resort.

I would estimate the water park to be an 18 month project based on other projects I have witnessed.

Summer 2016? That sounds plausible.

 

[Teebin]

Summer 2016? That sounds plausible.

A 10,000 year old cave painting that I have seen indicates 2017. Could it have been moved up, certainly. I have no knowledge of this happening however.