Transformers: The Ride - Summer 2013

[Disneyhead]

During the week following the 4th of July weekend, there was one day that the MK had just over 22K. And 3 days that week that DAK had less than 10K. These are not typical "Summertime Crowds".

 

[Teebin]

^ What are the normal numbers this time of year at those parks? I have never really followed it. I wonder what the causes might be...

Addendum: How far in advance of an Orlando vacation does the average family plan their trip? 6 months, 1 year, 2 years???

 

[martymcflyy85]

Could rising ticket/vacation prices have anything to do with it? Its gotten pretty outrageous at this point.

 

[Disneyhead]

MK should be around 38K-40K. DAK should be just under 20K.

 

[rozfan]

@disneyhead MK is correct for in park attendance, a little on the soft side but for all day counts and AK is pretty spot on for all day.

 

[Teebin]

Thanks, both of you! Mercy, that ain't good. As Walt reportedly said, "the people make the park". I have been in AK's Africa village with only two or three people wandering in the corners at the end of the day... and it began feeling a bit austere and sad. I have a feeling that any morning early visit works because it is filled with anticipation for the day ahead.

 

[graspthesun]

Addendum: How far in advance of an Orlando vacation does the average family plan their trip? 6 months, 1 year, 2 years???

I don't know the average, but I've been semi-planning for a year with the main work being done 3 months out.

 

[floridakid]

This plays a little off of martymcflyy85's post and is more or less a question(s) I already have an answer to, just curious:

Would it make any sense at all for a theme park (let's call it Universal Studios) to, instead of raising prices to compete against another theme park (let's call it Disney), lower them to draw in more people and in turn make the same as the competing park if not more?

What does competing do in this case, if not draw the consumer away? I mean I'm talking a few dollars knocked off a ticket price but a few dollars goes a long way to some people. Does that make sense from a higher-up's point of view? Or does competing with parks in terms of ticket prices really bring in the crowds?

More importantly: does higher ticket prices mean less people? Or is there simply a lull in tourism at the moment?

 

[ChrisFL]

This plays a little off of martymcflyy85's post and is more or less a question(s) I already have an answer to, just curious:

Would it make any sense at all for a theme park (let's call it Universal Studios) to, instead of raising prices to compete against another theme park (let's call it Disney), lower them to draw in more people and in turn make the same as the competing park if not more?

What does competing do in this case, if not draw the consumer away? I mean I'm talking a few dollars knocked off a ticket price but a few dollars goes a long way to some people. Does that make sense from a higher-up's point of view? Or does competing with parks in terms of ticket prices really bring in the crowds?

More importantly: does higher ticket prices mean less people? Or is there simply a lull in tourism at the moment?

I think, unlike other forms of consumer goods and services, people rate quality based on park admission prices.

If Park #1 costs $90 to get into, but Park #2 down the street costs $60 to get into, all other things being equal, people might just assume there's more activies to do in Park #1

That of course implies direct price differences instead of offering discounts, which is really how theme parks can compete. That's the real reason why we see the kids eat free, dining plan, etc. offers.

Remember also that many families don't buy single day tickets much anymore, they buy package deals...Disney for example, you can get something like a 5 day pass for only a couple of dollars more than a 4 day pass (which is the only reason why parks like DAK get decent attendance IMO)

 

[ynnoj]

Addendum: How far in advance of an Orlando vacation does the average family plan their trip? 6 months, 1 year, 2 years???

Travelling from the UK, we usually plan/book a trip 12-18 months beforehand. However last year we booked pretty late and only had to wait 12 weeks (it was too good a deal to pass up).

My trip for fall 2014 is already in the pipeline.

 

[Ash]

We usually plan about 9 months in advance again being from the UK

 

[Brervixen]

I'm going in september this year and haven't booked yet...

 

[KRAKENvsMANTA]

Just got back from a 4 day multi-park trip. The crowds of summer are present, but will admit, they're not as ridiculous as usual. The longest wait time at UOR wasn't Spidey, Potter, or Transformers, it was a 90 min wait for Ripsaw Falls. The longest for TF I saw was 45. WDW was pretty crowded. The longest lines, no shocker, were Soarin' and Toy Story Mania, both at 100. However, the longest line in Orlando continues to be Antarctica, 120 mins! I'm curious how long before the newness of Antarctica wears off?

 

[UNIrd]

Just got back from a 4 day multi-park trip. The crowds of summer are present, but will admit, they're not as ridiculous as usual. The longest wait time at UOR wasn't Spidey, Potter, or Transformers, it was a 90 min wait for Ripsaw Falls. The longest for TF I saw was 45. WDW was pretty crowded. The longest lines, no shocker, were Soarin' and Toy Story Mania, both at 100. However, the longest line in Orlando continues to be Antarctica, 120 mins! I'm curious how long before the newness of Antarctica wears off?

I see this every summer now. How bad has the capacity dropped on this thing after the mousetrap lap bar? It was never that bad before. Now I dread it even WITH Express.

 

[jtsalien]

I see this every summer now. How bad has the capacity dropped on this thing after the mousetrap lap bar? It was never that bad before. Now I dread it even WITH Express.

Off topic tip: If you don't mind getting wet first thing in the morning, go there as your first attraction, because nobody else will I was able to ride 3 times in a row before anyone else even got in line. It was cool because they made an announcement to the effect of "Attention Mounties, our first volunteers have arrived to help Dudley" during our first loading.

 

[Hockeyman55]

Is Transformers accepting Express yet?

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

Is Transformers accepting Express yet?

It's been for quite a while now.

 

[Eric]

Transformers has been accepting Express since June 21st.

 

[TylerDurden]

This plays a little off of martymcflyy85's post and is more or less a question(s) I already have an answer to, just curious:

Would it make any sense at all for a theme park (let's call it Universal Studios) to, instead of raising prices to compete against another theme park (let's call it Disney), lower them to draw in more people and in turn make the same as the competing park if not more?

What does competing do in this case, if not draw the consumer away? I mean I'm talking a few dollars knocked off a ticket price but a few dollars goes a long way to some people. Does that make sense from a higher-up's point of view? Or does competing with parks in terms of ticket prices really bring in the crowds?

More importantly: does higher ticket prices mean less people? Or is there simply a lull in tourism at the moment?

Because the line of thinking in an industry like tourism is different than that of retail or food. Whereas you can argue McDonalds makes more money than a fancy restaurant down the line simply because of the higher volume of customers they get, theme parks dont play that way.

For one thing, theme park vacations arent quick last minute decisions like figuring out where to eat and shop...a lotttttt goes into planning your vacation destination besides just price. And for many people, a few extra bucks isnt going to deter them from taking their trip of a lifetime.

The second factor is that Universal knows this...they know that people who want to ride Transformers or see Harry Potter are going to do it and wont let 4 extra bucks stop them. So instead of trying to nab people who dont want to pay 90+ to get in, theyre going to squeeze out the extra money from those that are deadset on coming.

The other thing you also have to consider is that whos to say people who wont spend 90 dollars on admission would spend 50? Theme parks have a specific market, and its not penny-pinchers. It makes absolutely more sense, especially in the wake of all this expansion, to get as much money as possible from your true vacationers rather than lower that cost to try and get a veryyyy small amount of people who base their trips based on admission price, while still getting less from those who wouldve paid more.

 

[andrew]

This plays a little off of martymcflyy85's post and is more or less a question(s) I already have an answer to, just curious:

Would it make any sense at all for a theme park (let's call it Universal Studios) to, instead of raising prices to compete against another theme park (let's call it Disney), lower them to draw in more people and in turn make the same as the competing park if not more?

What does competing do in this case, if not draw the consumer away? I mean I'm talking a few dollars knocked off a ticket price but a few dollars goes a long way to some people. Does that make sense from a higher-up's point of view? Or does competing with parks in terms of ticket prices really bring in the crowds?

More importantly: does higher ticket prices mean less people? Or is there simply a lull in tourism at the moment?

Not sure if I am reading this right, but if I am, this is illegal (price colluding) - competing firms cannot agree to set a price with each other. Obviously admission prices are the same across Orlando theme parks, but these prices were set by the market.

I received my undergraduate degree in economics and love these types of discussion.

ChrisFL has a good point that assuming a higher admission price means the park is of a higher quality. (As a side, I think this is an issue plaguing America's higher education market: if a school costs $40,000 a year, surely it must be better than the school costing $15,000, right?) However, the higher you go, the more consumers (theme park goers) will simply drop out of the market. This message board is full of theme park fanatics that would absolutely shell out the money to go to the parks, regardless of price. However, in considering vacations for us non-theme park fans, price is a huge factor.

I haven't been to Orlando since 2002 and really want to check out Harry Potter world and Springfield. However, it would be expensive to a) fly out there, b) pay for room and board, c) pay $90 for a day in the park, and d) pay for items inside the park. I truly cannot justify a $90 park ticket to have to wait in long lines in the heat for 3-4 minute long attractions. Plus, part of my draw to Potter and Springfield is the food/beverage that is offered - another huge cost. I am one person and would only pay for myself. To spend money on a vacation for a family of 4 for a week at the parks is asking way too much, and it looks like consumers are responding (as they should in an open market). There are plenty of other places to vacation that are definitely cheaper (Washington DC, national parks, grandma and grandpa's, beaches, etc).

But to answer your question, yes, higher prices means less tickets sold. These parks may need to put a pause on raising prices or theme parks will be seen as luxury items. Think a Lexus or a boat: these are luxury items that aren't terribly expensive, but are seen as something out of reach for a lot of families.