Movie World Attendance

[Adam]

Just wondering, does anyone know if Movie World's attendance has increased this year? The park seems to be expanding rapidly. I'd hate for them to install three new attractions in three years (Shrek, Superman, Batwing) and then nothing for another four years while they recoup their spent capital in profits. I'm really hoping more people will open their eyes to how much Movie World has picked up their game over the past few years. They beat Dreamworld in many, many aspects. I'd hate to lose such a great park because of low attendance figures.

[Richard]

Attendance in the second half of the 2006 financial year (more or less the six months after Superman opened) was up 9.5% so it has been pretty successful. The real test should come after this summer, with the lingering novelty of Superman Escape and the addition of Batwing. By contrast Scooby-Doo attracted an additional 5%. Sea World's attendance is down, which seems to be a recurring event (down 10% in 2003, up 10% in 2004, now down again - I'd say by more than 10%). They conceded that this was because of a lack of draw to domestic visitors with nothing new in several years. Clearly a catalyst in the hugely advertised annual pass deal.

[joz]

As far as I understand it from the various releases floating around: MW attendance was up 9% in the second half of the financial year, so post January saw a pretty decent increase you'd say primarily on the back of Superman, given Shrek had only a minimal effect on the first half. I'd think we can probably look forward to another similar increase next year (somewhere between 5-10% seems reasonable) with Batwing, particularly given how new Superman still is and the great word of mouth that ride is getting. Wet 'n' Wild was also up with Buccaneer Bay, though the full effect of H20 Zone probably won't really be felt till next year, which is a shame given its also when WWW will cut into the market. Seaworld was down by a pretty big margin, and the great profitability the park had built up over the past couple of years seems to have have been diminished, so its something of a double whammy. I think there is a perception out there that SW is a bit stale, and the place probably just as much as the place needs the new attractions needs a bit of a refresh(I'm aware of one such change supposedly happening next year which is pretty over due). You'll see the park will have a big attendance number next year, even without any new attractions, as the park has been nothing short of packed this year, but that is on the back the sale of 200,000 half price annual passes, so profitability won't be anywhere near former levels. Paradise Country is still plugging away. Another increase in attendance and profitability, put it down to better marketing and awareness. Put next years increase down to the same thing. DW is up 2.5% on last year, and WWW will probably help attendance again next year as DW will now be able to offer an alternative to the 3PSP, and the novelty of a new water park will probably be more then enough to make the DW alternative very appealing.

Edited September 30, 2006 by joz

[dreamworld_rulz]

the full effect of H20 Zone probably won't really be felt till next year, which is a shame given its also when WWW will cut into the market.

What do you mean by that phrase? It sounds like your against WWW? Edited September 30, 2006 by joz

[lisalila]

It means that because of www opening wnw won't get a full effect of visitors because some will go to www. At least that's my opinion of what it meant.

[joz]

What do you mean by that phrase? It sounds like your against WnW. I do think its a shame that the $20mil that went into WnW in the past 3 years probably won't pay off as well as if was built at pretty much any other time in the past few years. I want to see our parks succeed, WWW included. Besides the bottom paragraph there mentions how (I think) the waterpark will effect DW, so I can't be totally evil about the place.

[Richard]

I think I'd look at it a bit differently. It's a shame that WVTP chose to spend $20 million in the space of a year when this could have much more appropriately been spread out over the course of the five years or so that they've desperately needed this expansion. Whether or not they knew about WhiteWater World when they decided to add these attractions doesn't matter. The park has been splitting at the seams for years now. WVTP was blessed for over a decade with Wet'n'Wild being the sole standalone water park on the Gold Coast. It wasn't hard to see that with their attendance skyrocketing despite no new attractions that someone else was going to cash in on it, and Macquarie Leisure/Dreamworld was the most likely candidate. They will most likely suffer an attendance hit that is pretty significant, but I would guarantee it would be much more without this $20 million. Can you imagine anyone choosing Wet'n'Wild, with nothing new in five years (ignoring Whirlpool, as most visitors tend to do), over the cheaper and newer WhiteWater World with attractions that are almost all exclusive to the park?

[dreamworld_rulz]

I think I'd look at it a bit differently. It's a shame that WVTP chose to spend $20 million in the space of a year when this could have much more appropriately been spread out over the course of the five years or so that they've desperately needed this expansion. Whether or not they knew about WhiteWater World when they decided to add these attractions doesn't matter. The park has been splitting at the seams for years now. WVTP was blessed for over a decade with Wet'n'Wild being the sole standalone water park on the Gold Coast. It wasn't hard to see that with their attendance skyrocketing despite no new attractions that someone else was going to cash in on it, and Macquarie Leisure/Dreamworld was the most likely candidate. They will most likely suffer an attendance hit that is pretty significant, but I would guarantee it would be much more without this $20 million. Can you imagine anyone choosing Wet'n'Wild, with nothing new in five years (ignoring Whirlpool, as most visitors tend to do), over the cheaper and newer WhiteWater World with attractions that are almost all exclusive to the park?

Good point there Richard. If i had a choice of Wnw or WWW then i would choose WWW unless Wnw had a new attraction that would blow your mind.

[Brendan]

Quick question what is the attendance for this park ? is it 600.000 or higher i saw Dreamworld attendance at 1,100,000 as i thought Sea World was 750,000 does any one know what the theme park attendances are ?

[Richard]

Impossible to say for Sea World, Wet'n'Wild or Movie World because Village Roadshow don't release specific park attendance figures. Dreamworld attendance is at over 1.4 million per year now. It'll break 1.5 million in the next year or two. Sea World is well over 750,000 - more like 1.2-1.3 mil would by my best guess. Likewise Movie World is well over 1 million itself, most likely up at the 1.2 million mark itself.

[joz]

I'd say SW and MW would each be around the 1.2 / 1.3 mark with WnW around 800,000.

[Ian]

I would say MW 1.4 SW 1.2. MW attandance has been increasing each year ive been there and thats 4 years now. The past 2 days mon, tue were 7000 each day.

[Brendan]

What would the 2006 admission figures be ? See Warner Village theme parks had 3.3 million visitors so how would this break down by park ? Movie World 1.4 Dreamworld 1.3 Sea World 1.2 Wet n Wild .7 White Water ?? Why dont they make these figures public like Dreamworld does, what are they hiding ?

[myk]

Just on the note of WnW expansion, they have enough room to fit a Behemoth bowl behind the Black Hole, and maybe even a Rocket.

[Mushroom]

See Warner Village theme parks had 3.3 million visitors so how would this break down by park ? Movie World 1.4 Dreamworld 1.3 Sea World 1.2 Wet n Wild .7 White Water ?? Why dont they make these figures public like Dreamworld does, what are they hiding ?.

I'm with you Brendan, it would be nice to know what the actual figures are. I understand that the 2006/07 figures for Village Roadshow are around 3.5 million. Dreamworld is around 1.4 for 2006. Looking at the figures, I would hazard a guess and think that 39% would come from Qld, 38% from interstate and the remainder from International. These figures do not appear to fluctuate to greatly over an extended period of time. I would very much like to know what the individual performance of each theme park was just the same. Mushroom

[Richard]

I think it'd be wrong to automatically assume that WVTP's parks follow the same geographic breakdown as Dreamworld. Their well-known and diverse ticketing options alone would skew their results in favour of interstate visitors who in the past have forgone a visit to Dreamworld in favour of WVTP because of the three-park pass. This is in fact one of the key reasons WhiteWater World was built. Don't forget that WVTP's combined attendance figures now include Paradise Country and Australian Outback Spectacular, which contribute a significant portion to the total; probably in the area of 10 per cent.

[Mushroom]

Richard Valid point. What are you thinking then in terms of breakdown and patronage for the WVTP's? Mushroom