Are licensed characters crucial to the bottom line of regional parks?
I don't believe that most characters help a person make a decision. Does anyone really go to Six Flags parks to hang with Bugs and Daffy? I bet there are many kids who don't know who many of the fringe WB characters are like Marvin the Martian and Foghorn Leghorn, and maybe some that aren't familiar with even Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner. I think it's more an issue of it being easy to bring those characters into the parks to entertain rather than coming up with new ones, which takes time, money and probably a bunch of other stuff like copyrights.
*** Edited 11/8/2007 2:21:01 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***
I don't believe that most characters help a person make a decision. Does anyone really go to Six Flags parks to hang with Bugs and Daffy?
Probably not. But I'd bet that a lot of young'uns are going because of the Wiggles and Thomas.
It goes back to IP popularity.
We'll have to see come '08 how themed The Dark Knight coasters are. But, I can't think of any rides that Six Flags has (off the top of my head) that rely heavily on theme to be successful.
Even if they were, couldn't they theme a ride off of "Mr Six" and have it be wildly successful as well? Is it about the execution of the theme and character use, or is it really about the character itself?
I saw a couple of comments that said they went to King's Island JUST for Nick Universe. That's fair. I'm just wondering if that's a majority of guests, or just some.
I'm still very interested in seeing if it really is cheaper to use someone else's characters instead of making your own. When you talk regional parks, it's not really about theme, but experience. When's the last time Cedar Fair made Snoopy an integral part of a ride (without just being graphics stuck on a stock ride)?
I could assume it is cheaper, since that seems to be what everyone is doing these days. But, I'm a curious guy... :)
halltd said:
Even if they were, couldn't they theme a ride off of "Mr Six" and have it be wildly successful as well? Is it about the execution of the theme and character use, or is it really about the character itself?
Well, they did do Mr Six's Pandemonium. I believe they dropped the "Mr. Six" part after 2 years.
But that's an interesting point. Mr. Six is the closest any park's come in years to creating a recognizable character (come on, it was big enough to warrant pop culture parodies) and Shapiro & Co. came in and dropped it in the blink of an eye.
I'm still very interested in seeing if it really is cheaper to use someone else's characters instead of making your own.
Enough parks do it to make me think the IP is worth the price in comparison.
When you talk regional parks, it's not really about theme, but experience. When's the last time Cedar Fair made Snoopy an integral part of a ride (without just being graphics stuck on a stock ride)?
Yes, but not all parks do that. The Park at MOA certainly intergrated the Peanuts license when it was Camp Snoopy and I'd expect the same with the Nick License.
Even Kings Island has rides built specifically for the Nick license. For example - Blue's Skidoo
I could assume it is cheaper, since that seems to be what everyone is doing these days.
Either that or it's as I suspect - the additional cost is worth it because there is indeed an added interest with certain characters.
The place was PACKED for Eid tho (the end of Ramadan, the mall's become an extremely popular spot for that) and meet-and-greet lines for the Nick 'preview' characters have rivaled those for Santa. I guess we'll see how strongly it rebounds in spring.
-'Playa
NOTE: Severe fecal impaction may render the above words highly debatable.
Anecodotally, the numbers were off long before the construction. That didn't start until...was it very late August or early September?
The Spongebob coaster is going up where shops and the Iwerks simulator were before. That doesn't impact crowd flow much. And you're no longer able to cross North-South through the center of the park where the Half-Pipe is being built. That's about it. Oh yeah--the Ripsaw is down and segments of the track are gone during Half-Pipe construction.
Constrution or no, you still couldn't walk through the park on Eid. And the Halloween crowds (where they were previewing the Nick characters) looked much better than the year before.
-'Playa
NOTE: Severe fecal impaction may render the above words highly debatable.
Lord Gonchar said:
Enough parks do it to make me think the IP is worth the price in comparison.
It's either that, or they haven't considered doing it themselves. I honestly have no idea what parks like Cedar Point pay for licensing of Snoopy. But, they have to make all the Snoopy stuff or buy it right? Like, they make signs and ride theme don't they? (On existing rides) It's not like there's a snoopy ride theme shop, right?
So, instead of buying a license, what about hiring a young graphic designer? They could do all of your character stuff and whoever normally makes the characters or whatever would just make something new instead of Snoopy. Unless the licenses are really cheap, I would think hiring your own graphic designer would be cheaper. Plus, you then control the creativity. Plus, you have something totally unique.
That's why the big question to me is if the character likeness is the important thing or just having a character. Like MoA's attendance went down (allegedly) after Snoopy was pulled. But, attendance will probably go back up once Nick shows up. Park with character = popular. Park without character = not popular.
It would be interesting to know what would have happened if a created mascot for the mall showed up instead.
Characters are in no way all created equal...
Perfect example? Kenny Kangaroo. He was the Kennywood mascot/character for as long as I can remember - but they still brought in Garfield.
In fact, go to KW's Fun Zone page. Kenny's right there to greet you, but click the wallpaper link on that page and you'll not find a single one available with Kenny. However, 50% of them feature the Garfield characters.
The park has an original creation that, for regulars, is synonymous with the park itself, yet they're selling us Garfield at every turn.
Again, I have to go with the odds. If it worked the parks would do it.
But that's kinda my point. A second-rate IP (definitely among the bottom feeders as far as IP's go) was still a better choice for the park than their own historied in-house creation.
But I see what you're getting at. You're separating the 'sell' from the interest. Sure, they can sell Garfield, but is he bringing anyone to the park?
In Garfield's case...probably not. ;)
PIMP....Pseudo-Intellectual Merchandising Property... ;)
Obviously most parks have ALL characters in the games area because they can actually sell games to win these prizes. I've seen Disney characters at Six Flags parks for instance. I'm pretty sure I've also seen the sponge at CP.
I'm trying to sell the park - as in admission. I think selling merchandise is a different animal. Related, but I think a different animal.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure most parks buy the plush and merchandise. But, they tend to make a lot of the signs and characters used around the parks (which I thought could be cheaper if done in-house).
A. You don't know if it is going to be successful or not. So you can pour a bunch of money into a gamble hoping that this new character will be loved by all, or you could just license a proven successful character. Getting the license let's you know what you are getting into instead of going so far into the unknown.
B. A newly created character doesn't have anywhere near enough media time to become a huge hit. Say your average family visits a park once a year. That means that your average family is getting familiar with this created character 1/365 of the year. Are they going to remember that character that much? Will they build that relationship with them and excitement to see them? Answer is probably no.
Now say you have a licensed character like Blue. You get to ride Blue's Skidoo, take your picture with blue, probably buy some blue product, then leave the park at the end of your day. With an original character it ends there. With a licensed character the kid is going to go home, watch Blue's Clues (maybe even reflect on riding blue skidoo during the Blue skidoo portion of the show). At school the child will be able to see all the other tons of Blue's merchandise other kids have, or purchase some of their own like a backpack during back to school shopping. In the winter the kid will see nick toons on ice when it visits, or whatever crap they have on tour. Watch some Blue stuff along the way on tv some more. Plan their next visit to the park and get the child excited to visit because they get to see Blue again, and they get to ride Blue skidoo. And they will get to watch a parade with Blue in it.
So now they have gone the whole year with Blue on their mind keeping them less likely to forget their fun day, and more likely to be excited to return. And when they start to outgrow blue, good news they will be riding sponge bob, or fairly odd parents, or avatar. Keeping them in a cycle of characters to grow up with and a place to keep returning to and get excited about.
If you haven't noticed a lot of the parks go through budget cuts, a lot. One thing you don't usually see on the chopping block are these licensed characters. There is good reason for that
Exactly how popular is Nintendo's favorite son? That's hard to quantify, but a study conducted in 1990 by Marketing Evaluations found that the plump plumber was more recognizable to kids than - wait for it - Mickey "I Used to Run This Town" Mouse.
I wonder how true that is? (if you do a search you can find tons of articles citing that study)
I also wonder if it holds up today?
But at any rate, what about video game licenses? The game market continues to grow and reach record levels of sales and revenue each year. It's really a viable form of entertainment these days - not just something silly that kids do.
What about slapping Nintendo characters into your park? Or an interactive dark ride or coaster based on a game like Halo?
It's an interesting idea.
And if the popularity of those Wii Stations at the SF parks are any indicator - there is an interest in video games with park visitors.
Having large launch parties seemed pretty successful, but it seemed then like it was just the tip of the alliance ice burg for video games and theme parks. I thought it was great when they went with Wii over Xbox as it is the true everyone console, and I was excited to see what they did with it. Haven't given it much thought until now, but I'm pretty disappointed as nothing really happened outside of putting a few consoles in each of the parks. The partnership right now seems to be benefiting Nintendo more than Six Flags, as the Wii centers seem to just be a sample grounds to make people want to purchase the console. At the very least the parks could sell Wiis at the Wii centers, but who goes to a park to buy a Wii?
Hopefully this partnership will expand in the future...
The interesting thing to me is the supposed "competition" that video games give to local parks now. So, if you can't beat them, join them. Maybe that is a solution to getting more people through the gates. Bring the video games to life. So, if people are addicted to the games, maybe they'd like to see them in real life? Or, maybe they really just like being a zombie in a dark room with unlimited snacks? :)
You must be logged in to post
