Originally Posted By dizneed Hello everyone, I saw this on my MSN homepage this morning. This is the source of the information << Three years ago, the American travel title Travel+Leisure published a piece on the 50 most-visited global tourist attractions (Times Square in New York came in at No. 1). Now the home exchange website Lovehomeswap has decided to see how the figures have changed since the first list was compiled. >> This makes for some pretty impressive numbers! Here’s a quick summary: Universal Studios Hollywood California – 5,912,000 – (48) Universal Studios Orlando Florida – 6,195,000 – (44) Disneyland Hong Kong – 6,700,000 – (41) Disney’s California Adventure, California – 7,775,000 – (34) Islands of Adventure, Universal Orlando, Florida – 7,981,000 – (33) Universal Studios, Osaka, Japan – 9,700,000 – (24) Disney’s Hollywood Studios, Florida – 9,912,000 – (23) Disney’s Animal Kingdom, Florida – 9,998,000 – (22) Epcot, Florida – 11,063,000 – (17) Disneyland Park, Paris, France – 11,200,000 – (16) Tokyo DisneySea, Japan – 12,665,000 – (15) Tokyo Disneyland, Japan – 14,847,000 – (12) Disneyland Park, Anaheim, California – 15,963,000 – (9) Disneyworld’s Magic Kingdom, Orlando, Florida – 17,536,000 – (8)
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance Universal Studios Orlando Florida – 6,195,000 – (44) Disneyworld’s Magic Kingdom, Orlando, Florida – 17,536,000 – (8) Wow, didn't realize that MK has almost triple the attendance of Universal. It's not so surprising then that they aren't panicking about Harry Potter.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Did it say where the numbers actually came from? The companies typically don't release attendance, but there are several groups who do estimates It's interesting that IOA and DCA are so similar, yet I think IOA is a much better park. I guess location really is everything! I'm also somewhat surprised to see TDL and TDS that low. Wasn't TDL getting close to 16M for a while and TDS doing around 14M? I'm also still not convinced that MK really has that much more attendance than the other WDW parks, but that's an issue that's been growing in these types of reports for several years. I'm surprised to see Epcot is relatively low (quite close to DAK and the Studios), yet the park itself has a huge capacity; I hope this will translate into some big investments in coming years
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Wow, didn't realize that MK has almost triple the attendance of Universal. It's not so surprising then that they aren't panicking about Harry Potter." Not to mention that guest spending at MK probably blows Uni out of the water. The whole fake rivalry invented by internet fans between the two resorts is absurd. "I thought DCA was closing the gap more on DL?" Those numbers are three years old.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Yes, the numbers make it clear why Disney feels no need to add a new 'E' to the Magic Kingdom. They plan improvements at DHS and that is clearly the park that needs the most help. I'm surprised to find that the AK has surpassed it in attendance.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Why wouldn't the companies release attendance numbers?<< There are a lot of things involved in calculating the numbers, but the long and short of it is that it really doesn't matter to most investors; as long as guest spending performs well, that's all that really matters But for example, it would be tough to compare a place like Knott's Berry Farm, which is a standalone park, to DL or DCA, whose entrances are about 100 yards apart. Do you count the first park the guest goes into? What if they spend the majority of their time in the other park, but their early morning decision was made based on operating hours? What if they re-enter the park they started in; should that count again? Obviously this sort of stuff is quite important for the operations team to know, but it really serves little purpose for the general public, especially when independent organizations release their estimates >>They plan improvements at DHS and that is clearly the park that needs the most help. I'm surprised to find that the AK has surpassed it in attendance.<< The Studios definitely has room to improve the guest experience, but I'm not sure these numbers prove that it needs the most help. The park is small and has a fairly limited overall capacity for future growth. They could probably squeeze a couple million guests in there if they tried, but the haphazard layout and small scale make it tough for tons of people to be there at any given time. Epcot, on the other hand, has the infrastructure to support significantly larger crowds than MK, yet it can't even get 2/3 of MK's attendance; the room for growth there is incredible, if they're willing to thoughtfully invest in the place
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Like the Studios, the AK also feels small (even though it covers a huge amount of land). The relatively narrow walkways and hub area make it always seem crowded. I'm thinking part of the reason for the AK's surprisingly good attendance numbers is the "first park" factor you mentioned. Many still view the AK as a 2-3 hour park, and since it opens the earliest of any of the Florida parks I assume there are a fair number of people that start their day at the AK and then hop elsewhere.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance It would be hard to ever even out attendance between MK and the other 3 parks. Adding to the other parks would help, but for the average person, who only chooses one or two or three parks to attend, MK is almost always going to be the park that is chosen or one of them. The iconic castle and history is too much to compete with. Everyone wants to experience that first, and then if there is time they will go to the others. Obviously, I'm not including big Disney fans in this who have their own reasons for preferring other parks to MK, but for the average joe going to WDW, I don't see that ever changing dramatically.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "Obviously, I'm not including big Disney fans in this who have their own reasons for preferring other parks to MK, but for the average joe going to WDW, I don't see that ever changing dramatically." I agree. For most people a trip to any kind of Disney park means they are going to the park with a castle as the centerpiece. Did you know that the Magic Kingdom only got built because Walt's advisers insisted that WDW would fail without it? The reason why it's situated at the far north end of the property is because the Epcot (the city not the theme park) was going to be in the primary draw and centered in the middle of the property forcing visitors to pass through it to reach the MK.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo >< I'm surprised to find that the AK has surpassed it in attendance.> I'm not. It's a better park. <but for the average person, who only chooses one or two or three parks to attend,> The average visitor doesn't visit all the parks?
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I think there are a fair number of people who don't vacation at WDW and are just in the area and pick a park for the day. Chances are the MK is going to be the first choice. I'm guessing, but I would also imagine that the MK gets more repeat visits than the other three parks.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Many still view the AK as a 2-3 hour park, and since it opens the earliest of any of the Florida parks I assume there are a fair number of people that start their day at the AK and then hop elsewhere.<< I agree. There's also been the long-standing "conventional wisdom" that claims the animals are more active in the morning, so everybody wants to be on the Safari right when it opens (though I haven't noticed any significant differences in activity levels on my visits at various points in the day). After everybody's gone and done that, then they'll head to another park >>Obviously, I'm not including big Disney fans in this who have their own reasons for preferring other parks to MK, but for the average joe going to WDW, I don't see that ever changing dramatically.<< I agree to a certain extent, but I could see Disney working to try and shift that to a degree. Obviously they always want MK to top the worldwide attendance charts, but realistically they need to do a better job evenly distributing guests throughout their property. FP+ has made it painfully evident that there are very few attractions in the 3 other parks, and that they all have a lot of catching up to do. Honestly, it's really impressive that the other parks do so well, considering they have roughly 1/3 of the attractions as MK There are always going to be those people who say "Today we're going to Disney [MK] and tomorrow we'll go to Epcot." MK holds a position that makes it special, but that doesn't mean that it's the only one that should get attention. The stuff they've made for the Fantasyland expansion has been very well done (even if I don't agree with the original design choices), and really highlight just how stale WDW has become overall >>Chances are the MK is going to be the first choice. I'm guessing, but I would also imagine that the MK gets more repeat visits than the other three parks.<< It's also typically open later than the other parks, so it would benefit more from park hoppers (which I'm sure are counted some how). DAK closes at dusk (soon to be helped by Avatar) and Epcot closes at 9pm. The Studios is occasionally open until 10 or 11, but typically closes around 8 or 9; yet MK routinely stays open until midnight or later at least once a week. Again, I think that shifting of crowds within WDW's parks could help balance this out better
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "The average visitor doesn't visit all the parks?" I'd bet that there are tons of people that vacation for 2-3-4 nights, that just don't have the time to visit all of them.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "It's also typically open later than the other parks, so it would benefit more from park hoppers (which I'm sure are counted some how). DAK closes at dusk (soon to be helped by Avatar) and Epcot closes at 9pm. The Studios is occasionally open until 10 or 11, but typically closes around 8 or 9; yet MK routinely stays open until midnight or later at least once a week" The park hours are probably largely set due to trends they see in parks, right? If the parks are dead after dark, it would make sense for them to close at dusk. Chicken and the egg arguement.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros ^^Right, but depending who is counting attendance and what method they use, it could really change the end numbers I completely agree that MK is the one must-do park for most visitors, and the others are added on as time and money allow. But to a certain degree (for better or worse), the behavior of guests within that framework is decided by the hours that Disney sets for each location
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Or to put it another way, think about the demographics at play. MK is very toddler-focused at the moment (moreso than any other Disney park); yet it regularly has Extra Magic Hours that keep it open until 1-2am. How many parents of a 3 year-old would have requested the park be open that late? Probably not many, yet they're there, attempting to take advantage of shorter queues (which is an entirely different discussion)
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt EPCOT and MK are the only parks at WDW that I'd visit more than once on a single visit. AK is awesome, but there just isn't enough there to keep me interested beyond a day to make it worthwhile to extend my vacation. Same with HWS except that it isn't awesome.
Originally Posted By dizneed << Did it say where the numbers actually came from? The companies typically don't release attendance, but there are several groups who do estimates >> After a quick search at "coastergrotto" website I think I found the source, but they are 2012 numbers.... << Info: Amusement park attendance figures are estimated values based on company information, annual reports and park sources compiled by Themed Entertainment Association (TEA) and Economics Research Associates (ERA). >>
