Universal Announces Texas Resort

[Comped]

If you're not familiar with Frisco, it's new urban sprawl that converted over the past 10-15 years open fields to concrete and strip malls.

I'm very aware. Almost moved there and still keep in touch with a client I had out that way.

 

[Stripes]

I've been hearing concern from throughout the industry on how city-driven the requirements for this resort are, and how they may be setting up this park to fail. With HHN in Vegas seemingly a mediocre success at best (making Chicago an open question for me personally), they have to hit it out of the park with this one. But it seems like the restrictions Frisco put them under are going to make that very difficult.

The public comment on the project at the Frisco city council meetings was brutal. As one would expect, the residents were furious about the project. I have family that actually sold their house and got out of Frisco, with the new park being a significant contributing factor in their decision.

 

[Comped]

The public comment on the project at the Frisco city council meetings was brutal. As one would expect, the residents were furious about the project. I have family that actually sold their house and got out of Frisco, with the new park being a significant contributing factor in their decision.

You're not wrong, but it still makes it incredibly difficult to see this park succeeding long term. My sources I've talked to who live in the area are furious about many of the restrictions, but recognize they are in the minority. I've heard some stories about the backroom discussions surrounding the deal that are... interesting to say the least. It's not the regional idea the city needs (a DisneyQuest type deal would have worked well), but Universal saw promise for some reason. Christ, Grapevine would have been a better choice if they could get the land...

 

[CoastalElite64]

The pricing will make or break this park. Considering it's limited appeal it needs to be very affordable.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I’m sure it will do fine, but fine is inconsequential to the company. It’s meant to be a model to replicate domestically.

My bigger concern is brand erosion. This is generating way more excitement for again what is ostensibly a legoland/sesame place that is going to feel like a third party operator licensing out their properties instead of the other way around.

The yin to Epic’s yang and that’s not a good thing, I feel, for the direction of their destination business.

This is very much my feeling about the park. It is an interesting marketing challenge to try and manage expectations by clearly communicating the message that the new Universal park opening in Texas isn't what most people imagine when they think of a Universal park, but instead something a lot smaller, less elaborate, and more narrowly aimed at small children.

Considering how much buzz it is generating online from well-informed theme park fans, I can't help but imagine they are going to struggle out of the gate with people accepting it is aimed at smaller children but still expecting an experience closer in quality to what they would find in Orlando or Hollywood. If people do drive 4-6 hours to this resort with those expectations as some are suggesting, that could also have a boomerang effect on how they perceive the brand as a whole.

It strikes me that the venture will work if there is enough business within about a 1-2 hour radius from families looking for something to do with their children who might otherwise go to the zoo, etc.

 

[Andrew C]

The pricing will make or break this park. Considering it's limited appeal it needs to be very affordable.

Nah. It’s doesn’t.

 

[networkpro]

I'm very aware. Almost moved there and still keep in touch with a client I had out that way.

I almost relocated to our Frisco office, but thankfully did not as Covid transplants have made the DFW area unpleasant with even more sprawl. We sold one ranch because it got ringed with subdivisions and was no longer quiet.

 

[flynnibus]

Considering how much buzz it is generating online from well-informed theme park fans, I can't help but imagine they are going to struggle out of the gate with people accepting it is aimed at smaller children but still expecting an experience closer in quality to what they would find in Orlando or Hollywood. If people do drive 4-6 hours to this resort with those expectations as some are suggesting, that could also have a boomerang effect on how they perceive the brand as a whole.

It's much like LegoLand or Seaseme St Place.. managing expectations there has been achievable.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

It's much like LegoLand or Seaseme St Place.. managing expectations there has been achievable.

Sure, but they have only ever been on the same scale. This is more akin to Disney opening a new park somewhere else in the United States on this scale; they, like Universal, would have to be very careful to make sure people didn't expect something on the scale of the parks at all the other resorts. Disney indeed had a similar problem opening a smaller-scale Disneyland in Hong Kong thinking the locals wouldn't compare it to the parks elsewhere, which, of course, they did.

 

[flynnibus]

Sure, but they have only ever been on the same scale. This is more akin to Disney opening a new park somewhere else in the United States on this scale; they, like Universal, would have to be very careful to make sure people didn't expect something on the scale of the parks at all the other resorts. Disney indeed had a similar problem opening a smaller-scale Disneyland in Hong Kong thinking the locals wouldn't compare it to the parks elsewhere, which, of course, they did.

I think that's stretching... HK was in fact another castle park.. of course it's going to be hard to avoid comparisons when it's the same thing, that has been done multiple times, and you get the worst version that is the same.. yet has pieces missing.

Uni isn't building Universal Studios here.. sure you will get some that fail to make that distinction, but when we're talking about how they market it, it will be easy to distinguish between a park made for <10yr olds and Islands of Adventure...

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Uni isn't building Universal Studios here.. sure you will get some that fail to make that distinction, but when we're talking about how they market it, it will be easy to distinguish between a park made for <10yr olds and Islands of Adventure...

I guess we'll see. I think it would be a challenge for either Universal or Disney to launch a theme park on a very different scale and pitched at a different audience than those on which they have built their brand, but maybe you're right and consumers will mostly just get the difference and not compare them.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I guess we'll see. I think it would be a challenge for either Universal or Disney to launch a theme park on a very different scale and pitched at a different audience than those on which they have built their brand, but maybe you're right and consumers will mostly just get the difference and not compare them.

Nah you are correct, they will expect what anyone expects from a Universal or Disney park. Not to be rude but in general, consumers are kinda... thick. Not theme park fans, but the general public. They still can't differentiate between Disneyworld and Universal Orlando, and which parks have what experiences.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

Nah you are correct, they will expect what anyone expects from a Universal or Disney park. Not to be rude but in general, consumers are kinda... thick. Not theme park fans, but the general public. They still can't differentiate between Disneyworld and Universal Orlando, and which parks have what experiences.

You mean the ones that ask the CM’s what time the 2:00 parade starts? Lol

 

[BrianLo]

I think that's stretching... HK was in fact another castle park.. of course it's going to be hard to avoid comparisons when it's the same thing, that has been done multiple times, and you get the worst version that is the same.. yet has pieces missing.

Uni isn't building Universal Studios here.. sure you will get some that fail to make that distinction, but when we're talking about how they market it, it will be easy to distinguish between a park made for <10yr olds and Islands of Adventure...

It’s a business in parallel rather than one I can really draw a straight line to. DCL and Aulani appeal to a certain subsection of Disney loyalists. The Vegas and Chicago houses likewise.

This is more like a parallel product that doesn’t really correlate or appeal to the same demographic in meaningful ways other than its IP and tangentially another version of amusement parks. That’s why I say it feels like Universal has licensed out their IP to another operator than really something that feels like a logical business move for them to make.

It may very well be a successful business venture. Though I don’t get what the synergy is achieving off their current destination portfolio.

 

[Disney Analyst]

It’s a business in parallel rather than one I can really draw a straight line to. DCL and Aulani appeal to a certain subsection of Disney loyalists. The Vegas and Chicago houses likewise.

This is more like a parallel product that doesn’t really correlate or appeal to the same demographic in meaningful ways other than its IP and tangentially another version of amusement parks. That’s why I say it feels like Universal has licensed out their IP to another operator than really something that feels like a logical business move for them to make.

It may very well be a successful business venture. Though I don’t get what the synergy is achieving off their current destination portfolio.

I wonder if they’d have made more money investing in a family friendly park in Orlando, or making their current parks more family friendly

Time will tell!

 

[flynnibus]

It may very well be a successful business venture. Though I don’t get what the synergy is achieving off their current destination portfolio.

Maybe they see it as a feeder kind of product. Hook the kids younger...
Maybe they see it as a way to expand without needing the same level of capital investment...
Maybe it's a strategy to tier their offerings...
Maybe it's a dip your toes attempt..

What we do know is UNI is an experienced park operator - so they should be able to make smart decisions on what it means to operate something vs just collect licensing fees. Now, they still gotta predict the market right.. but the company isn't a noob. Just hope they put good people on it so they don't make noob mistakes.

People increasingly want 'experiences' and the prices being charged make a full day Disney ticket look like a steal at times. $40-70 for experiences that don't even last a half day isn't uncommon.

The product isn't for me or my family at all - but I'm not down on the concept enough to think they are dumb to try.. it just seems like an expensive try. But somethings just have to be 'big enough' to be minimally viable too.. gotta pay to play..

 

[BrianLo]

Maybe they see it as a feeder kind of product. Hook the kids younger...

That’s the one area that I’m not sure I am sold on yet, but frequently cited. 6% of visitors to Tokyo Disney come from the Osaka region and that’s a 3H bullet train. I’m not sure a fraction (those who travel to the destinations) of a fraction (those who properly correlate the products) of… a fraction (a tiny capacity-wise regional park) makes a lick of difference to Universal Orlando resort. I’d imagine a huge percentage of domestic DCL guests have gone to the parks on the other hand.

Maybe they see it as a way to expand without needing the same level of capital investment...
Maybe it's a strategy to tier their offerings...
Maybe it's a dip your toes attempt..

I think this is it. A way of leveraging their properties into a lower point of entry regional market. A parallel product. I don’t think it’s entirely stupid, I just think it isn’t synergistic and not their best play toward their strengths.

I don’t entirely want to say Disney has it figured out, but I’m a bit flabbergasted Universal is chasing specifically the child regional market. Not Disney, not Royal, not Cedar Fair, not even their own licensed out hotels… but Merlin? A regional child friendly (not demographically exclusive) park could have still gotten into the highly lucrative HHN after hours business.

Instead we seem to be getting DreamWorks Land - The Regional Park. It does at least continue to make Comcast even more differentiated than The Disney Company than the forum goers here think.

 

[sedati]

I wouldn't expect it to compare with the regular parks, but I did expect to see Universal raise the bar over what Lego offers and this art work at best seems comparable or even a step-down sadly.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I don’t entirely want to say Disney has it figured out, but I’m a bit flabbergasted Universal is chasing specifically the child regional market. Not Disney, not Royal, not Cedar Fair

Now there's an idea...

Build regional resorts near their most visited cruise ports

People are already encouraged to get there the day before so they don't miss their sailing, why not another extra night or two? Bundle it with the cruise and get a discount. Do something akin to Great Wolf Lodge, but better...

No need to worry about getting a transfer or Uber from the hotel to port, have that included

Wouldn't have considered that until you mentioned that name

 

[BrianLo]

Now there's an idea...

Build regional resorts near their most visited cruise ports

Indeed and that's kind of what Royal is doing. They are somewhat backwardly turning into a land based water park operator. I've long said that Royal is increasingly becoming the major third player and in some ways already does better chase Disney's younger demo. Universal is just dipping their toe in barely with a regional offering.

I think their next natural step is having a hotel at their private destination that guests disembark at and embark a different ship to head back. Or, as you say, lean more to pre-post cruise experiences.

As a further aside, Disney needs to get into their own cruise-destination water park.