Thorpe is only a 1.5 day park due to operations though surely? Although the same could be said of a lot of parks. What Thorpe needs is extended opening, they're the only park in the group where it's a real possibility.
Joey: I think a lot of it is quite simply that there isn't an infrastructure in place to allow ideas to flourish properly. If an idea happens, then immediately the questions have to be:
1. Who will have ownership of the project
2. How difficult will it be to implement with our current company structure
Usually 2. is "Very - because there isn't anyone in a position to do 1."
Everyone is working for their own little sections; their own kingdoms. Nobody will step outside of their zones, and there doesn't seem to be anyone coordinating anything and looking holistically (I know I'm repeating myself now :lol: ).
You're right Joey, the copy and paste attractions diminish visits. In Gt. Yarmouth last year, we only visited the Sea Life because we had APs. Without them, we'd have left it completely alone for other local attractions - because they would offer us something new to see. If the Sea Life centres were the most fantastic aquariums on earth and always spellbinding, I'd be more likely to visit each - but they're not. They're not even as good as their competitor's like The Deep.
However, it's cheap and it's easy. You don't need to think about who to get in to design the thing, who to build the displays, who to buy cladding off, where to get the fish, how to train the staff, how to market it. The entire process is just pulled off a shelf and ordered.
It's that short term thing, definitely. They can knock up a new SLC in the minimum time and at minimum cost and get a guaranteed return on investment rapidly. They then have another attraction in their portfolio to keep share prices high and they can flog it to death. They'll gradually lose repeat visitors over time, but they will also just have enough throughput to keep them profitable. If they don't. They can sell it on or close it, it will have paid for itself before there's an issue with visitor numbers.
Does it do their image any good? Not really, but they don't care as long as there is profit.
It's interesting looking at the gate figures thing this year. Merlin IS second only to Disney in terms of visitor numbers, but Universal isn't that far behind. How many attractions does Universal offer compared to Merlin? I'll bet Merlin has a 5:1 ratio, maybe more. When you consider they also hold the two top UK theme parks, it's not a good show at all.
They want to be Disney or Universal, but don't understand the idea of a complete, professional solution. Then again, Disney aren't shy when it comes to copy and paste attractions
The point is though, a big company, making money, then works towards producing an excellent customer experience. At the moment, it's all about enticing customers and taking their cash with as few overheads as possible. Disney and Universal understand that customers aren't fools and actively offer them things that might make their visits better.
