By that, do you mean that Universal has only registered Britain? Or that they've also registered France?According to the forums at Inside Universal, both the domains UniversalStudiosGreatBritain and UniversalStudiosBritain have been registered by NBC. Other variants ie UniversalStudiosFrance are available.
They have *only* registered Britain.By that, do you mean that Universal has only registered Britain? Or that they've also registered France?
So Sellafield? Got it.It's pure speculation but an old industrial site such as a power station, Quarry or chemical works would be a good shout as it would be transforming old industrial land and would swerve some of the environmental issues that plagued London resort.
Why is it absurd? Why can't we get a brand new theme park in the UK? Germany, Poland Belgium all have top theme parks with similar climates. Spain, France and Italy to a lesser extent are all well catered for. I don't get this concept we can't have anything new in the UK we just have to make do with what we have and be grateful for it.The best site would be outside of the UK entirely. This is hardly a smoking gun. Owing to how absurd the very idea of all this is, only when JCB's start digging things up flanked by Universal executives wearing hard hats with blueprints in their hands will I believe it. Is it not quite normal, and indeed good business practice, for large organisations to purchase as many domains relating to the names of their brands as possible? Otherwise they end up with situations like B&Q now being stuck with the domain 'DIY.com'?
Possibly, but I’d argue that the fact that they’ve only purchased a domain name for the UK, and not for other European countries like France or Germany, might make this possibility less likely. Surely if they were doing as you suggest, we’d have seen domain name purchases for other European countries too? Particularly if, as you and others commonly infer, these countries have far more going for them on paper than the UK?Is it not quite normal, and indeed good business practice, for large organisations to purchase as many domains relating to the names of their brands as possible? Otherwise they end up with situations like B&Q now being stuck with the domain 'DIY.com'?
Possibly, but I’d argue that the fact that they’ve only purchased a domain name for the UK, and not for other European countries like France or Germany, might make this possibility less likely.
For everyone's sanity, not wanting to post repetitive things that bore everyone (and will likely get ignored anyway because that's how excitable closed season speculative chat generally works, I say this slightly affectionately) and to keep the thread moving, there's a very exhaustive list of factors as to why this is an absurd suggestion, that I won't keep spamming wholesale. Feel free to have a look back and pick out any particular points for debate if you wish. But to summarise, there's various reasons as to why DLP wasn't built here, why London Resort was never ever going to happen, and many more factors that weren't present then, but are present now which make this even more unlikely.Why is it absurd? Why can't we get a brand new theme park in the UK? Germany, Poland Belgium all have top theme parks with similar climates. Spain, France and Italy to a lesser extent are all well catered for. I don't get this concept we can't have anything new in the UK we just have to make do with what we have and be grateful for it.
Maybe, if there is a morsel of truth, how about the possibility of a small, midway style studios like attraction is planned? I could see that being plausible.
Unfortunately Sellafield is dedicated to nuclear decommissioning until the year 2130... might a good spot for the london resort though.So Sellafield? Got it.
Assuming Warner Bros allow it. Not sure on the terms of the licensing between WB and Uni but its possible they won't permit it in the UK due to the studio tour already existing.Britain is the home of Harry Potter: This is admittedly a slightly more spurious argument, particularly seeing as Universal may not even use Potter. However, Harry Potter is arguably Universal’s golden goose in terms of IPs. With Britain being the home of Harry Potter, surely a Potter attraction in the home of Potter is a no brainer in terms of money making?
That’s very possible, and precisely why I said that the Potter argument was a more spurious one. I was also thinking that Universal may not use Potter in order to prevent the cannibalisation of visitors to the Orlando resort.Assuming Warner Bros allow it. Not sure on the terms of the licensing between WB and Uni but its possible they won't permit it in the UK due to the studio tour already existing.
But hey, closed season and all that so it's all good fun and a clock is right twice a day. Maybe, if there is a morsel of truth, how about the possibility of a small, midway style studios like attraction is planned? I could see that being plausible. Some big, super duper new world class park with 300ft tall B&M's kissing the clouds built on land only costing less than 250m quid I think is impossible. But I wouldn't rule out something far smaller being planned, if anything is at all Maybe, if there is a morsel of truth, how about the possibility of a small, midway style studios like attraction is planned? I could see that being plausible. Some big, super duper new world class park with 300ft tall B&M's kissing the clouds built on land only costing less than 250m quid I think is impossible. But I wouldn't rule out something far smaller being planned, if anything is at all as we still have very little to go by.