Epic Universe Expansion Speculation

[Jake S]

HTTYD is obviously targeted at the young childrens demographic, same with SNW.

Depends on your definition of “young” haha.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

The irony in not wanting "Disney rides" at Universal is that Disney has been and is building "Universal rides" at their parks for a minute now. RoTR, GoTG, Monsters Inc door coaster, the new Cars ride, etc are all much more thrilling than the typical Disney ride people expect and do a lot to balance the parks and offer something for everyone.

But we're not talking about ride systems alone. Universal builds their attractions around Jay Bangs and other concepts while Disney has their own house style. From the person I was discussing with:

The growth market for Universal/Epic is Disney guests not already going to Universal parks because they associate Universal parks as screen-heavy or coaster-heavy, and lacking family-friendly thematic, vibe-filled attractions (Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Jungle Cruise, Fantasyland, etc., etc....). With a few more of these per park, Universal has the opportunity to drain off some of the guests from Disney resort. These tourists who already like theme parks -- generally -- and go to Orlando are such easier guests to attract than someone in their living room in Kansas who doesn't already participate.

Universal doesn't build "thematic, vibe-filled attractions" like Pirates, HM, or JC. That's Disney's wheelhouse. They never have, and likely won't (never say never). Universal's Flight of Passage would be VERY different than Disney's. That's what I'm getting at here.

And Disney isn't building Universal rides per say, they're building Disney thrill rides, with all the design considerations and that entails. I don't think anyone would say the Monsters Inc coaster is a Universal ride. And a Universal boat ride won't be "thematic, vibe-filled", it'll have Jay Bangs and something trying to kill you.

Yes, for sure....but I don't think they want to go as far as the toddlers and very young. Plus, Universal doesn't really have the right IP's for under 7's like Disney does. Disney will forever own that demo.

Seems Universal's decision to go after these kids and families is with regional parks like Kids in Texas.

 

[DrStarlander]

If it looks like this and doesn't do coaster-y things, I doubt people would think of it as a coaster as much as
the broomstick ride"

True. Because at that point it's an issue of semantics I think. People who want another coaster are, I think, mostly expecting an attraction that does coastery things. If it's doesn't do any of that, and it's only a coaster because of the style of carriage on tubular steel track, but is otherwise an all-ages / dark ride, then I think it's an all-ages / dark ride. I don't think casual guests are going by the engineering, but rather on the overall accessibility, behaviors, and content of the attraction.

For example, I think Arthur is more dark ride than coaster because it does more dark ridey things than coastery things.

Universal doesn't build "thematic, vibe-filled attractions" like Pirates, HM, or JC. That's Disney's wheelhouse. They never have, and likely won't (never say never). Universal's Flight of Passage would be VERY different than Disney's. That's what I'm getting at here.

And Disney isn't building Universal rides per say, they're building Disney thrill rides, with all the design considerations and that entails. I don't think anyone would say the Monsters Inc coaster is a Universal ride. And a Universal boat ride won't be "thematic, vibe-filled", it'll have Jay Bangs and something trying to kill you.

Saying [X company] "doesn't" do such and such is beside the point of the conversation. We're not talking about the company's history -- at least I'm not -- (and I'm not "asking" for anything of them, they can do whatever they want).

There was a time when Disney "didn't run a cruise line" or when Universal "didn't have hotels" or all sorts of periods where either company didn't pursue a certain customer or revenue stream prior to doing just that.

I'm talking about how would Comcast best ensure it shows up to quarterly calls in five or ten years and be talking about tracking to 13 to 16 million visits to each park. They're not finding 5 million new visits with more and more coasters. They can only squeeze so much juice from that lime. They need to find other customers.

 

[lowbudget]

Something no one has mentioned yet is the growth rate of children. Kids are only in the 30"-42" height range for 2-3 years. I've got 3 and took them all to Epic a few months ago. The 3 and 5 year old had a blast in Berk, we did Fyre Drill (25 min wait), Untrainable Dragon blew their minds, but neither of them had the patience to wait in line for the other rides which had a height requirement. So it doesn't matter what height requirement you've got, I'm not forcing a 6 year old to wait in line for 90 minutes for a 5 minute experience, when they'd rather watch the ice breathing dragon for 15 minutes. For reference, even at Magic Kingdom if its over 30 minute wait, we skip it and let the kids do something they can actually experience, enjoy, and remember. A day spent eye level with some stranger's butt in a boring concrete que is a horrible memory I don't want my kids to have. I'd actually wager that the parents which do make the decision to wait in line with small children actually walk out less satisfied than average, and are unlikely to come back.

Exploring the land and other walk up items was the highlight of the day, kids under 40" don't care about how many rides they do in a day, as long as they get to do some sort of ride or experience. Ride count doesn't enter into a kids thought process until they are 9-10, and the ride count = value preposition doesn't come into play until you get an appreciation for $ as a mid teenager.

I'm not saying young kids should be ignored in the park planning process, just that nothing in the 42"+ 6-60 age range appeal should be sacrificed for the 30-42" 3-6 age range.

 

[Mad Dog]

True. Because at that point it's an issue of semantics I think. People who want another coaster are, I think, mostly expecting an attraction that does coastery things. If it's doesn't do any of that, and it's only a coaster because of the style of carriage on tubular steel track, but is otherwise an all-ages / dark ride, then I think it's an all-ages / dark ride. I don't think casual guests are going by the engineering, but rather on the overall accessibility, behaviors, and content of the attraction.

For example, I think Arthur is more dark ride than coaster because it does more dark ridey things than coastery things.


Saying [X company] "doesn't" do such and such is beside the point of the conversation. We're not talking about the company's history -- at least I'm not -- (and I'm not "asking" for anything of them, they can do whatever they want).

There was a time when Disney "didn't run a cruise line" or when Universal "didn't have hotels" or all sorts of periods where either company didn't pursue a certain customer or revenue stream prior to doing just that.

I'm talking about how would Comcast best ensure it shows up to quarterly calls in five or ten years and be talking about tracking to 13 to 16 million visits to each park. They're not finding 5 million new visits with more and more coasters. They can only squeeze so much juice from that lime. They need to find other customers.

Yes, look at the corner Six Flags/Cedar Fair painted themselves in by only building basically non themed outdoor coasters and closing most of their other types of attractions. They went all in on teenage/early twenties demographic that is declining in numbers relative to the population as a whole. They'll never get out of that jam unless they get deep pockets that'll build non coaster new attractions, and that's not going to happen.

 

[Alicia]

Something no one has mentioned yet is the growth rate of children. Kids are only in the 30"-42" height range for 2-3 years. I've got 3 and took them all to Epic a few months ago. The 3 and 5 year old had a blast in Berk, we did Fyre Drill (25 min wait), Untrainable Dragon blew their minds, but neither of them had the patience to wait in line for the other rides which had a height requirement. So it doesn't matter what height requirement you've got, I'm not forcing a 6 year old to wait in line for 90 minutes for a 5 minute experience, when they'd rather watch the ice breathing dragon for 15 minutes. For reference, even at Magic Kingdom if its over 30 minute wait, we skip it and let the kids do something they can actually experience, enjoy, and remember. A day spent eye level with some stranger's butt in a boring concrete que is a horrible memory I don't want my kids to have. I'd actually wager that the parents which do make the decision to wait in line with small children actually walk out less satisfied than average, and are unlikely to come back.

Exploring the land and other walk up items was the highlight of the day, kids under 40" don't care about how many rides they do in a day, as long as they get to do some sort of ride or experience. Ride count doesn't enter into a kids thought process until they are 9-10, and the ride count = value preposition doesn't come into play until you get an appreciation for $ as a mid teenager.

I'm not saying young kids should be ignored in the park planning process, just that nothing in the 42"+ 6-60 age range appeal should be sacrificed for the 30-42" 3-6 age range.

Yup.

My 2-year old’s favorite ride is currently the “Donald Duck Boat Ride” in Epcot.

We let her ride it over and over, because it never has a wait. She’d rather ride that 12 times in one day than wait an hour in line to meet Mickey Mouse.

If I took her to Epic I bet she’d spend more than half the day in Dragons, alternating between Fyre Drill and the play area. And as fun as Yoshi may be for her, which she is ALREADY tall enough for at her age, I wouldn’t force her to wait more than 25 mins for it. (And even once we do, she’s just gonna ask to ride it again and again and get frustrated when we either tell her no or the waiting in line takes too long.)

Spending hours marathoning Gran Fiesta Tour on your Epcot day probably isn’t something most guests do, but we know she’s having an amazing day and that’s what matters.

She’s two. She doesn’t know what other rides there are. She’d be happy running through Astronomica all day if we let her.

 

[OrlLover]

Yes, look at the corner Six Flags/Cedar Fair painted themselves in by only building basically non themed outdoor coasters and closing most of their other types of attractions. They went all in on teenage/early twenties demographic that is declining in numbers relative to the population as a whole. They'll never get out of that jam unless they get deep pockets that'll build non coaster new attractions, and that's not going to happen.

While I agree to an extent I don’t think that’s the big reason why they have had several issues over the years.

Bad management is more like it in my opinion.

Cedar Fair always did a lot better than Six Flags I believe.

 

[DrStarlander]

I'm not saying young kids should be ignored in the park planning process, just that nothing in the 42"+ 6-60 age range appeal should be sacrificed for the 30-42" 3-6 age range.

I think the non-attraction stuff is really import for sure. But regarding attractions (which I do think are important in the marketing/messaging to attract families in the first place), as far as investment trade-offs, they can build six (or more), say, $50 million Fantasyland-style dark rides that will fully satisfy parents, grandparents, and young kids for the cost of one big attraction for adults.

The entire Kids Resort is supposedly $550 million, presumably including the hotel, parking lot and other overall site infrastructure. That's not far off what these companies are spending on a single attraction nowadays. Getting parents to bring their young kids is an on-ramp to an annuity of revisitation and lifetime brand loyalty. Every year they wait to attract them for the first time, is an opportunity for another company to steal that heart-share (is that a business term or did I just make that up?).

 

[fryoj]

If it looks like this and doesn't do coaster-y things, I doubt people would think of it as a coaster as much as
the broomstick ride"

My wife refuses to ride coasters. Won't even get in line with me for them. She'd have panic attacks back when she'd still ride them with me.

But she'll ride gringotts and Hagrids. Cause they're Potter.

So here's hoping for a broom stratacoaster!

 

[Mad Dog]

My wife refuses to ride coasters. Won't even get in line with me for them. She'd have panic attacks back when she'd still ride them with me.

But she'll ride gringotts and Hagrids. Cause they're Potter.

So here's hoping for a broom stratacoaster!

My wife's similar. She'll ride the indoor coasters and Hagrids but rarely ever the other outdoor coasters. One problem with too many coasters is that they block a lot of guests from enjoying the park fully. OK to have a few, but when it's a high percentage of the rides the park can become a tad unbalanced. ....One reason the Disney & Universal parks do so well is that they offer a wide range of attraction types, and a wide demographic mix.

 

[jseal777]

Mario Galaxy Space Mountain?

 

[HHN Maddux]

Mario Galaxy Space Mountain?

This would be a dream come true. An indoor Comet Observatory is used as the queue, and imagine a launch star effect being used for a launch, and using Cosmic Rewind-style screens it feels like you're flying with Lumas through galaxies.