What's new

Would the UK benefit from a lot less theme parks?

slappy mcguire

Mega Poster
While by no means underfunded, Big UK parks seem to spend less on new rides than their American or European counterparts. The most likely reason seeming to be the number of parks compared to number of visitors being far inferior, and therefore it makes it economically unviable for the larger companies, like Merlin to invest similar sums than the likes of Disney. So question is, would the UK be better off with a few less parks, to warrant better themed, or more impressive rides?
 
Probably, giving the current economic crisis in Britain, nothing will happen either way but if your idea Happens and all the small parks are shut, I think the other way, the money should go to the little parks, not to the big ones.
 
Complete and utter bollocks for a variety of reasons.

1. The major UK parks tend to spend just as much, if not more, money on major new attractions as their US counterparts (you can't compare them with Disney/Universal as they're in a completely different league when it comes to visitor numbers); we just seem to get a fair bit "less" for our money.

2. Again, taking Disney/Universal out of the equation, which you have to since they are not comparable to Merlin, the most popular UK parks attract similar numbers of visitors to their US equivalents. For example, Alton Towers attracted 2,650,000 visitors last year (guessing higher again this year thanks to 13), which is not far off Cedar Point (2,900,000), and higher than the majority of Six Flags parks (2,500,000 at Magic Mountain in that same year).

3. Ok, so how about Europe? Only 8 parks attracted more visitors than Alton in 2009 (it was only 5,000 short of Disney Studios), and even Thorpe Park attracted more visitors than a lot of the "heavy hitters", like Park Asterix, Mirabilandia and Heide to name just a few.

4. If we lose the small parks, then the bigger ones (let's face it, we're talking Merlin here) have even less incentive to spend money on new attractions, as the park-going public would have even less choice. It would have the complete opposite effect of your idea that it would "warrant better themed, or more impressive rides.

Sorry, but you have just pulled this whole idea out of your arse without looking into/thinking about it at all. Smaller parks closing would be nothing but disastrous for the industry as a whole.

Edit - Here's the information for the 2009 park figures:http://www.aecom.com/deployedfiles/.../2009 Theme Index Final 042710_for screen.pdf
 
and of course - a good share of the new european rides from recent years have been at the small parks - troy at toverland, el toro at plohn, piraten at djurs,
 
The creative minds at Merlin certainly want to be considered in the same league as Disney. At Merlin Studios they have images up of Merlin the wizard zapping Mickey Mouse, I am not kidding. Merlin are the largest amusement company behind Disney, but they are behind by miles and miles and will never, ever catch up, but it's awesome that they are aiming high and there are definitely a few high-quality creatives, who even have experience as Imagineers, working at Merlin. Merlin Studios will never get the funding they would need to do Disney-scale and quality attractions, and in a way I'm glad, because it forces different and quintessentially "Tussauds" creative solutions. We don't need more Disney's in the world.

When you think that, like Gavin pointed out, Alton Towers ain't far behind the gate figures Cedar Point gets you realise what a seriously important park Alton is.
 
^ Is Merlin still the second largest theme park operator if you only take into account their theme parks? Or does that statistic only work if you include the London Eye, Dungeons etc?
 
^I think Merlin count the Midway attractions in their total... I would say I'm 99% sure about that as they do go on about them...
 
rickydoodle said:
^ Is Merlin still the second largest theme park operator if you only take into account their theme parks? Or does that statistic only work if you include the London Eye, Dungeons etc?
I'm not sure! Who else would potentially take second? I think they class themselves as an amusement attractions company, so one would assume that includes all of their attractions. The real question is what does "largest" mean? I assume revenue? It's worth noting that they are also the most visited amusement park company after Disney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_am ... ce_figures
 
Joey said:
rickydoodle said:
^ Is Merlin still the second largest theme park operator if you only take into account their theme parks? Or does that statistic only work if you include the London Eye, Dungeons etc?
I'm not sure! Who else would potentially take second? I think they class themselves as an amusement attractions company, so one would assume that includes all of their attractions. The real question is what does "largest" mean? I assume revenue? It's worth noting that they are also the most visited amusement park company after Disney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_am ... ce_figures

I actually think they define "largest" by the visitor numbers. Techincally Merlin have a few more gated attractions then Disney however Disney probably covers far far more land mass. I couldn't say 100% but I do remember them (Merlin) jumping at the chance to use the '2nd only to Disney' point the first time it came about in the Attendence Report thing.

And yes, I have seen the images of the wizard zapping a rather crudely drawn Mickey Mouse. I do wonder what Disney would create as a counter-image :p
 
Mark said:
Joey said:
rickydoodle said:
^ Is Merlin still the second largest theme park operator if you only take into account their theme parks? Or does that statistic only work if you include the London Eye, Dungeons etc?
I'm not sure! Who else would potentially take second? I think they class themselves as an amusement attractions company, so one would assume that includes all of their attractions. The real question is what does "largest" mean? I assume revenue? It's worth noting that they are also the most visited amusement park company after Disney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_am ... ce_figures

I actually think they define "largest" by the visitor numbers. Techincally Merlin have a few more gated attractions then Disney however Disney probably covers far far more land mass. I couldn't say 100% but I do remember them (Merlin) jumping at the chance to use the '2nd only to Disney' point the first time it came about in the Attendence Report thing.

And yes, I have seen the images of the wizard zapping a rather crudely drawn Mickey Mouse. I do wonder what Disney would create as a counter-image :p
They'd not waste their time. They'd lol.

Wiki reports second largest and second most visited as separate things. Not that this means anything, but I assume largest means overall revenue.

That Spanish company which comes after 4th also has a tonne of non-theme parks, such as zoos and aquaria. Don't think this is a coincidence, I think Merlin are counting ALL attractions to make their "largest" title.

Regardless, it's impressive that a theme park like Alton Towers gains almost the same visitors as the "world's largest amusement park" and I think Merlin shouldn't be laughed off. They aren't Disney and as long as they don't make the mistake of trying to be a **** version of Disney, they will go on to make magnificent and unique attractions.

I can't find a company, except Disney, who outdoes Merlins £700million+ revenue. None really come close, yet Disney is miles ahead into the billions.
 
How many parks have Merlin built from ground up though? All they have done is taken over parks where companies like Disney, universal, six flags etc have built from ground zero.

Merlin is counted for everything they own not just theme parks where the others just have theme parks.

Would the uk benefit from less parks? Hell no we need more not less as we need more competition.

I agree with what Gavin says, but merlin want to beat Disney and they are just simply miles behind in every single area. But to say they spend less on rides is wrong as they spend the same just it seems to cost more over here.

Smaller parks need to pull their fingers out and get better attractions, only a few seem to even try.
 
marc said:
How many parks have Merlin built from ground up though? All they have done is taken over parks where companies like Disney, universal, six flags etc have built from ground zero.

Merlin is counted for everything they own not just theme parks where the others just have theme parks.

Would the uk benefit from less parks? Hell no we need more not less as we need more competition.

I agree with what Gavin says, but merlin want to beat Disney and they are just simply miles behind in every single area. But to say they spend less on rides is wrong as they spend the same just it seems to cost more over here.

Smaller parks need to pull their fingers out and get better attractions, only a few seem to even try.
When Merlin took over Tussauds, what really happened is the two companies merged. It's not like they sacked all the Tussauds employees and brought in their own. Everyone who previously worked for Merlin was combined with the existing, more experienced employees of Tussauds. Good and bad has come of this, but in essence it's the same company with the same employees. From what I gather, Paula Hurst who now is creative director for Madame Tussauds, worked heavily on the development of Chessington into a theme park.

I agree though, Merlin seems to be trying to copy Disney's model and I'm not convinced it's working. They need to offer something different, that quirky unique Tussauds thing on a larger, bigger invested scale than they did back in the day, to win a niche. They are getting there, slowly. X-Raptor and Krake, and despite it's failure even Thirteen, show evidence of moving in the right direction.
 
marc said:
Smaller parks need to pull their fingers out and get better attractions, only a few seem to even try.

Problem is, it's a very high-risk move for a smaller park to get a big ride... What if visitor numbers don't improve or bring back the money for the park? It's all really about how the park can deal with planning permission and the like as well... It could well be not worth the risk in the eyes of some park managers to build a new big ride in case they don't get the return...

We do however need the non-Merlin parks to buck their ideas up in some ways... Drayton have gone into the kids markets with IPs and Mingo seem to be getting a decent enough line-up these days... Could just do with a few more risks it would seem...

It's like when everyone was reacting to the Merlin AP thing and listing the alternatives... It just doesn't particularly read well when you have Blackpool, Drayton and Mingo in comparison to Towers, Thorpe, Chessie and Lego...

Quite right about the ground up building Marc, where's 80s Tussauds when you need them?
 
I know it's a risk for smaller parks as they don't just have 12 million to spare. Drayton took the risk with Thomas land and it worked for them, flamingo land totally changed and it worked for them.

I actually have a better day at the smaller parks in the uk tbh but that's just me :)

I have yet to hear anyone at work say anything good about legoland, they all complain about the cost, food prices and how busy it is. Is that a good reputation for a park?

Thorpe is known for all the wrong reasons as well.

Alton is stuck in the 90's as well.

Chessington they are slowly making improvements, let's hope they continue but I have a gut feeling Wild Asia is it for the next 3 years.

Let's hope another park can raise their game and force merlin into something. Yes I know thorpes big plans etc let's see what happens.

Gone off topic a bit sorry.
 
^Don't see how it's gone off topic Marc, because of Merlin's monopoly on parks it's generally a sense of them against everyone else...

And generally what you say about the 4 Merlin parks are right... Lego is stupidly expensive (and AP holders get a lower discount if I recall), Thorpe is Thorpe, Towers just doesn't have the old magic, and Chessie still suffers from being the middle child... (Although project cancellation of 2011 for Chessie is a slight disapointment)...

But are Thomas Town and Mumbo Jumbo really big 'risks'? Thomas had the backing of one of the biggest kids brand names ever to exist and I doubt Jumbo was that expensive...

I'd like to see more take a few risks... I'm sure many would like to see a ride like Piraten or Anubis come over here and it could well be one of the smaller parks bringing them in... And
according to Merlin's 'research', I would love to see Drayton or Mingo get a GCI Wooden coaster of epicness just to show people how awesome they are...

I need to go to more non-Merlin parks this year... Though Chessie can happen still... Obviously...
 
marc said:
smaller parks as they don't just have 12 million to spare.

New rides don't necessarily cost £12million a go though. Like, I highly doubt it cost Adventure Island and Paultons Park that amount of money to get Rage, Edge or Cobra, and they seem to have done wonders for the parks!

I have yet to hear anyone at work say anything good about legoland, they all complain about the cost, food prices and how busy it is. Is that a good reputation for a park?

Oh, I didn't know we were ranking how successful parks are by what you and your mates think of them now... If a place is packed out everytime you visit, then surely that's just a testament to how successful the place is!

I think that Kings Dominion is one of the ****test parks I've ever been to, and the food and drinks prices were astronomical... Doesn't mean it's not successful though, does it!

Thorpe is known for all the wrong reasons as well.

Is it? By whom? Families? It's hardly marketing itself to be a family park is it... By the regular punter? The majority of people I've heard talking about the place actually love it! All of these "wrong reasons" don't seem to stop them from rolling through Thorpe's gates... By us "enthusiasts"? Not exactly every enthusiast there is.

What has a parks reputation got to do with how successful it is anyway?

Alton is stuck in the 90's as well.

Why fix something that isn't broken?

companies like Disney, universal, six flags etc have built from ground zero.

Disney and Universal yes, but Six Flags? The last time I checked, the majority of Six Flags parks are/were take-overs. SFMM was orginally just Magic Mountain. SFGAm was originally Marriott's Great America...etc...etc...

Anyway, going back to the originial topic, I think Gavin's said pretty much everything that needed to be said.
The theory is a load of bollocks.
 
Mike I used people at works view as they are the public, and they do not see getting on 3 rides at Thorpe as a good day out with their kids upset. Many will not go back to Legoland but will go back to Flamingoland. A family is not just made up to 2 adults and 2 4 years old, a family day out can be 2 adults and 2 teens so every park is a family park in my view. Some cater for younger families some for older ones and each has something different to offer. What I said was not from a coaster fan view.

A big coaster like a B&M etc will cost around the 12 million mark to build in the uk as it has been said many a time. Small parks could not afford this without taking a risk, which is what I meant. So they go for smaller family rides that draw in new people and this has worked well for them. But how many new people will be drawn to Thorpe next year with their 2nd hand ride?

You are totally missing the point btw. Dont fix something that is not broken just means lack of development and change which is the rut they are in. This is the reason they get away with it as people just put up with it which is why I visit Alton maybe once every other year now and not every year. The park actually used to be a lot better than it is now.

A few years back you were one of the people that complained the most about Thorpe at GF when we got on hardly anything and everything kept breaking down :)

Granted Six Flags was a bad example but Universal and Disney have built up from ground zero and try to add new things and improve thing every few years. Please tell me what Merlin have done to improve the attractions that were already at the parks they took over? Bugger all the rides have just got in worse and worse condition with people complaining how rough some are now.

I am only looking at parks I have been to, granted you have been to more in the USA so know more about them, I would not even try and talk about them. But a Six Flags pass costs what? $54 which is £100 less than the Merlin pass lol.

I am not saying the parks are not successful at all I never did say that, people go and put up with the poor standard, and yes I am comparing it to Disney and Universal as Merlin are meant to be in the same league by their own admission.

I can near enough say if Disney and Universal opened up in London or the South of the UK Alton would be in trouble, as I doubt very much people from down south would not bother to travel to Alton for the same stuff they have been on for the past 10 years.

Benin in a way the Thomas thing was a risk as it has not worked for Six Flags, but saying that Thomas was huge in the UK anyway. Pepper Pig is also causing big interest so it shows the small parks can do it :) Where as Alton were going for Shrek 4D lol until they were told no as they tried to do it on the cheap.
 
Mike said:
marc said:
I have yet to hear anyone at work say anything good about legoland, they all complain about the cost, food prices and how busy it is. Is that a good reputation for a park?

Oh, I didn't know we were ranking how successful parks are by what you and your mates think of them now... If a place is packed out everytime you visit, then surely that's just a testament to how successful the place is!

I've highlighted the glaring mistake that you just made there Mike. Marc never said anything whatsoever about the SUCCESS of the park. He was talking about the REPUTATION. Sometimes interlinked however not always. Secondly, as work colleagues they are non enthusiasts and go for family days out. Personally, I would view their opinions quite highly thank you very much.

Mike said:
What has a parks reputation got to do with how successful it is anyway?

As before, he never actually said it had anything to do with it... you made that link not him... :roll:

It is generally accepted that Disney is one of, if not THE most successful groups of parks. However, they still have a slightly less then gleaming reputation for long queues etc. To the point where it has become somewhat of a minor joke. Straight off the top of my head: The Simpsons as a TV show pokes fun at it all the time just for starters!!!!!! I am sure there are plenty more.

However, Does it stop people going, of course not, because the parks are still amazing regardless. And no, that is not from an enthusiast point of view. This is from talking to people on holiday and visiting the parks.
 
Reputation means everything to the success of theme parks. I mean, duh, think about it.

But reputations aren't necessarily formed on FACTS. Certainly not up-to-date ones, that is, because once you've got a reputation... you'll be hard pressed to change it, for better or worse.
 
Money

Anyone ever bothered to calculate how much an amusement park can make in a day? Using my relatively dim-witted brain with a boatload of estimates, I found that they make approx. $1mil a day. Which can't be right. Probably got the number of visitors a day wrong, but not going to go over the flaws in my guess. If my guess was right they would be spewing coasters all over the place. By this time GAdv might have 30-some odd coasters.

Anyway, it would be interesting to see. Determine how long it would take to save up your money and buy another coaster. I know the cost of coasters can be anywhere from $4mil-$25mil and probably even outside that range, I'm not exactly trained in economics (or anything, for that matter).
 
Top