Disney (obviously) spends more on attractions at WDW, but their most attended park at the resort hosts 8 times as many visitors and their least successful park at the resort hosts 4 times as many as Alton.
Perspective.
And that's exactly it, perspective. Merlin's perspective is that they want to liken themselves to Disney and Universal and become top...what is there not to see about the fact they are setting themselves up for massive disappointments by comparing themselves to a league with which they are nowhere near? I've seen more quality in parks like Drayton, Paultons, Europa Park etc than I have in many Merlin parks lately. Plus, my original post focuses on front line experience and perceptions, not guest figures, attendance or size...
It's time Merlin got real, stopped their aggressive expansion plan and focus on what they already have in their portfolio. They need to sit up and realise that soon they won't be the only fish in the UK pond.
The two things go hand in hand, you can't look at them exclusively. You have to strike a balance between the two, or you face making no money because guest experience is so poor and nobody visits (American Adventure, Kentucky Kingdom etc) or the opposite where you spend so much money on building a park, or attraction that you can barely afford to stay in business (DLP, Hard Rock Park etc).
They do go hand in hand, working in the visitor business my self we have to always weigh up a reasonable and realistic budget that we then transfer in to a top guest experience - it's not some little fantasy in my head.
The guest experience is poor in many (not all) of their Resort Themeparks and Midway Attractions...Legoland is the only park they ensure is at top notch all season (it has it's own dedicated team within Merlin), whereas the others are just left to their own devices?
You say that they need to strike a balance between the two? So why then do things like Oblivion's mist, Nemesis' scenery, Duel's zombie, pretty much half of Haunted Hollow, extraordinary golf (the guest experience) etc suffer from years of lying dormant because they simply don't get given the budget. These were created with visitor experience in mind and planning/investment was spent on these elements... yet they decide to let their most obvious effects and aesthetics fail...causing the visitor experience become poor. THIS is where Disney excel and I mean it in a frontline point of view (as I said in my previous post) we're not talking about guest attendance ratios. A park's effects, experience and aesthetics should always be top notch and maintained as they were meant to be from day one - regardless if the park is Disney or Funderworld! Don't make these elements if you can't maintain it, the general public notice this stuff much more than many think.
Merlin have the money but instead they'd like to see their books ooze more magic than their attractions and this is exactly how the two and two
don't go hand in hand here. Disney squeeze as much as they can out of you, the way the park is designed is built on return profit. Main Street isn't just some quaint themed street with shops and eateries, it's a hub of income for the Disney parks. Disney's up-selling is targeted subconsciously and subtly. You'll be tempted to spend lots when you visit, try to analyse every site plan of every Disney resort and you'll see the planning of every area and ride is part of the profit drive.
But Merlin don't get subtly, as soon as you walk in, there's photo sellers, fastrack posters, staff asking you straight away about this or that (those staff have eased in the past few years though). Every eatery, shop and area have something which they're making obvious to the guest that they want them to buy and be informed about. The parks are huge, it needs to be based on customer feedback and strategy. If Rollercoaster Restaurant is more busy late afternoon according to bookings then target Gloomy Wood, Dark Forest and Forbidden Valley boards to run a "deal" with a dining plan after 2pm. BOGOF or 50% will be far more attractive to the customer than just "buy a platinum this for £99" etc. Work out how your guests are moving about the park, target groups and use your new queue information boards (which have cameras in) to really work out interaction and guest flow to certain areas and start targeting tailored up-selling. This way Towers/Merlin are far more likely to not hinder guest experience whilst still making maximum profit. If the guest isn't aware of blatant upselling, then they'll likely sell more.
There's a critical point when it comes to deciding the investment level for an attraction. Spending twice as much on a roller coaster doesn't in any way mean you'll make twice as much money back, the two things aren't linear.
No it doesn't at all but experiences need to be invested in properly - it's silly to
always go in to an attraction project thinking that you'll make twice as much money than you put in, but you'll always need to make a profit.
A rollercoaster is the easiest experience for MMM to do and market. Why do we need to spend twice as much? Other parks create rides, themes and whole areas effectively on a smaller budget, let's look at Magic Valley at Toverland which was 20 million euros (almost 16 million pounds). The whole area was less than the smiler!
Others are saying everyone just points the finger at Merlin but to be honest, I always give them credit where it is due. But right now, in this discussion, they are the ones at fault.
Sorry, I've really gone off topic. Urm, errr, yes - major ride close...reopen N:ST asap!
