London Entertainment Resort: All Discussion

[Matt N]

The thing confusing me is; why did Paramount leave the project in June 2017, and then sign back on in 2019? Something must have changed to make them more confident in the project again, because I’m assuming that Paramount originally severed ties due to a lack of confidence in the project. Something must have seemed more promising to Paramount about the project recently for them to sign back onto it after leaving, something more promising than just a new CEO, because the project has had plenty of those in the past.

The deals with companies like ITV and Radisson were also signed fairly recently (within the last year, I think), so surely there must be new faith in the project from the standpoint of companies wanting to work with them, because I believe that these deals, as well as the deal with Paramount, were the first new deals to be signed since 2014/15, were they not?

Another thing that rather interests me is that the park released drastically different concept art at the end of last year. Up until late last year, the concept art being circulated was the same concept art that was released with the project’s announcement in 2012, with the same area names and very little being released. However, they seem to have almost completely torn apart their original plans and generated a completely new theme park plan since December 2019, as if you look at last year’s concept images, they look very, very different to those that were first released in 2012. That proves that they are clearly working on refining the plans as opposed to just sitting there doing nothing.

My point is; I find it rather strange, albeit promising, that the project seems to have gained steam again within the last year or so after years of very little happening. If we’d continued along the same timeline as we’d had for the past few years, we’d probably have had at least 1 or 2 more CEO changes, with the project being delayed to at least 2026/2027 and no DCO application due until 2022 at the earliest. At the same time, nothing would really have happened. However, what we’ve actually had are signs that the project is building momentum again. Stuff is happening, and I’m optimistic that it could lead to something tangible this time.

Getting that DCO application in at the end of 2020 would be a substantial step for the project, for a start.

 

[pluk]

My prediction

- get planning for leisure development surrounded by residential.
- build residential, sell residential.
- apply for change of use (much easier than getting planning from scratch for undeveloped land) for most, if not all, of the leisure area, build a lot more houses.

Quick profit, low risk.

 

[Dave]

My prediction

- get planning for leisure development surrounded by residential.
- build residential, sell residential.
- apply for change of use (much easier than getting planning from scratch for undeveloped land) for most, if not all, of the leisure area, build a lot more houses.

Quick profit, low risk.

This is exactly on the money

 

[Alastair]

Totally agree. Had they said they plan to be taking 5m guests a year by their 5th year you could maybe, just maybe, think they had a sensible plan.

They won't get 5m guests in the first year in a million years even if it goes ahead. Europa Park is a world class theme park, often rated number 1 in the world, and situated in a country of over 80m people and they get just over 5m after decades of trying.

It's nonsense to think they could top that in one year. Absolute nonsense.

There is a major difference locationally between this and EP though. London, by all accounts is a hugely popular city tourist-wise - over 30m visitors annually (pre-Covid of course). This proposed park is essentially on a direct rail link both from London and from the continent, arguably geographically this would be just as easy to get to from a train perspective as the likes of DLP, let alone EP which has no form of rail link and is about an hour's drive from just about anywhere of note. Even just taking account of this you could see how this could be a lucrative endeavour - the potential for visitors is enormous.

 

[Matt N]

There is a major difference locationally between this and EP though. London, by all accounts is a hugely popular city tourist-wise - over 30m visitors annually (pre-Covid of course). This proposed park is essentially on a direct rail link both from London and from the continent, arguably geographically this would be just as easy to get to from a train perspective as the likes of DLP, let alone EP which has no form of rail link and is about an hour's drive from just about anywhere of note. Even just taking account of this you could see how this could be a lucrative endeavour - the potential for visitors is enormous.

I completely agree, and it’s worth remembering that this park also has a large roster of IPs on its side, which EP doesn’t; some of Paramount’s stuff is quite well-known worldwide (for example, Star Trek and Mission Impossible), and there are definitely a few BBC and ITV franchises that could pull international visitors in (for example, Doctor Who is quite a well-known franchise worldwide, as well as Top Gear which I’d previously heard mentioned).

I know most enthusiasts despise IPs with a passion, but you’d be surprised how lucrative a good selection of IPs can be.

Another thing worth remembering is that Europa started out as a very small park and grew very gradually to where it is today, while London Resort will be a pretty big park from the get-go.

 

[Dave]

There is a major difference locationally between this and EP though. London, by all accounts is a hugely popular city tourist-wise - over 30m visitors annually (pre-Covid of course). This proposed park is essentially on a direct rail link both from London and from the continent, arguably geographically this would be just as easy to get to from a train perspective as the likes of DLP, let alone EP which has no form of rail link and is about an hour's drive from just about anywhere of note. Even just taking account of this you could see how this could be a lucrative endeavour - the potential for visitors is enormous.

Ebsfleet is a bit of a bottleneck for cars however, it would require some major capacity upgrades around Dartford crossing and considering the crossing has had multiple capacity upgrades I’m not sure what else they can do to lube up the flow there.

People also forget that there is a lot of competition for leisure spend in the area and the location excludes a large part of the country (the north), who arguable are more likely to want to visit a UK theme park over the more affluent south choosing to go abroad more regularly.

Without a compelling IP you wouldn’t be pulling much of the London tourist spend, 15 years ago and the Harry Potter IP and you might have had a shot but I’m not sure there is anything out there right now that is available and would have that sort of draw. The paramount IP’s don’t have that.

 

[Matt N]

If you have a compelling enough combined product, however, people from the North will come down and visit. This will be the sort of place that you could easily make a multi-day stay out of, similar to places like DLP and PortAventura in that regard. If something good is built, which with the budget being touted and IPs brought on board I have no doubt that something good will be built if the project goes ahead, then people will come.

A fantastic example of this is located within the UK itself; Alton Towers. People from the South visit, and people travel for hours to go there. It’s far harder to get to than the London Resort will be, and has far weaker transport links, yet many, many British people still visit in their droves each year, from all across the country. I know that numbers have reduced, but in the park’s so-called “golden age”, close to 3 million people would visit each year. When you take into account that the London Resort will be a much larger-scale project than Alton Towers, and have better transport links, as well as a percentage of its visitors coming from abroad, I’d say that there’s definitely a very strong case for the Resort to meet the touted visitor figures, personally.

 

[Dave]

If you have a compelling enough combined product, however, people from the North will come down and visit. This will be the sort of place that you could easily make a multi-day stay out of, similar to places like DLP and PortAventura in that regard. If something good is built, which with the budget being touted and IPs brought on board I have no doubt that something good will be built if the project goes ahead, then people will come.

A fantastic example of this is located within the UK itself; Alton Towers. People from the South visit, and people travel for hours to go there. It’s far harder to get to than the London Resort will be, and has far weaker transport links, yet many, many British people still visit in their droves each year, from all across the country. I know that numbers have reduced, but in the park’s so-called “golden age”, close to 3 million people would visit each year. When you take into account that the London Resort will be a much larger-scale project than Alton Towers, and have better transport links, as well as a percentage of its visitors coming from abroad, I’d say that there’s definitely a very strong case for the Resort to meet the touted visitor figures, personally.

Towers is not far harder to get to, the local roads are smaller but two major motorways serve the area as well as a number of major A roads. The only slowdown for Towers is the last 20 min of the journey in car. For sure it’s public transport links are terrible.

Ebsfleet pretty much depends on the M20 which spurs of the M25 at the Dartford crossing, which is a notorious part of a notorious motorway for getting stuck.

 

[pluk]

Towers is not far harder to get to, the local roads are smaller but two major motorways serve the area as well as a number of major A roads. The only slowdown for Towers is the last 20 min of the journey in car. For sure it’s public transport links are terrible.

Ebsfleet pretty much depends on the M20 which spurs of the M25 at the Dartford crossing, which is a notorious part of a notorious motorway for getting stuck.

A
second crossing is underway, from the A2 near Gravesend to the A13 at Orsett and on to the M25 at Ockendon. That'll mean no need to use the QE2 bridge and should free up the roads around there.

 

[Matt N]

A
second crossing is underway, from the A2 near Gravesend to the A13 at Orsett and on to the M25 at Ockendon. That'll mean no need to use the QE2 bridge and should free up the roads around there.

Good to hear that they are making road improvements for the perceived demand! Should make reaching the Resort easier!

 

[Thameslink Rail]

Also the area is well served by HS1, there are four trains per hour from London St Pancras to Ebbsfleet International taking about 17 mins calling at Stratford International.

 

[Dave]

A
second crossing is underway, from the A2 near Gravesend to the A13 at Orsett and on to the M25 at Ockendon. That'll mean no need to use the QE2 bridge and should free up the roads around there.

That will definitely help.

But regarding travel time factor this in as a comparison:

I live in Leeds, it’s north but not remotely so, for me the journey to Towers is 2hrs, it would take me 4.5hrs with no traffic to get to Ebsfleet. If you live on the outskirts of London you can get to Ebsfleet in 1.5hrs on a good run, yet you can get to Towers for just an hour longer in car.

So basically with a 3 hour journey radius AT covers as far south as London and as far north as Newcastle, Ebsfleet because of its location tucked into the peninsular struggles to get to Birmingham in 3 hours.

 

[Craig]

The thing confusing me is; why did Paramount leave the project in June 2017, and then sign back on in 2019? Something must have changed to make them more confident in the project again, because I’m assuming that Paramount originally severed ties due to a lack of confidence in the project. Something must have seemed more promising to Paramount about the project recently for them to sign back onto it after leaving, something more promising than just a new CEO, because the project has had plenty of those in the past.

They signed back on but only to put their IPs into the park, not to have their name on the sign. Having their name so prominently in the original plan for the park would:

A) Risk reputational damage if it failed.
B) There was no doubt a high amount of money they were promising to invest by having their name on the door. They were not willing to risk that amount of cash.

Having their IPs only gives them an option of a low risk option to be involved, with a potentially high reward IF they pull this thing off.

 

[Dave]

Also the area is well served by HS1, there are four trains per hour from London St Pancras to Ebbsfleet International taking about 17 mins calling at Stratford International.

Train connections are important but there are only ever going to be a subset of the population willing to travel by train and again, from the north you would have to change trains in London, most would just save the hassle and have a day in London. And unless you book a few months in advance trains to London can cost over £100 return, they are regularly +£60. Add to that I imagine you are looking at a 3-4hr journey time when connections are factored in from somewhere like Leeds or Manchester/

 

[pluk]

Good to hear that they are making road improvements for the perceived demand! Should make reaching the Resort easier!

Just to clarify, the new road has been in planning for a lot longer than this development, it's not to cope with any perceived demand for the London Resort, it's to free up the existing bottleneck at the QE2 and surrounding junctions.

 

[jon81uk]

I understand they want to try to attract "Europe" and that's one of the factors in choosing this site. But in terms of UK connectivity, something close to Birmingham is probably a better idea. Drayton Manor is probably one of the best located parks in the UK being close to the M42, M6, M6Toll and not far to the M1.

 

[Benjsh]

Odds that a single digger hasn't been on site by this time next year???

 

[Alastair]

Odds that a single digger hasn't been on site by this time next year???

Given they've clearly stated construction would only begin in 2022 at the earliest, probably 100% chance of that...

 

[Benjsh]

Given they've clearly stated construction would only begin in 2022 at the earliest, probably 100% chance of that...

Construction going to start in 2022 for 2024 opening???

Even more laughable then. Universal can't even turn around a brand new park in that time and they are the masters of the quick turn around.

Are these people living in the real world?

There won't be digger on site in 2022 either then.

 

[Matt N]

2024 is very open ended; it could be December 2024 for all we know (although that would be slightly strange given the British climate). As long as it opens before 31st December 2024, they’ve technically met their timeline.

Besides, even if they don’t, projects like these encounter delays during construction all the time. For example, wasn’t Shanghai Disneyland due for 2015 originally, but eventually opened in June 2016? I also think Disneyland Paris may originally have been scheduled for 1991, but didn’t open until April 1992?

It would not be a surprise if this project was delayed by a year or so during construction. Besides, Andy Martin, the manager of the project, said that he was confident it would be built and operational “by 2026” if the application is approved. He never expressly stated 2024, even though that is the current aspirational target.