2014: Family Developments

[Meat Pie]

That's the point I'm making djtruefitt.

It's because there is a requirement on a park to maintain a high quality of attraction when an IP is involved, that the ride ends up being a long-term success and contributes to attracting visitors to the park for many years to come. I don't think it's the IP itself that attracts visitors (beyond the opening year anyway), but what does is the quality of attraction. If that hypothesis is true, then that makes IPs unnecessary as they therefore do not improve the chances of long-term commercial success.

It's a perfectly acceptable idea to bring to life an existing brand if you want to (although I have my grievances about it being a rather limiting use of the unique theme park format), but unless the quality of product is up to scratch, it won't have long-term appeal.

 

[Fredward]

But if the IP is already a long term success, then the ride/area may very well be a long term success.

I get what your trying to say, but IP's are successful, so are well made rides/areas. But a well made ride/area with a long term and successful IP will be more successful then just a well made ride/area, Mainly from a marketing stand point, the theme is already promoted by the IP and people want to experience it.

 

[Meat Pie]

Reading back my posts, I don't feel like I'm getting what I'm trying to say across very well. So instead, I've made a patronising diagram!

The overlapping segments of the diagram represent long-term success. So as you can see... I propose that whether you apply an IP or not is irrelevant since both of those choices are dependent on the quality factor to be successful. So if you don't need an IP, why would you use one?

Fredward - I agree that IP's can have a greater pull for visitors at the start of a new attraction's life, but I disagree that it will continue to pull people in for much longer than that early period. It's the quality of attraction on offer that will cement it's long-term success or failure. At that stage, whether the attraction has an IP or not does not matter.

 

[Fredward]

You are viewing this argument from a enthusiast point of view. The quality may be the same. But if it's an appropriate IP and quality, it'll be more successful.

Disneyland would not be as successful if it didn't have an IP

Wizarding world of Harry Potter would not be as successful if it didn't have an IP.


You may not like IP's but if they didn't need IP's or then why does the most successful theme park companies use them?

Thanks for the patronising diagram, It doesn't make me agree with you though...

 

[Tim]

I think part of the trouble is that most parks are concerned more about short term success. I agree with what you are saying Meat Pie that over time it is the quality of the investment that will draw people in. But initially before people get to see the attraction in person or hear about it by word of mouth the familiarity of an IP matters. This initial period can last for much longer than the first year and by the time most people know if it's good or bad it's normally time for a re-theme anyway.

 

[James]

Disneyland would not be as successful if it didn't have an IP

Disneyland wouldn't exist without the IP! So that's an invalid argument when Disneyland is reliant on the IP and the fact they were created as Disney parks. Not as generic parks that had a Disney IP thrown on top.

I kind of half agree and disagree with Meat Pie's point. Certainly at either end the quality still needs to be top notch. Although an IP still initially draws in more guests than an in-house brand would. Having an in-house brand the marketing is mainly reliant on the imagery and the actual attractions appeal. Marketing an IP is easier as if they use a popular one it will already attract a huge part of the target market without advertising the rides. Although of course the rides form a part of the marketing. I believe it's more due to the IP though over anything else.

Look at Harry Potter world, people who didn't even visit theme parks all the time went there and that's solely down to the appeal of experiencing Harry Potter. They wanted to experience this world so this already attracted a huge part of the target market.

In fact Sonic at Alton Towers is the best example. All the Sonic fan forums exploded with discussion over the 'new' ride and rooms at Alton Towers and this attracted a huge chunk of new guests. If Spinball had been re-themed to something in-house then these guests would have been lost and not visited.

Meat Pie's point that the quality has to stay the same is certainly right. So why do park's go for IPs? Simple answer is it draws in the guests in the short term. The great thing about it is that when the IP runs out the park is still left with good quality attractions to re-theme. We could talk about the long term although it's clear that parks do not think about that when it comes to IPs. It's a thing in the UK at the moment for parks to have IP areas, Alton Towers would only be joining the crowd and trying to outdo the rest. So it makes sense if we see an IP area come 2014.

 

[Tim]

Slightly off topic but the interesting thing about Disney is that they didn't start off making rides with IPs. Sure the whole park is once big IP and Fantasyland can't pretend to be anything but a marketing tool but the other areas of the park were all new ideas based on very basic cinematic stereotypes.

A good example of this is that when you ask someone to think of classic Disney Rides they'll talk about Space Mountain, Small World, Haunted Mansion, Pirates of the Caribbean, Big Thunder Mountain, The Matterhorn, Splash Mountain, Tower of Terror ect.
The main thing you’ll notice from that list is that only the last two (the more recent two) are based on an IP.

If anything this suggests that non IP attractions have a better sense of their own identity once they’ve been given long enough for them to develop. Some rides like Pirates of the Caribbean and even to a degree Nemesis have gone on to become IPs in their own right.

 

[Scott]

I think the issue with IPs is that, in the kind of economic situation we find ourselves in now, time is not something which companies have to play with.

To a certain extent, Alton Towers is relatively safe as it will generally attract a good level of visitors no matter what additions are made to the park each year. However, at a time when people are strapped for cash and have to really think about trips and days out - the certainty and recognition of an IP is important.

I'd say that the people who are most cautious with spending are those with young children. In order to get them to make a decision to come to the park - an IP is a must in terms of advertising and design. It might seem bad in terms of enthusiast points of view, but it's the kind of thing that draws an immediate effect in terms of visitor numbers and can (if it is a good choice of IP) provide long-term investment and keep people coming back for more.

I'm not sure I agree with Meat Pie's argument. Yes, quality makes an attraction but it does that whether its an IP or not. Equally, yes quality attractions keep people coming back but I think it is important in the current climate that people are attracted straight away, rather than having to turn up to an 'unknown' non-IP family attraction.

Basically, IPs come with a sense of familiarity and have to be delivered professionally so as not to damage the brand. It's this quality combined with instant recognition by the general public which makes them successful an keeps people coming back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.

 

[Maya]

We know that AT are doing something to do with Moshi Monsters in Feb Half term, so maybe if successful it could lead to an IP for a new ride/ land?

 

[Plastic Person]

One of the bigger mistakes Alton made was not retaining enough of a sense of identity. Efteling and Europa Park have become IPs within themselves, whereas Alton's determinedness to remain 'on trend' the past two decades have shaved much of the character from the park - although, saying that, I think it has more 'magic' now than in a long time. But it's a shadow of what it could have been, and will unfotunately remain so under Merlin.

 

[Josh]

One of the bigger mistakes Alton made was not retaining enough of a sense of identity. Efteling and Europa Park have become IPs within themselves, whereas Alton's determinedness to remain 'on trend' the past two decades have shaved much of the character from the park - although, saying that, I think it has more 'magic' now than in a long time. But it's a shadow of what it could have been, and will unfotunately remain so under Merlin.

Yet even Europa Park are now getting an IP, they're new coaster is being themed to Arthur and the invisibles.

Now I hate IP's as much as the next person, but at the end of the day they really do attract guests, so this is exactly what Towers need. As long as they choose the right IP, if they choose the wrong one then this could be a disaster....

So far the best idea I've heard is a Hobbit/middle earth themed area, with it also tied in with the new lodges.

EDIT: Having just said that I don't like IP's I have to say that I love Thomas Land at DMP, now that's an IP themed to the right standard, something like that is exactly what Towers needs!

 

[AstroDan]

A great deal of theme parks, no matter how major, seem unable to pen major dark rides without an IP attached, these days.

That said, this isn't a dark ride - but Alton's hand has been somewhat forced here due to PBB, DMP and even Paultons!

 

[Harv]

Got it, why don't they just create a Beatrix Potter area? Squirrel Nutty can stay, perhaps slightly modified, and the charm of the place isn't lost. I had a go at it on RCT once and thought it worked.

 

[CoasterCrazyChris]

"The accommodation is based on myths and legends and the increasing popularity of children's adventure stories and fairytales.
"It will conjure up images of accommodation in a far-off magical land." - Taken from the article posted in the 2014 new accommodation thread.

I think this is enough information to assume the farm will adopt this theme in 2014 too.

 

[Dave]

Towers have always had family IP's in the park so if its a good one I have no problem with it

 

[CoasterCrazyChris]

If it's an IP then it must be distinctly british like Alton Towers - no American film tie-in's.

 

[Ben]

Got it, why don't they just create a Beatrix Potter area? Squirrel Nutty can stay, perhaps slightly modified, and the charm of the place isn't lost. I had a go at it on RCT once and thought it worked.

Lets not forget the retired ice show was based on Beatrix Potter creatures, Id be surprised to see them return though.

Id personally expect a dreamworks partnership, they have had limited success in the past with themed weekends such as kung fu panda etc, and lets not forget Shrek was originally planned to take over the farm area until it all fell through.

Im not fussed whether its tied to an IP or not, as long as it is done well. Ice Age has been done very well and worked wonders for the park, which proves with the right budget they can look after an IP and do it well.

Id like a Madagascar area, please towers.

 

[AstroDan]

Got it, why don't they just create a Beatrix Potter area? Squirrel Nutty can stay, perhaps slightly modified, and the charm of the place isn't lost. I had a go at it on RCT once and thought it worked.

Lets not forget the retired ice show was based on Beatrix Potter creatures, Id be surprised to see them return though.

Id personally expect a dreamworks partnership, they have had limited success in the past with themed weekends such as kung fu panda etc, and lets not forget Shrek was originally planned to take over the farm area until it all fell through.

Im not fussed whether its tied to an IP or not, as long as it is done well. Ice Age has been done very well and worked wonders for the park, which proves with the right budget they can look after an IP and do it well.

Id like a Madagascar area, please towers.

Chessington has Madagascar... I would rather not have a major kids film franchise. Madagascar just isn't as big as Nickelodeon, nor has the timeless appeal of Thomas etc.

 

[Ben]

Madagascar is pretty big with a new film out atm (the 3rd) and a Penguin one to follow soon, and possibly a 4th film. Also its pretty 'family' which is what is needed and have you seen the Madagascar area at Universal Studios Singapore?

 

[josht]

Madagascar themed area could be brilliant, but it's how much money is going to be invested