I understand the pessimism given the track record of these sort of projects. I’m going to remain mildly optimistic though, if for no other reason than I’d quite like this to happen and if anyone in the industry at the moment has the capital and will to do it, Comcast do.
Whilst there are significant headwinds at the moment, a project like this is a long term proposition and it’s perhaps the case the Comcast see an opportunity in just that. It’s definitely been a while since we’ve had a new theme park of note in this country and there’s also clearly been a degradation in park quality relative to how European parks have advanced. That feels like a reasonable USP.
Thanks for turning down the dial on the irrational closed season hysteria displayed in this thread. You raise some interesting points here.
Comcast have deep pockets and an eye on not-insignificant expansion. It's clearly part of their wider business strategy, and Europe is the obvious low hanging fruit. It could be argued that there is a large domestic UK market for such a proposal if, for nothing else, owed to the fact that the domestic market currently consists of quite low quality, down-market attractions. Thus there is a void to be filled.
However, I think there's too many negative economic and practical factors stacked against this, and these aren't current headwinds, they're long-term structural problems. Why would any large international company invest huge sums of money buying large amounts of development land in the UK just to whack a theme park on it when there a far easier and cheaper alternatives on the European main land?
As a country, we desperately need to build housing, transportation infrastructure, sustainable energy solutions and battery plants. We can't even build a windmill in a field, no matter how badly we may need it. The solutions that could attract investments like this are at the bottom of a very long, bumpy, obstacle ridden dirt track, if they're even there at all.
The UK government lobbied hard and offered large cheques to get Disneyland Paris and the London Resort built here during far better economic times than we're currently experiencing, and failed miserably. There's only one reason why Comcast would choose to build here as opposed to the far more attractive alternatives, and that's government incentives. There's no other practical or economic reasons I can see as to why they would bother?
The public finances are in a terrible state, and the only way I can see the cheque book coming out and planning laws being sidelined is government desperation for electioneering purposes, which could (rightly) be cancelled by a change in government, under intense scrutiny as to why theme parks are being fast tracked amidst a housing and energy crisis.
Deep pockets or not, avoiding the UK like the plague for Comcast makes perfect sense for multiple reasons unless bundles of government cash incentives and favourable planning terms are on the table. And the government, whether outgoing or incoming, have far bigger priorities to throw the kitchen sink at before considering roller coasters and dark rides.
Regarding Merlin, I don't see any kind of Universal park being a problem at all. Both operate in very different segments of the market. "New Merlin" or not, their market positioning is firmly placed well below the likes of Disney or Universal. They don't offer special premium immersive experiences, they offer 6 hours to get on a few roller coasters to a family for £120, a milkshake bottle and a cereal box cutout. Merlin have downgraded their parks to compete against fairgrounds, cinemas, holiday camps and zoos. A so called high quality "competitor" could potentially even accelerate the downgrading/down-marketing process that's been operating in its parks for the last couple of decades.
)