Which UK theme park do you feel is left most at risk by the potential of Universal entering the UK?

[Marsden10002]

Oakwood.

 

[Graeme]

Another point I'd raise is that I think Pleasurewood Hills is already arguably in a peripheral, regional tier of British theme parks, so it's less likely to be majorly upended by Universal coming along. Where the Merlin parks will cease to be the biggest fish in the UK's small pond and will have that transition to cope with, Pleasurewood Hills is already a pretty small fish, so is probably less likely to feel the effects of Universal quite so acutely.

As a slight counter-argument to that, I don't think Pleasurewood is meant to be that minor. It really was a big deal when it opened, and in the 1980s had a better roller coaster (Ladybird) than Thorpe Park or Chessington! It is also arguably the most minor park in the UK to still have a huge (100ft+) coaster. I guess what I'm saying is there are a few parks like this whose business model is being one of the Top 3 choices in each region, and with Universal I do think they'll get shunted down the list even more.

The other important thing to note about Pleasurewood, and a number of other smaller UK parks, is that its visitation is boosted in significant part by seaside holiday crowds. In Pleasurewood's case, a large part of their visitor base is probably made up of holidaymakers to Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft more widely who visit as a constituent part of a holiday to the wider area, and numerous other smaller UK parks fall into this bracket (e.g. Fantasy Island and Skegness, Adventure Island and Southend, Blackpool Pleasure Beach and Blackpool, Oakwood and Pembrokeshire). These visitors are going for a longer seaside holiday and visiting a theme park as part of it rather than specifically going for a theme park holiday, and as Bedford is around 55 miles from the nearest coastline as the crow flies, Universal will not be tapping into this seaside holiday visitor demographic.

Yep, totally agree with that. Competition is entirely a good thing in this context. I always went to the north-west because of Blackpool and Southport; the east because of Fantasy Island and Pleasure Island; and the south-east because of Margate and Folkestone etc.

...

Some thoughts about the other parks...

At the risk of stating the obvious, the seaside parks shouldn't have much to fear from Universal, as the business model is so different. However, a lot of them are already struggling because of running costs. Great Yarmouth Pleasure Beach, Clacton Pier and Adventure Island have all either mentioned the increasing difficulties of running their businesses and/or cut back operational hours recently. If the Government ends up cutting Universal any slack regarding running costs, it would only be fair if they did it for all theme and amusement parks.

I don't think Alton Towers or Thorpe Park have much to lose apart from a sort of psychological status as the best. If you remember what it was like to be a teenager going on school trips, I think there will always be room for parks that have four or five "extreme" coasters. Even Universal won't be able to compete with that. And with Thorpe's high ceiling, that's an even bigger advantage (I know Bedford has a high ceiling as well, but they're extremely unlikely to have lots of tall coasters).

As for the smaller parks, like Pleasurewood, Lightwater Valley and (now) Drayton Manor, they would do well to match the Paultons model of a modest family coaster every now and then. 100% focus on family and family-thrill, I think. If they all got a small wooden coaster, say, that would distinguish them even more, as Universal is unlikely to get a woodie (good tactic for Thorpe Park too, with a bigger one).

In short, if Universal does go ahead, it will be overwhelmingly a good thing for the UK industry. True competition is healthy, and I don't think the well-run parks have much to fear. Whether they make good choices, however, is in their hands...

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Some thoughts about the other parks...

At the risk of stating the obvious, the seaside parks shouldn't have much to fear from Universal, as the business model is so different. However, a lot of them are already struggling because of running costs. Great Yarmouth Pleasure Beach, Clacton Pier and Adventure Island have all either mentioned the increasing difficulties of running their businesses and/or cut back operational hours recently. If the Government ends up cutting Universal any slack regarding running costs, it would only be fair if they did it for all theme and amusement parks.

I don't think Alton Towers or Thorpe Park have much to lose apart from a sort of psychological status as the best. If you remember what it was like to be a teenager going on school trips, I think there will always be room for parks that have four or five "extreme" coasters. Even Universal won't be able to compete with that. And with Thorpe's high ceiling, that's an even bigger advantage (I know Bedford has a high ceiling as well, but they're extremely unlikely to have lots of tall coasters).

As for the smaller parks, like Pleasurewood, Lightwater Valley and (now) Drayton Manor, they would do well to match the Paultons model of a modest family coaster every now and then. 100% focus on family and family-thrill, I think. If they all got a small wooden coaster, say, that would distinguish them even more, as Universal is unlikely to get a woodie (good tactic for Thorpe Park too, with a bigger one).

In short, if Universal does go ahead, it will be overwhelmingly a good thing for the UK industry. True competition is healthy, and I don't think the well-run parks have much to fear. Whether they make good choices, however, is in their hands...

I agree with this.

It's so hard to say though, isn't it? 6 years minimum is such a long time, I doubt the UK theme park landscape would still look the same in 6 years time, as it does now, with or without Universal. Also, I remember it was only 6 years ago that thoosies all over the UK were claiming that BPB was the UK's best, flagship park, and they couldn't do anything wrong, look at the difference now. Which brings me onto the main reason it's hard to call, and that's because, as you rightly pointed out, the ball is in their court. They all have 6 years minimum to formulate a plan, make changes, and put themselves in a good position to operate, and prosper, alongside Universal. 6 years is a hell of a long time. (Long enough to build a ground up theme park and resort, funnily enough.)

Theoretically (and I do mean theoretically, please don't mistake me suggesting it as a possibility, for me actually thinking this might happen, because I don't) Alton Towers could have a complete makeover of the park, tidy everything up, renew theming, build 2 coasters, a dark ride, a water ride and a couple of flats in 6 years. Would we still be casting the same doubts on their survival then? The same could be said for many of the parks mentioned in this thread. Now's the time to start investing, and get themselves to the front of, what will be, the chasing pack. The best 2 or 3 'thrill' parks in the UK will not struggle alongside Universal, no matter which parks that turns out to be, or where they're situated. They same, I think, can be said for parks focused on younger families, like Paulton's and Legoland. I know I keep saying it, but 6 years is plenty of time for any of them to establish, or cement, themselves as leaders in either of those niches.

I can't wait to come back to this subject in 3 or 4 years, when we'll know who took the plunge and started investing hard, who is battling the hardest to climb to the top of the stack in each niche, then we'll probably find it much easier to call who will struggle the most. They ALL have work to do! (Except maybe Paulton's who just seem to be constantly smashing it year on year anyway, business as usual for them, lol.)