Mad Dog
V.I.P. Member
I don't disagree with you. My only real point is that they're not going to replace the entire park again (USF), which they essentially did once already, within the 'next few years'. It will be a long drawn out process that works within a budget. ....The shame of the whole thing is that the most unpopular attraction in both Universal parks is USF's relatively brand new F&F attraction, which occupies a huge piece of property. That has tied their hands, to a degree, since it didn't serve it's purpose and produced terrible return on investment, and tied up budget and land that could have been better utilized. If that would have been the successful D/E ticket that it was meant to be, a lot of concerns about park balance would be less pronounced.I mean, yes and no.
Even coming up on 50 years old, MK still has plenty of expansion room (some that is being used right now for Tron). As does Epcot and DAK. DHS even has a decent amount of expansion room if Disney chooses to use space correctly. Hitting 30 this year, there's only one plot really available for expansion at USF outside of tearing down the sound stages which I think is a last resort option. Same thing with IOA. Very few actual expansion plots left (one of the last major areas that was underused is now being used for the JP Coaster). IOA has a few areas for redevelopment, but really no expansion space.
It's just facts that USF and IOA are running on a finite amount of land and both are almost built out as far as usable land. Not all of the land is being used best though, which is why replacements need to continue to happen at USF. This park was truly a complete mess before Comcast took over and while it's much better, it still has a long ways to go. And there WILL be technical expansion because (for example) once they decide what to do with Kid Zone, that will add rides that people actually care about and that section of the park will be relevant. Replacing is not bad, especially when what you're replacing is poor to begin with.