Universal Orlando Resort Expansion News (Part 2)

[RFRees]

Be realistic, building a new park costs a ton of money. There is grading the land, infrastructure, designing the park, building it, parking, a hotel or 2. So, realistically (and as mentioned before), this park won't be 100% filled and finished when it opens (like every theme park in the world). I'm sure what is being build will be amazing and give you enough for a decently filled day when it's crowded. The amount you get out of it difference on how deep you want to dive in the experience but I think it will be 60% (at best) when comparing it to USF or IOA.
So over the years Universal likely will fill in the empty lots, tweak their rides and add and replace rides at USF and IOA. All this to keep guests coming back to all parks.
Taking all this in account it's ignorant to even think about yet another park. Will it one day be there, probably, will I still be alive when it opens? Probably not.

Using your logic, Universal wouldn't have opened two parks within 10 years in the 90s, Disney wouldn't have opened two parks in that same time frame, Universal wouldn't be eyeing two or three parks in Beijing.

I'm not saying you don't have some accuracies in your post: it's a lot of time and investment to build a theme park. It's also possible they have an unfinished Fantastic Worlds. It's also possible that they don't build a fourth park soon. But to suggest we're ignorant for suggesting it's possible they are eyeing land for future development soon after Fantastic Worlds is factually inaccurate.

It's really a matter of red light (stop) and green light (go)...
1) Fantastic Worlds is considered a "finished park" - green light
2) IOA/USF/FW have good average attendance (let's say, 9-10 million) - green light
3) Comcast continues to see profit from their investment in theme parks - green light
4) The global economy is doing well and tourism is still booming - green light

Now, even if they have the green light, you can suggest it takes time... But I don't think anyone is suggesting this is for sure going to be built immediately after FW. The most people are suggesting is they have the land, capital, ability, to possibly build within ten years 2033 - 2035). Is that for sure? No... Just that it's possible... Possibly planned, factually possible.

 

[Happytycho]

It appears that the large utilities development plan was approved today by the Development Review Committee.

Now we wait for Universal to apply for building/construction permits.

 

[tielo]

Using your logic, Universal wouldn't have opened two parks within 10 years in the 90s, Disney wouldn't have opened two parks in that same time frame, Universal wouldn't be eyeing two or three parks in Beijing.

I'm not saying you don't have some accuracies in your post: it's a lot of time and investment to build a theme park. It's also possible they have an unfinished Fantastic Worlds. It's also possible that they don't build a fourth park soon. But to suggest we're ignorant for suggesting it's possible they are eyeing land for future development soon after Fantastic Worlds is factually inaccurate.

It's really a matter of red light (stop) and green light (go)...
1) Fantastic Worlds is considered a "finished park" - green light
2) IOA/USF/FW have good average attendance (let's say, 9-10 million) - green light
3) Comcast continues to see profit from their investment in theme parks - green light
4) The global economy is doing well and tourism is still booming - green light

Now, even if they have the green light, you can suggest it takes time... But I don't think anyone is suggesting this is for sure going to be built immediately after FW. The most people are suggesting is they have the land, capital, ability, to possibly build within ten years 2033 - 2035). Is that for sure? No... Just that it's possible... Possibly planned, factually possible.

Only fact we have is that they are building a new theme park, 1 new theme park. Lets focus on that, that's all I'm saying. The rest could be anything but it's counterproductive and tiresome imho.

 

[RFRees]

Only fact we have is that they are building a new theme park, 1 new theme park. Lets focus on that, that's all I'm saying. The rest could be anything but it's counterproductive and tiresome imho.

Land, profit, attendance levels, historical precedence, tourism trends, are all facts.

"Do they have enough space in this area for future development of a fourth dry park?" is an example of a 100% reasonable facts based question for this thread. Trying to nail down which IPs or an exact year might be silly, but there's a ton of reasonable discussion for Universals expansion space beyond just focusing on Fantastic Worlds.

But you know... Agree to disagree.

 

[GA-MBIT]

I just think it’s really cool that for the first time in almost 2 decades we’ll be able to watch a huge A-list amusement park appear out of nothing in real time. That hasn’t happened in so long, and honestly it may never happen again, at least in Orlando. I say let’s worry about any potential 4th parks later and just enjoy talking about this one for a bit. It’s not everyday you get a brand new park growing in your backyard.

 

[zg44]

The biggest difference between 2020+ and prior theme park openings is that the Orlando theme park/vacation market is now a mature and fully developed market.

Orlando has become perhaps the top destination in the US, comparable to Vegas/NYC and other tourist locations; the top parks are all operating at record or near-record attendance levels.


Nobody really knows what the early attendance figures will look like for Fantastic Worlds. I wouldn't be shocked if it opened to around 6-7 million guests (annualized to account for not being open full year) in its first year.


If this was the year 2000, a reasonable estimate would be around 3-4 million guests for the first year. I'd imagine that Comcast/NBCU execs have much higher expectations now due to how much larger the market is now, and there's the fact that Universal's current resort is operating with much stronger numbers and between UOR and FW will have around 11,000+ hotel rooms when the 3rd dry park opens.


All of the above should make it very easy for FW to catch USF/IoA in attendance over a relatively short period of time (3-5 years?), and that's when the future expansion questions get interesting. But of course, all of this is a discussion for 2025 and beyond when we start seeing some actual performance data.

 

[Mike S]

The biggest difference between 2020+ and prior theme park openings is that the Orlando theme park/vacation market is now a mature and fully developed market.

Orlando has become perhaps the top destination in the US, comparable to Vegas/NYC and other tourist locations; the top parks are all operating at record or near-record attendance levels.


Nobody really knows what the early attendance figures will look like for Fantastic Worlds. I wouldn't be shocked if it opened to around 6-7 million guests (annualized to account for not being open full year) in its first year.


If this was the year 2000, a reasonable estimate would be around 3-4 million guests for the first year. I'd imagine that Comcast/NBCU execs have much higher expectations now due to how much larger the market is now, and there's the fact that Universal's current resort is operating with much stronger numbers and between UOR and FW will have around 11,000+ hotel rooms when the 3rd dry park opens.


All of the above should make it very easy for FW to catch USF/IoA in attendance over a relatively short period of time (3-5 years?), and that's when the future expansion questions get interesting. But of course, all of this is a discussion for 2025 and beyond when we start seeing some actual performance data.

I remember hearing that like 10 years ago being used as an excuse for why Disney wasn’t adding stuff. Good times, good times.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

FW should have large attendance numbers north of 4 mil in its first year. What Universal is interested in is if their hotel occupancy goes up (which it should) and if people are spending more time on their property, or just spending the same amount of time but spread between the three parks.

 

[RFRees]

The biggest difference between 2020+ and prior theme park openings is that the Orlando theme park/vacation market is now a mature and fully developed market.

I understand this is the biggest reason why people hesitate to speak about a fifth Disney park or fourth Universal park, but the counter point is there is no law in nature (or economics) which states "this is what a mature fully developed market looks like."

Many thought the movie and television industry was fully developed in the 90s. Compare that to the amount of media to today... It has multiplied by hundreds or thousands.

I saw one article basically say "Disney won't add a fifth park because no tourist can go to five parks on one vacation." That's as logical as saying "a restaurant wouldn't have more than one entree on their menu because no one can eat two in one visit." Netflix/YouTube has more media than you'll ever be able to consume, restaurants as well, why do people feel this is a strict law for theme parks? I believe theme parks and their rides will be like a menu of options to choose from for your vacation, and maybe you'll come back for more.

But I agree with the rest of your post.

(Side note, I'll step back from talking about this. I know I've posted several times on this topic already and it's diverting a bit away from the overall point of this thread.)

 

[Nick]

I understand this is the biggest reason why people hesitate to speak about a fifth Disney park or fourth Universal park, but the counter point is there is no law in nature (or economics) which states "this is what a mature fully developed market looks like."

Many thought the movie and television industry was fully developed in the 90s. Compare that to the amount of media to today... It has multiplied by hundreds or thousands.

I saw one article basically say "Disney won't add a fifth park because no tourist can go to five parks on one vacation." That's as logical as saying "a restaurant wouldn't have more than one entree on their menu because no one can eat two in one visit." Netflix/YouTube has more media than you'll ever be able to consume, restaurants as well, why do people feel this is a strict law for theme parks? I believe theme parks and their rides will be like a menu of options to choose from for your vacation, and maybe you'll come back for more.

But I agree with the rest of your post.

(Side note, I'll step back from talking about this. I know I've posted several times on this topic already and it's diverting a bit away from the overall point of this thread.)

Theme parks are expensive to build, staff and operate - user generated content on YouTube? Not so much. Any company needs to be sure that the demand is there and that it can be profitable before committing to a new park.

 

[RFRees]

Theme parks are expensive to build, staff and operate - user generated content on YouTube? Not so much. Any company needs to be sure that the demand is there and that it can be profitable before committing to a new park.

Maybe YouTube was a bad example. I stand by the rest of my post.

I mention in earlier posts (several times) that I believe Universal will do full research on market/demand, test the waters with FW, etc, before moving forward.

 

[zg44]

I understand this is the biggest reason why people hesitate to speak about a fifth Disney park or fourth Universal park, but the counter point is there is no law in nature (or economics) which states "this is what a mature fully developed market looks like."

Many thought the movie and television industry was fully developed in the 90s. Compare that to the amount of media to today... It has multiplied by hundreds or thousands.

I saw one article basically say "Disney won't add a fifth park because no tourist can go to five parks on one vacation." That's as logical as saying "a restaurant wouldn't have more than one entree on their menu because no one can eat two in one visit." Netflix/YouTube has more media than you'll ever be able to consume, restaurants as well, why do people feel this is a strict law for theme parks? I believe theme parks and their rides will be like a menu of options to choose from for your vacation, and maybe you'll come back for more.

But I agree with the rest of your post.

(Side note, I'll step back from talking about this. I know I've posted several times on this topic already and it's diverting a bit away from the overall point of this thread.)

That's not what I mean; I mean a "developed market" versus a "growth market" in terms of the context of speed of growth versus overall size of market.

In that context, Orlando is now a developed market as a tourism area, it's now attained a size similar to NYC or Vegas in terms of overall visitors/airport usage/hotel rooms as well as shifted to lower growth as a result of becoming so large.


The overall theme park system won't shift as much in the future as it has in the past simply because of how large attendance numbers are at the parks now. The parks themselves are starting to reach levels that restrict future growth.


Movies and television both fit that kind of definition as well depending on the scope of market that you're discussing. The movie business and tv business are both extremely mature and declining markets depending on the context used (i.e. if you're talking about movie theaters or pay tv). Conversely, the streaming on-demand market for media is a growth market that's largely undeveloped with at least a good 10-15 years of good growth ahead of it.

Just look at movie theater attendance which declines annually (overall $ are propped up by increased prices), and the same is true of live television which is seeing cord cutting/shaving ravage the business.


Overall, these things aren't really too important for this discussion because we're talking about something relatively unique like expanding supply and expecting demand for a single extra theme park in Orlando. I happen to think that there is enough demand for 4 Universal dry parks, but it will take a while to get there, probably at least 10-12 years if it is to happen.

 

[RFRees]

That's not what I mean; I mean a "developed market" versus a "growth market" in terms of the context of speed of growth versus overall size of market.

In that context, Orlando is now a developed market as a tourism area, it's now attained a size similar to NYC or Vegas in terms of overall visitors/airport usage/hotel rooms as well as shifted to lower growth as a result of becoming so large.


The overall theme park system won't shift as much in the future as it has in the past simply because of how large attendance numbers are at the parks now. The parks themselves are starting to reach levels that restrict future growth.


Movies and television both fit that kind of definition as well depending on the scope of market that you're discussing. The movie business and tv business are both extremely mature and declining markets depending on the context used (i.e. if you're talking about movie theaters or pay tv). Conversely, the streaming on-demand market for media is a growth market that's largely undeveloped with at least a good 10-15 years of good growth ahead of it.

Just look at movie theater attendance which declines annually (overall $ are propped up by increased prices), and the same is true of live television which is seeing cord cutting/shaving ravage the business.


Overall, these things aren't really too important for this discussion because we're talking about something relatively unique like expanding supply and expecting demand for a single extra theme park in Orlando. I happen to think that there is enough demand for 4 Universal dry parks, but it will take a while to get there, probably at least 10-12 years if it is to happen.

100% agree, thanks for the clarification.

 

[WolverineinMichigan]

Being a Marketing Director and armed with a ton of data in my job, I can state that it'll be a numbers driven game. (I am also a Master of the Obvious!)

Somewhere in the land of attendance, market share growth, per capita spending and how well Comcast is doing financially is a sweet spot that allows for the fourth dry park to come to fruition. I would agree that it is a long way off (a minimum of 15 years) and a 2nd water park will come before the 4th dry park.

On a tangentially related subject... Has anyone heard anything in re: the status of the Stan Thomas foreclosure/sale land that was supposed to be available around May 10?

 

[Viator]

On a tangentially related subject... Has anyone heard anything in re: the status of the Stan Thomas foreclosure/sale land that was supposed to be available around May 10?

I'm actually surprised that no-one hasn't brought that up yet. As usually, either @zg44 or @Happytycho would've brought something up on that, as done from the past.

 

[Happytycho]

On a tangentially related subject... Has anyone heard anything in re: the status of the Stan Thomas foreclosure/sale land that was supposed to be available around May 10?

I'm actually surprised that no-one hasn't brought that up yet. As usually, either @zg44 or @Happytycho would've brought something up on that, as done from the past.

I too am anxious to hear more.

I haven't seen any evidence of an official sale in my public records searches, and the foreclosure case hasn't seemed to make much progress either.

I think @RichOBJ was the one who broke the story - perhaps he has heard some follow-up?

 

[zg44]

On a tangentially related subject... Has anyone heard anything in re: the status of the Stan Thomas foreclosure/sale land that was supposed to be available around May 10?

It appears that Stan Thomas' repurchase option on the Orlando land has expired given that May 10, 2019 has passed, but we have to wait a couple of days to see if there's a time-lag between any transaction and filing of paperwork.

June 1 was the deadline in the bankruptcy case that Stan Thomas is involved in at the moment which is why he was trying to sell the Orlando land prior to that.


As far as the Orlando land goes, CPR Money only agreed not to sell the land before May 1, 2019. My hunch is that nobody offered more than Stan Thomas' debts on the lands, that's why we haven't seen an agreed upon sale. Stan Thomas was only planning to exercise his purchase option if he could immediately flip the land for more than the debts on it.

But if the offer price was less than the debts, then he'd probably just cede the land to CPR Money. (All this is my speculation, but I think it should be accurate based upon what's going on with Stan Thomas' foreclosure case in Nashville.)


Basically, as of now, CPR Money can sell the land to whomever they want since it doesn't appear that Stan Thomas exercised his purchase option. I believe that CPR Money has sought out buyers (to bid against Comcast presumably), so we should be hearing more pretty soon.

I'd guess that a purchase happens in the next couple of months, unless they change their mind and decide to keep it.

 

[brainleech419]

It appears that Stan Thomas' repurchase option on the Orlando land has expired given that May 10, 2019 has passed, but we have to wait a couple of days to see if there's a time-lag between any transaction and filing of paperwork.

June 1 was the deadline in the bankruptcy case that Stan Thomas is involved in at the moment which is why he was trying to sell the Orlando land prior to that.


As far as the Orlando land goes, CPR Money only agreed not to sell the land before May 1, 2019. My hunch is that nobody offered more than Stan Thomas' debts on the lands, that's why we haven't seen an agreed upon sale. Stan Thomas was only planning to exercise his purchase option if he could immediately flip the land for more than the debts on it.

But if the offer price was less than the debts, then he'd probably just cede the land to CPR Money. (All this is my speculation, but I think it should be accurate based upon what's going on with Stan Thomas' foreclosure case in Nashville.)


Basically, as of now, CPR Money can sell the land to whomever they want since it doesn't appear that Stan Thomas exercised his purchase option. I believe that CPR Money has sought out buyers (to bid against Comcast presumably), so we should be hearing more pretty soon.

I'd guess that a purchase happens in the next couple of months, unless they change their mind and decide to keep it.

which land was that ?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Hey all,

We've been pretty bad at enforcing the split between this thread and the blue sky thread but we need to start enforcing this as work picks up. I have been just as guilty as anyone else.

Use this thread for news and updates on Universal Orlando expansions. The Blue Sky thread is for speculation, rumors, and conjecture.

Thanks,

 

[Viator]