Purpose: Whereas investments in new attractions continue to rise within the theme park industry, knowledge regarding the effects of new attractions on theme park performance and attendance remains scarce. In order to isolate these effects, the purpose of this paper is to present the results of an econometric study explaining the variance in theme park visitor numbers and quantifying the effects of new attractions on theme park attendance. Design/methodology/approach: The paper is based on an econometric study, in which models were produced for four European theme parks. No pooled modelling was used, meaning that four different models were created; one for each participating theme park. Various variables affecting theme park attendance were identified and quantified, and subsequently the effects of new attractions on visitor numbers were isolated. Findings: Findings indicate that all new attractions opened at Park D during the research period have had a positive long-term influence on attendance. This positive influence lasted for no more than two years. No significant short-term influence was found. There were significant differences in effect between new attractions which could not yet be explained. Research limitations/implications: The research by design only takes into account the economic effects of new attractions and disregards all environmental and socio-cultural effects. Even though the research provides an accurate approximation of the effects of new attractions on attendance, this effect should, according to the author, not be perceived as a stand-alone effect yet as a part of a complex system. A situational approach taking into account several other situational as well as qualitative factors would do the complex reality more justice than a, even though effective, simplified and general approach. Practical implications: Industry operators can now use the econometric model presented in this paper to determine the effects of new attractions on their theme park's attendance and use this knowledge to further fine-tune their investment policy. Originality/value: The paper presents the first econometric model successful at isolating and quantifying a new attraction's effect on theme park attendance and can thus be a valuable tool in perfecting one's investment policy. The paper furthermore includes a brief introduction to a situational approach of determining a new attraction's effects on theme park performance.
LINK
Purpose – Co-branding is an often used marketing strategy within the theme park industry and it has existed in one form or another since the 1930s. Notwithstanding the growing interest for co-branding in the theme park industry academic research in a theme park context has not been found yet. Empirical research on co-branding is limited to a relatively few studies that have typically examined product concepts or fictitious products rather than real instances of co-branding. This article aims to present results of an experiment on the effects of co-branding from a real-life theme park perspective. Design/methodology/approach – The article is based on a classical field experiment in which the IBRA-method of measuring brand associations was used. The IBRA-method does not influence the brand associations like many other research techniques do (by giving certain cues). It is an unaided, unbiasing research technique. The objective of the study is to investigate whether the relationship between theme park Efteling and WWF, resulting in the co-branded attraction PandaVision, could have a negative effect on the strong brand associations of theme park Efteling. Findings – Through the field experiment an insight has been given into the possible effects a respondent's perceived brand fit within a co-branding situation can have on the average evaluation of core associations of one of the constituent brands. Even strong brands (Efteling is the strongest brand in The Netherlands) can be harmed by a wrong co-brand strategy. Results also showed that the brand fit manipulation has resulted in a more negative image of Efteling without affecting the evaluation of the co-branded attraction PandaVision. Only measuring whether guests like or dislike your attractions is thus not sufficient. Research limitations/implications – This research is presented as a preliminarily study and the results should be interpreted with caution. The sample size was limited to 70 respondents and the experimental design with only students may not necessarily represent the typical visitor to the Efteling. Because of the crude manipulation of the treatment it is unclear what precisely caused the established effect. Is the effect caused by the degree of elaboration (meaning, because the respondent is triggered to think deeply about the matter at hand) or by the substantive guidance? Supplementary research with several experimental groups is needed to answer this question. Practical implications – Theme parks should be aware of the dangers of co-branding. Pairing with a wrong partner can damage the brand; negative spillover effects, erosion, brand dilution and even negative bottom line effects for the participating brands are possible. If the results occur for strong brands, weaker brands should be even more aware of the dangers. Originality/value – This article presents the first application of the effects of co-branding in a specific theme park setting. It is also the first article to use the unbiased IBRA-method for measuring brand associations of a co-brand strategy. Negative effects of co-branding for strong brands in a real-life situation were never reported before.
LINK
Parks are necessary for sustainable urban vitality. We studied the optimal availability of parks by combining open data sets with polygons and classification frameworks from urban planning literature. Both distance and population density should be considered as measures of availability when planning urban parks.
MULTIFILE
Whereas investments in new attractions continue to rise within the theme park indus- try, knowledge regarding the effects of new attractions on theme park performance and attendance remains scarce. In order to predict the impact of new attractions on the performance of European theme parks, this article presents an Attraction Response Matrix (ARM). The Attraction Response Matrix offers an integrated framework in which research into the effects of new attractions can take place in a systematic manner. The ARM attempts to transform post priori knowledge into a priori knowledge by better understanding the impact of a new attraction and its' mediating causes. The main premise of the ARM is: "in situation A, attraction B will most likely have effect C on target audience D." By performing research into the relevant effects within certain cells of the ARM and consecu- tively investigating the relationship between the various cells, a better insight will be gained in the working of new attractions. ARM is based on an extensive ZMET study conducted in The Netherlands.
LINK
The key role of Restructing Agencies in achieving high private investments and creating employment. Effective revitalization leads to economically vital and future proof industrial parks. This short paper tells how revitalization can be effectively performed. Preliminary results are presented of a four year study of the Restructuring Agency of Overijssel, active in revitalization in the Province of Overijssel in the Netherlands. The study identifies, presents and reflects on the effectiveness of working methods used by the restructuring agency in seven revitalization projects of industrial parks. The value of continuously focusing on willingness to invest is identified as a key working method and success factor. Other working methods illustrate the importance and effectiveness of goal-oriented choices that aim at snowball effects, the use of dynamic opportunity maps, choosing own role based on complementarity, always developing business cases that contribute to value cases, and managing the important relationship between effective working methods and capability of individuals and organizations. Ongoing research aims at further underpinning provisional conclusions about the use and effectiveness of working methods, and the development of a toolbox for practitioners that will contain and integrate capability profiles, working methods, and the related change management approach.
MULTIFILE
Whereas investments in new attractions continue to rise within the theme park industry, knowledge regarding the effects of new attractions on theme park performance and attendance remains scarce. In this article results from a research amongst general managers of theme parks in Europe will be presented. Different methods were used to investigate what the impact of adding a new attraction on the number of visitors to a theme park would be, according to the general management. The managers first responded to a written survey and then answered some detailed, elaborative questions by email or telephone. The majority of managers also participated in an in-depth interview. Results show that investing in new attractions is considered to be the most important (controllable) factor on the number of visitors in both the short and long run. Most theme parks in Europe invest in major new attractions once every three years, combining it with a minor investment every year. Large differences in effects were found between parks. Parks that invest once every three years showed the highest effect on number of visitors for their latest new attraction.
LINK
