Published: May 9, 2006 at 9:08 AM1 Persons comments do not condem a park.
Plenty of people say things about Disney but they are not condemed.
Why does everyone have something against USF.
In regards to the faeces, are they sure it was? Maybe is was Chocolate? I find it hard to believe there would be faeces in a queue, especially as the most likely suspect would be a child and this ride is definately not a childs ride! If it were, then it wouldn't be the fault of USF.
In regards to the fires, things happen. Recently there have been a lot of brush fires in Florida (We are currently under a state of emergency because of this) I wouldn't be surpirsed if the fire was caused by the heat and lack of rain. Again, hardly Universal's fault.
Published: May 9, 2006 at 10:11 AMUniversal is still a tad behind Disney. I went to both Universal and Disney over spring break and USH still needs some work. We stayed at the Royal Pacific Resort and did not get our room until 11:30 that night when we arrived at about 10. There was a huge line at the front desk as well with only two people working.
It seems to me Universal still may have one or two things go wrong during your visit, while at Disney nothing will go wrong.
Published: May 9, 2006 at 10:31 AMI agree with Gareth, Universal does not get the respect it deserves! Universal has gone through some major transitions with changes in ownership/management and granted they made some mistakes,I feel they're on the verge of a big rebound in attendance with all of the upcoming attractions.
And Mike I think that's and absurd assumption that Disney will have "nothing go wrong" during your visit, they are JUST AS susceptible to mistakes/problems as Universal.
Published: May 10, 2006 at 5:40 AMAs far as things "not going wrong" at Disney, more than likely twice as much will go wrong at Disney. They are just much much much more experienced at hiding it from you. As far as Royal Pacific, it's not run by Universal, it is run by Lowes Hotels.
Published: May 10, 2006 at 5:14 PMIf the doors of USF had opened in 1970, would they still be in business today if they remained relatively the same? I doubt it.
But when you've waited for two hours or more to go on a ride and there's not much else but the two minute thrill to recommend it, you'll begin to look elsewhere to spend the same dollar.
By a huge margin of comparison Disney offers much more in the way of design, attention to details you haven't even caught yet, hospitality, operations, accomodations, and no matter that some of the rides have been there FOREVER they still withstand the tests of time.
It takes more than a kicked up Six Flags to compete. And PAY half the cost of a ticket not to wait in line? Don't get me started. USF should invest more time in training and guest feedback.
Published: May 11, 2006 at 11:29 AMThink you hit to nail on the head without realising.
Disney is for Kids and their parents.
USF hits that bit in the middle, where you want a thrill and not a tired story that you've seen on TV from childhood, that got realeased on VHS, then DVD, then got digitally remastered and released just in time for Christmas/Easter/Mothers day or any other event thats sure to make a billion bucks or 2..
At least USF, when it brings out new rides and shows, doesn't rely on these tired film's the under 12's and over 50's like. USF bring the thrills to another level (Mummy) by investing in technolgy no one else has used.
Disney does invest more as it has more to invest and just recently they have brought out a lot more rides, to bring back the customers they lost due to lack of thrills...
Watch USF over the next few years, theres now more money to invest, a company who wants them to succeed by investing and asking their customers what they want. We all know there are big plans for new rides and thats one of the reasons Disney did what they did.
So sit back, relax, go to Disney if you want , but watch what happens! See you all back here in 3 years to Discuss
"Why Disney Florida is Losing"
Published: May 12, 2006 at 10:16 AMDisney will always best its imitators because it is a true theme park, not a bunch of generic thrill rides 'dressed' with a common theme. Disney continues to deliver on an immersive sensory experience, whereas other parks rely on the draw of thrill rides. Folks who do not care about service, attention to detail, or the general appearance of a park, will likely not care about the Disney Experience. I offer proof of this theory by asking a rhetorical question: