Drayton Manor Park

[Matt N]

Admittedly I’m flying a little blind here, as I don’t follow Drayton Manor super closely, but I’m not sure the question is why more guests didn’t visit as much as it is why the guests they had weren’t generating the park a better financial return. I don’t think the number of guests visiting was the problem as much as that the guest numbers they were getting weren’t generating the financial payoff you’d expect.

Even in 2019, DMP was still getting a pretty decent annual guest figure of 1.2 million, which is higher than many parks in both the UK and Europe that are considered to be thriving, yet they were commonly considered to be “really struggling”… I think that’s the part that confuses me.

 

[Benjsh]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the hotel said to have crippled Drayton somewhat? I definitely seem to remember something being said about the hotel generating them a huge amount of debt, which was what caused the relative drought of non-Thomas investment to begin.

I don't know the numbers involved and how much trade they got from business use Only in the hotels......however it always seemed strange they even had a hotel in the first place purely from a parks guest perspective. It's a regional park really and probably doesn't even need a hotel and given it situated slap bang in the middle of the country it's a driveable distance for many visitors.

 

[jon81uk]

I don't know the numbers involved and how much trade they got from business use Only in the hotels......however it always seemed strange they even had a hotel in the first place purely from a parks guest perspective. It's a regional park really and probably doesn't even need a hotel and given it situated slap bang in the middle of the country it's a driveable distance for many visitors.

I imagine as the Tussauds/Merlin parks were all adding hotels they thought it seemed logical.
But Alton Towers always felt like it needed a hotel due to the remote location.
I would say that Chessington doesn't need hotels for the same reason as Drayton Manor, its not a big park and if it wasn't for the Tussauds/Merlin annual pass it wouldn't attract people down from north of Birmingham. Also CWoA is only a two day park because of the queues, not the size.
I think DM thought if the other parks could make a success of a hotel so could they, but they didn't have the marketing or the national appeal the annual pass gave the Tussauds parks.

 

[Funcone]

Drayton clearly was struggling hence going into Administration. Does anyone have any insight into why a park which continued to receive over 1m visitors a year was in such a bad financial situation? I know the obvious answer would be Splash Canyon but financially they never paid the fine because the company went into administration before that and it continued to receive 1m+ visitors a year even after that? I know the floods/covid would have had an impact but it was more like that was the straw that broke the camels back so I'm more curious about what led to the poor financial situation leading up to 2020.

That's a good question. It does seem odd. As you say, 1.2 million visitors is a lot, even if it represents a fall from the peak. You are right in saying that the Splash Canyon accident, flooding and Covid were all factors, but clearly not the only ones. Drayton Manor's rides from the 90s and early 2000s seemed to be very successful. Some of the more recent ones a little less so. Excalibur was very creative and different to anything else in the UK, but was a technical challenge and didn't last for long. After the success of Thomasland they tried to do it again with Cartoon Network and Ben 10, but that too doesn't seem to have had the longetivity. At the same time, most of Drayton Manor's investments have been sensible and well thought out.

If you're comparing Drayton Manor to places like Toverland, Plopsaland and Walibi Belgium, Drayton Manor does have the zoo. Animals are quite expensive to keep when you factor in the animal food, zoo keepers, vets bills and the heating bill. Plopsa has the advantage that they own the rights to their own properties, and aren't having to licence a brand like Thomas. Drayton Manor is open for a lot of days each year. I looked at going to Walibi Holland before Covid and it was only open weekends and school holidays for a relatively short season. Drayton Manor gets a lot of visitors, but it is open most days during the season, as well as Christmas and February half term. To be fair Toverland and Tripsdrill are open daily through the seasona and for quite long hours, but Drayton Manor's attendance isn't as impressive when you look at the guests per day.

Drayton Manor may have got backed into more of a discount model than some other European parks. That's been a problem for the UK theme park industry. Although it's changed a bit recently, Merlin has done a lot of discounting with BOGOFFs and the Merlin Annual Pass, which has arguably dragged down the price of theme parks in the UK. Theme park prices are also a reflection of what people can afford. Although the UK is a G7 country, when you adjust for GDP per capita we're about the 14th wealthiest country in Europe and the 42nd wealthiest country in the world. We'd be lower than that it you took away London. Parks like Toverland, Plopsaland and Walibi Belgium are in countries with stronger economies. The UK is also the second most inequitable country in Europe after Portugual. Our weak economy and high inequality effects the prices theme parks can charge. In the UK a lot of wealth is also locked up in the property market, giving people less disposable income.

I suspect a bigger portion of Drayton Manor's attendance is from school groups compared to the theme parks in most other European countries. School groups typically get big discounts, so that would also give Drayton Manor a relatively low yield.

I'll tell you what I don't think it is. I don't think our theme parks are struggling because of the minimum wage or our employment laws. We actually have some of the weakest employment laws in the developed world.

 

[pjanvil]

Admittedly I’m flying a little blind here, as I don’t follow Drayton Manor super closely, but I’m not sure the question is why more guests didn’t visit as much as it is why the guests they had weren’t generating the park a better financial return. I don’t think the number of guests visiting was the problem as much as that the guest numbers they were getting weren’t generating the financial payoff you’d expect.

Even in 2019, DMP was still getting a pretty decent annual guest figure of 1.2 million, which is higher than many parks in both the UK and Europe that are considered to be thriving, yet they were commonly considered to be “really struggling”… I think that’s the part that confuses me.

Yep that exactly what I think.

That's a good question. It does seem odd. As you say, 1.2 million visitors is a lot, even if it represents a fall from the peak. You are right in saying that the Splash Canyon accident, flooding and Covid were all factors, but clearly not the only ones. Drayton Manor's rides from the 90s and early 2000s seemed to be very successful. Some of the more recent ones a little less so. Excalibur was very creative and different to anything else in the UK, but was a technical challenge and didn't last for long. After the success of Thomasland they tried to do it again with Cartoon Network and Ben 10, but that too doesn't seem to have had the longetivity. At the same time, most of Drayton Manor's investments have been sensible and well thought out.

If you're comparing Drayton Manor to places like Toverland, Plopsaland and Walibi Belgium, Drayton Manor does have the zoo. Animals are quite expensive to keep when you factor in the animal food, zoo keepers, vets bills and the heating bill. Plopsa has the advantage that they own the rights to their own properties, and aren't having to licence a brand like Thomas. Drayton Manor is open for a lot of days each year. I looked at going to Walibi Holland before Covid and it was only open weekends and school holidays for a relatively short season. Drayton Manor gets a lot of visitors, but it is open most days during the season, as well as Christmas and February half term. To be fair Toverland and Tripsdrill are open daily through the seasona and for quite long hours, but Drayton Manor's attendance isn't as impressive when you look at the guests per day.

Drayton Manor may have got backed into more of a discount model than some other European parks. That's been a problem for the UK theme park industry. Although it's changed a bit recently, Merlin has done a lot of discounting with BOGOFFs and the Merlin Annual Pass, which has arguably dragged down the price of theme parks in the UK. Theme park prices are also a reflection of what people can afford. Although the UK is a G7 country, when you adjust for GDP per capita we're about the 14th wealthiest country in Europe and the 42nd wealthiest country in the world. We'd be lower than that it you took away London. Parks like Toverland, Plopsaland and Walibi Belgium are in countries with stronger economies. The UK is also the second most inequitable country in Europe after Portugual. Our weak economy and high inequality effects the prices theme parks can charge. In the UK a lot of wealth is also locked up in the property market, giving people less disposable income.

I suspect a bigger portion of Drayton Manor's attendance is from school groups compared to the theme parks in most other European countries. School groups typically get big discounts, so that would also give Drayton Manor a relatively low yield.

I'll tell you what I don't think it is. I don't think our theme parks are struggling because of the minimum wage or our employment laws. We actually have some of the weakest employment laws in the developed world.

The zoo is interesting and a good point about its running cost. I'd also agree about most of Drayton's being sensible investments even if they haven't all paid off like Excalibur. Fare less gimmicky like some of Merlin's. From the outside it looked like Drayton was booming after Thomas Land although its true we don't know what their deal is for the licensing and maybe that plus the cost of all the new rides that went into Thomas land all in one go perhaps just pushed the park underwater whereas it felt like the investment prior to Thomas Land was more based on what they could afford without massive debt, hence 1 new ride per year. In 2008 of course they bought like 10 new rides in one go plus ongoing licensing fees. Maybe despite its apparent success in visitor numbers maybe Thomas Land was the eventual reason for the part going into administration?

 

[Funcone]

I don't think there was one single reason. I thought I'd elaborate on the school trips though, as a lot of the UK parks get a signficiant proportion of their visitors from school groups which isn't true in many other countries.

School groups typically get a big discount per child. Remember, when you pay for a school trip you're also paying for the coach there as well as the park. Some schools add money onto the cost of a school trip to create a hardship fund, so the poorest kids in the school also get a chance to go on the trip too.

School groups typically get some free tickets for the adult helpers, the bus drivers, and so a couple of the teachers can do a reccy.

Theme parks might spend quite a bit of money marketing themselves to schools, and the biggest parks offer workshops, which are probably subsidised.

Schools kids typically have low secondary spends. They might bring packed lunches, and have strict limits on how much spending money they can have.

I'm not saying the UK parks are wrong to target school groups. It's actually quite sensible. But if you're comparing UK parks to parks in other countries, the UK park's do have their attendance somewhat inflated.

 

[Matt N]

One interesting question I have is; when a lot of people cite the UK’s discount culture as a reason why our parks have less cash, don’t other countries also have similar schemes? Or is this a uniquely British thing?

 

[Funcone]

It does happen in other countries, and Merlin do use a similar strategy with other Merlin parks around the world. But I think it is a lot more prevalent in the UK than some other countries. Clearly parks do need to build up brand awareness. Merlin's strategy is using discounts which gets them free exposure on cereal boxes and in newspapers like the Sun. Many of the non-Merlin UK parks have followed a similar strategy, although they don't have the national muscle to get onto cereal boxes. Not all the UK parks do that though, for example Paultons doesn't have a lot of discounts. In other countries more parks get their brand exposure through paid for advertising rather than discount deals. Having said that, at least in the past Six Flags have been 'famous' for their discounting. It's not unique to Merlin or Britain. Then again, look what's happened to Six Flags.

 

[Matt N]

It does happen in other countries, and Merlin do use a similar strategy with other Merlin parks around the world. But I think it is a lot more prevalent in the UK than some other countries. Clearly parks do need to build up brand awareness. Merlin's strategy is using discounts which gets them free exposure on cereal boxes and in newspapers like the Sun. Many of the non-Merlin UK parks have followed a similar strategy, although they don't have the national muscle to get onto cereal boxes. Not all the UK parks do that though, for example Paultons doesn't have a lot of discounts. In other countries more parks get their brand exposure through paid for advertising rather than discount deals. Having said that, at least in the past Six Flags have been 'famous' for their discounting. It's not unique to Merlin or Britain. Then again, look what's happened to Six Flags.

Do you feel that this is at least partially why Paultons seemingly has more cash to splash than other independent UK parks, as well as more stable finances? (Other than their visitor figures being higher than most, of course)

Blackpool Pleasure Beach doesn’t operate many discounts as far as I’m aware, though, and they are supposedly struggling, so perhaps it’s not that simple.

 

[Funcone]

I think discounting is only one of many factors. And it's not just a case of discounting vs no discounting. Many of the British parks have been very 'generous' with their discounts doing things like BOGOFF and half price. That's different to knocking a few euros off. It's not necessarily that some of our parks are doing more discounts, but perhaps deeper discounts. If you let someone in half price, then that's a significant difference in revenue.

 

[jon81uk]

One interesting question I have is; when a lot of people cite the UK’s discount culture as a reason why our parks have less cash, don’t other countries also have similar schemes? Or is this a uniquely British thing?

It does happen in other countries, and Merlin do use a similar strategy with other Merlin parks around the world. But I think it is a lot more prevalent in the UK than some other countries. Clearly parks do need to build up brand awareness. Merlin's strategy is using discounts which gets them free exposure on cereal boxes and in newspapers like the Sun. Many of the non-Merlin UK parks have followed a similar strategy, although they don't have the national muscle to get onto cereal boxes. Not all the UK parks do that though, for example Paultons doesn't have a lot of discounts. In other countries more parks get their brand exposure through paid for advertising rather than discount deals. Having said that, at least in the past Six Flags have been 'famous' for their discounting. It's not unique to Merlin or Britain. Then again, look what's happened to Six Flags.

I would say its mainly a Merlin & Six Flags thing.

Within the UK Paulton & Blackpool don't really offer discounts, except Tesco vouchers.
In Europe Phantasialand and Europa don't really offer discounts on park tickets.
In the USA Disney & Universal don't really offer ticket discounts, except for targetting locals. They do offer hotel and package discounts often though.

I don't recall Drayton Manor discounting in the same way as the Merlin/Tussauds parks, they've just always been a bit cheaper. Also used to be more affordable back in the 90s as it was free admission (pay for parking) and then tickets/wristband for rides.

I think the main thing that went wrong for DM was Excaliber not really working and then G-Force not really working. Thomasland pulled it back for them but refocused their market.

 

[Rick]

Attendance is often not a good indicator of profitability. Much of it comes down to the per capita income per guest and the costs that are associated with running the park.

Some parks have horribly expensive maintenance bills relating to rides that they can't afford to remove/replace, some parks and chains have huge mountains of debt that is very expensive to service, even if the folks are flooding in. DLP and the old Six Flags were good examples of this.

I also think this industry is going to struggle with costs over the next decade or so, I imagine the cost of running parks (whether it be utilities, staffing etc) and building new rides is going to far outstrip their ability to increase the price of the product.

 

[Excalibur]

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again. Colin lost all interest in the park once his parents died.

2008 the park were on the brink of going under and it’s Thomas that saved them. Yes, investment was lacking up to this point and obviously other things could have contributed to it but the family had no motivation what so ever.

They signed a contract with Cartoon Network.. Ben 10 was plastered everywhere and it was common knowledge that Scooby Doo and other CN friends were coming, however due to a disagreement between CN and the Bryans it all collapsed. What’s frustrating is that if the Bryans REALLY wanted it, they could have had it and come to a agreement.. but no. They let it slide.

I do feel sorry for the family after all what they built up.

 

[Ian]

You can’t base financial health on gate figures alone. You only need to look at DLP to see that.

Drayton Manor in the mid to late naughties was ropey in my opinion. You’d seen years of big investment through the 90s and beginning of the millennium but really, the park felt like it started to get left behind while the Tussauds/Merlin parks tore ahead. The last major investment in the main park was G-Force. But until Thomas Land opened the park felt like it was falling behind. Loans and bills would still need to be paid, but until Thomas Land it never felt like the park was going places. Undoubtedly Thomas bought in the cash to help keep the place afloat, but outside of Thomas Land it felt like you never really saw much in the way of development aside from the eventually opening of Ben 10.

Ben 10 coupled with the hotel development around a similar time were huge financial undertakings, and certainly something of a gamble. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a lovely hotel. But it’s hard to justify a stay there for me as the park isn’t a resort or even a two day park. Had they saw through the rumoured water park it might have been a different story.

But ultimately you can only keep the wolves at bay for so long. Sooner or later your file gets to the top of a debtors pile and you have to start paying back. You can have plenty of people coming through the door, but what are you left with after all your deductions? It’s why when you look any business you need to focus on the gross profit, not just the turnover. Without GP you have nothing to invest and play with. Which is better? 1M through the gate with £10K GP, or 500K through the gate with £100K GP? Couple all of that with the pandemic, Splash Canyon and flooding and you have several straws to break the camel’s back.

 

[Jb85]

I don't know the numbers involved and how much trade they got from business use Only in the hotels......however it always seemed strange they even had a hotel in the first place purely from a parks guest perspective. It's a regional park really and probably doesn't even need a hotel and given it situated slap bang in the middle of the country it's a driveable distance for many visitors.

The hotel makes sense - close the Belfry / motorways

 

[Funcone]

We’re going pretty far off topic, but this is interesting, so I’m going to carry on.

Disneyland Paris is a bit unusual because of the relationship between the park as an independent business, and the Walt Disney Company. The park was its own business, but any developments had to be bought from Walt Disney Imagineering, and they had to pay significant royalties to Disney (although Disney did wave some of them for a bit). Disneyland Paris was also advertising all over Europe (which is very expensive) and at least a good chunk of the loses came from the hotels rather than the park. They also had a huge amount of debt. I don’t think Disneyland Paris is very typical of a major park.

I think generally attendance can be a reasonable indicator of a park’s financial health, but obviously they’ve got to be proportionate to the scale of business. I.e. if you had two identical parks and Park A got 500,000 visitors a year and park B got 1,000,000, but Park A was open for 100 days a year and Park B was open for 365 days a year, then Park A might be more financially successful. But if you take attendance and tie it into things like the size of the park, number of staff, operating hours and marketing reach, then I think attendance can be a reasonable barometer. I suppose it’s partly about overall attendance, but also about attendance as a proportion of the potential capacity.

Clearly a bigger park isn’t necessarily going to be more successful than a smaller park. Sometimes the bigger the park, the bigger the loses. But being big does have advantages, for example in terms of economies of scale. To some degree being part of a chain can give smaller parks some economies of scale when it comes to things like buying food and merchandise. But even so there are more economies of scale for a big park where things like training and recruitment are done on a larger scale. In a bigger park there are more jobs, meaning roles become more specialised. That either makes things more efficient, or allows ‘experts’ to do them to a higher standard. Marketing also tends to be scalable, where the costs of creating content aren’t proportionate to the number of people who see it. Smaller parks can be very successful, but staff turnover can be more of a problem. For example, a small park might have one person doing a role. If that person leaves, it’s a massive brain drain. In a big park you might have five people doing that role. It’s unlikely they’ll all leave at the same time, so you’re more likely to have continuity with the knowledge and expertise.

In the end big and small parks can be successful or unsuccessful, and big or small parks can be well run or poorly run. There clearly are advantages in being a bigger park, although I’m sure there are disadvantages as well.

 

[Prof Burp]

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again. Colin lost all interest in the park once his parents died.

2008 the park were on the brink of going under and it’s Thomas that saved them. Yes, investment was lacking up to this point and obviously other things could have contributed to it but the family had no motivation what so ever.

They signed a contract with Cartoon Network.. Ben 10 was plastered everywhere and it was common knowledge that Scooby Doo and other CN friends were coming, however due to a disagreement between CN and the Bryans it all collapsed. What’s frustrating is that if the Bryans REALLY wanted it, they could have had it and come to a agreement.. but no. They let it slide.

I do feel sorry for the family after all what they built up.

@Excalibur what Cartoon Network attractions were planned but didn’t come to fruition?

 

[Excalibur]

@Excalibur what Cartoon Network attractions were planned but didn’t come to fruition?

They were all proposed re-themes as apposed new attractions as such.

 

[John]

Cartoon Network Street was being discussed 10 years ago on the first page of this very thread. I think the rumours predate this forum though, so the full details are probably elsewhere. IIRC the Haunting was rumoured to be given a Scooby Doo re-theme, not 100% on that one though. I didn't pay much attention at the time so I don't know what else was on the cards, other than (presumably) a new film for the 4d cinema.

 

[pjanvil]

Does anyone have any ideas on a unifying theme for that area of the park. The area with Haunting, Drunken Barrels, Accelerator, Flying Dutchman and (currently) Apocalypse. I'm wondering if even if you remove Apocalypse and replace it with a coaster what common theme could unite those attractions?