June 22, 2025 • 31 mins
The Louvre’s staff closed the world’s most-visited museum with a snap strike, blaming “untenable” crowding and a 20 % cut in state funding even as attendance soars. Philip and Scott pull three operating fixes every attraction can steal now—hard capacity caps, timed-entry tech, and reinvesting in on-site teams before adding the next wing—because a six-year master plan won’t save a gallery that melts down tomorrow. Across the Atlantic, Netflix unveiled its first Netflix House venues—permanent ticketed centers built around Wednesday, One Piece, Stranger Things, and Squid Game. The hosts explain why Netflix needs brick-and-mortar revenue as YouTube does to streaming what streaming once did to cable, and what that means for parks that suddenly share a lane with a $200 billion content giant. Bottom line: cultural icons must treat capacity as an asset while digital titans rush to monetize IP in the real world—collision is coming. Listen to weekly BONUS episodes on our Patreon.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
From our studios this week in Los Angeles in Tampa.
This is green Tag Theme Park and thirty. I'm Philip.
He is Scott Swanson of Scott Swinson Great Development And
on Green Tag we break down the top theme park
news each week and explain white matters to business professionals.
And this week we are covering the third act in
the Louver.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Drama, which is what I will be calling it from
There we go, There we go. Yeah, it's so funny.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
So we we've reported on challenges. I think challenges is
fair that the Louver has been facing and this is
the this is the the Paris Louve, not the not
the Abu Dhabi Loof. But yeah, it's uh, well it's
become very it's become very dramatic.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
It is so great. I'm just and it's so French. Also,
I mean, I'm sure it's.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
It's like because just because I like it.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
But I also it's one of those things where I'm like,
I don't know if this would happen, you know, in America, definitely, but.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So it's been going in a mare. Who knows what
would happen in America. We just don't know that as true.
That's also true.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
That's a good point, Scott, though we do know that
in the last several episodes we talked about the background
for this, which is background is so here.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
I'll let you recap act one the Loopes Act one.
Speaker 1 (01:17):
Act one is that after the pandemic there was revenge
travel and also due to more interest in international locations
that are not necessarily the USA, you have seen a
like spike in visitor attendance at the Loup. And we're
not talking like five extra people. We are talking double
the capacity that these rooms were meant for. We're talking
(01:39):
twenty thousand people trying to see the Mona Lisa every day.
You know, we're talking just a lot, like an incredible
amount of what the infrastructure is not meant to contain.
And so that was sort of act one. Act two
was that there was a like leaked memo, like quote
unquote leaked memo from the director of the Louver and
(02:01):
it leaked out to the press, but it was it
was from the director being written to the government and
basically the director outlined all the terrible things that was
like there's damage to the infrastructure that the bathrooms, like
the staff just can't can you know, keep up the
upkeep and also make it habitable for people and all
this kind of stuff. And then at that point we
(02:22):
covered the plan and Macron had a plan, right. The
plan was basically we've done and talked about it where
it seemed like politically he didn't want to try and
like appropriate money for the louver, and so what he
did politically was like basically put announcers going to there
was gonna be a tax on visitors, like a you know,
(02:45):
a fee to visit them, like extra fees to visit
things that residents would be exempt from. And then he
would they would collect those over the next six years
ish and use them.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
To renovate the building.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
And then what happened was now we're to Act three,
which is that the staff did not like that. So
so basically they went on strike, which is great. I
just think it's great from a just I mean, you know,
it's a bad situation. I think it's it's a legitimate
(03:20):
way to kind of help or to bring attention back
to it. But basically they just said, we can't wait
six years for help, basically, and they said that they
called his plan, they say, the seven hundred to eight
hundred million euro plan renovation plan was hypocritical and it
masks a deeper crisis because while Macron is investing in
(03:41):
new entrances and exhibit spaces, the loose annual operating subsidies
from the French state have shrunk by more than twenty
percent over the past decade, even as as I mentioned,
Busard numbers of sword. So they're kind of pointing to
a systemic problem, which is that there hasn't been investment
to match the amount of additional attendance that is coming in,
you know, and that they can't wait six years.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
But in fact they have reduced the support as the
attendance goes up. It's not even they're not even holding
status quo and they're not adding more more financial support
for additional visitors. They're actually going down. They're supplying financial
support for additional visitors.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
And so they're basically saying that the chronic understaffing and
the situations there with the ticket agents and the security
just everything is just untenable, is what they're saying. And
if you look at the pictures in the piece that
from the Associated Press, I mean the lines and these
I mean, it is it is crazy like to see
that I mean it, it does look really bad, and
(04:44):
so I'm not sure the reality, of course we're not
there on the ground, but the pictures are pretty look
pretty bad. But so yeah, the Love temporary closed because
the staff went on strike, and whether or not it's
going to reopen or reopen importions is TBD as when
(05:04):
we're recording this and then to see how how the
long term stuff.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Will work on it.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
But they this actually the AP brought it into context
for that area that across southern Europe that this is
not the only anti tourism protests happening, that there were
thousands rallied in Venice and Libson and beyond denouncing an
economic model they say displaces locals and erodes city life,
and Barcelona activists sprayed tourists with water pistols, a theatrical
(05:31):
bid to cool down runaway tourists. So that is we
talked about that last time. Also because Japan, of course,
we had covered previously how Japan was like putting up
new fences and kind of like having to put up
signage and do things that they didn't normally have to
do because the visitors didn't have the same sense of
(05:52):
care that the locals did. For some of their historic properties,
and that they're putting capacity limits and prices, and so
this seems to be sweeping across a lot of the areas.
We're not seeing it here in the US, or I
have not seen anything about any of it here in
the US.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
But well, and you know, there are many countries who
are saying don't come to the US right now.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
So there's that, yes, there's that. There's but it is
an interesting thing. We talked about the trend last time,
where Scott and I I think advocated that tourism writ
large is a good thing, but infrastructure, especially what Scott
said about creature comforts, is also a good thing. And
it's definitely about having the balance. And I think we
(06:32):
we as tourist and professionals, can't take for granted. I
think that all of the folks in these situations also no,
you know, they're not necessarily tours and professionals that have
the same background that we do.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
And or even if we think.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
About Scott's background in managing amount people for a large facility,
like you don't necessarily have that if you're the guy
who's in charge of bringing up, you know, the tickets
and stuff at Mountain, like, that's not necessarily in your background.
So we talked about last time how that could be
part of it. But this is definitely an escalation, and
I just think it's funny.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Well, and it's interesting because I think that you know
you're right, this is this is creature comfort. But this
is creature comfort both for the guests and for the
employees and for the team members. That is being that
has has gotten to the point where it needs to
be fixed, and it needs to be fixed sooner rather
than later based on what we've read. Again, as you said,
(07:29):
we're not boots on the ground, so we can't we
cannot advocate for this based on first person experience. This
is sort of trying to read between the lines, I
guess and figure out, you know, what is what is
really going on. Suffice to say that it was to me.
To me, the thing that is most interesting about the
(07:50):
Love specifically is it's it is, and I think Philip
alluded to it. It is the current plan is a
white wash up to cover up the fact that they
have been reducing quietly and slowly reducing funding. Now, the
next question is, if the Lover is so popular, what's
(08:12):
happening to all of the money generated by that popularity,
is that it is the business model such that that
is what they need just to keep their head above water.
Because if that's the case, there's another problem. You know,
having worked with both profits and nonprofits, I am a
firm believer, and there are nonprofit organizations that will disagree
(08:34):
with me, but I am a firm believer that a
nonprofit should operate as though they are for profit and
use their nonprofit status to continue to use it towards
R and D, to continue to develop, to continue to grow.
And I will say, based on my experience in working
with nonprofits, if you're looking for grant money, not necessarily
(08:55):
government grant money, but grant money from sponsorship and from corporations,
And that's thing. Corporations want to see that their money,
their investment, is going to be utilized to its best
possible outcome. So they want to see that you know
how to run your organization. They want to see that
you are focused as much on the basic infrastructure as
(09:16):
you are the sexy new exhibit or the sexy new
ride or whatever that is that's going to come up
in the future. So there is a balance here, you know,
I know you are thrilled by the fact that they've
gone on strike and you think that's really fun. Having
spent enough time on the other side of that, I
think this is a I think this is a very
(09:37):
sad situation because basically, and maybe I'm wrong, but what
I'm hearing, because we've seen the leaked memo in act too,
the management of the Loop are stuck between a rock
and a hard place. They don't have the funding that
they need, primarily from the government, and they have very
(10:03):
disgruntled staff. So you know, when we say quote unquote leaked,
that kind of makes sense that that got out, yep,
so that it would light a fuse, you know, it
would it would force some some hand. It did force
some hand, which was the let's do taxes. Let's you know,
(10:23):
let's basically add tariffs to people visiting the Louver and.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
We'll see how.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
That pans out. And the idea of we can't wait
six years. That's that's where I think there's a little
bit of a a questioning, you know, is this, would
it be possible, for example, for the government to reevaluate
the budget for next year so that they could start
(10:49):
getting that funding in and then utilize the additional tourist
tax for lack of a better description, the additional tourist tax,
to then bring that money back into their coffers so
that we can get the apparently very very much needed
(11:10):
improvements made so that the guest experience continues to be
something special, continues to be something desirable. And you know,
and I'm sure that there's an argument people sitting out
there going, but wait, they've already got people breaking down
the doors, They've already got twice capacity. Why why is
that even a concern? Because eventually the pendulum will swing
(11:32):
back the other way. Eventually people will go, yeah, we
went to the Louver. It sucked, it was horrible. Yeah,
we didn't get to you know, we got to we
got to one gallery. We had to wait two hours
to see the Mona Lisa, and that even then it
was across the room of crowded people because the Mona
Lisa kids is not that big.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
People are saying that there's some people in the story
actually quoted that are being like what you see when
you go into mon Lisa's elbows and cell phones. You
don't see the Mona Lisa, right.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
And a posting vamp on the other side of the room.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Yeah, so I'm wondering what do you think about changing
the capacity, because apparently there is currently a like a
capacity as in like a whatever. I think it's they've
set it. I think thirty thousand is already a limit,
like they've already set a limit on daily attendance. I
(12:21):
guess my question is what about dropping that to where
it's actually supposed to be, which is fifteen, and then
just saying just like dynamic pricing in a way right
where you're just saying, look like it's fifteen.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
So the Disneyland model, Yeah, just be.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Like it's max fifteen and you get therapy times where
it's more expensive, Like like, why not in this case
because of the urgency of the situation, why not put
that effect and then that could affect real change immediately
for the staff members. And it's and there's got to
be I'm not sure about how it works in France,
(12:57):
but like you know, if the room was built for
X and you're putting why in it, it seems like
there's also a danger just in the amount of people
in the room for fire code and for evacuation. So
I mean it seems to me like those things I'm
curious about, like why if they already have a capacity
limit or you know, a restriction on the number of
(13:18):
tickets sold for a day, why is it so high
and why aren't they they just take that down? Is it?
Speaker 2 (13:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Yeah, I have no idea what that what that number
is based on, you know, it's I don't know, I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
Whether that is.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
It was set at the first number because they felt
that would make a good guest experience. Then when they
realized we have people knocking down the doors and people
get you know, if you let fifteen fifteen thousand and
thirty thousand, you know, you were letting in thirty thousand,
and then you cut it down to fifteen thousand, then
you have fifteen thousand complaints? So is that more negative?
Speaker 2 (13:54):
You know, it's it's all one of the.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Things that I if you get nothing else from this show,
one of the things that I want you to remember
is there is no silver bullet. There's no magic bullet.
That is just one way to go and it makes
everything right. It's always a balancing act. It is always
a balancing act. So is there going to be more complaint,
more negative publicity generated from reducing the number down and
(14:21):
increasing the price, whether that's through dynamic pricing or just
you know, we're gonna let half as many people in
and we're gonna double the price. You know, that's the
simple math solution. I like simple math because I'm not
very good at it, but that's the simple math solution.
Is that going to create more negativity than keeping letting
(14:42):
everybody in but making their experience less than it should be.
I don't know the answer, but these are all the
kinds of questions that they need to be having right now,
because you know, even because so I was in Paris
ten years ago, twelve years ago, and we didn't go
to the loof because you it was even back then
(15:02):
it was too crowded. This is pre COVID. Even then,
we couldn't get in day of because I was only
there for a day because I was on a cruise ship.
But we couldn't get in, so we opted not to
go to the loose. So this is not a new problem.
That's the thing that I think is frustrating.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
This is not new. This is something as you know,
even in the short time that we've been reporting it,
it's already now had three very dramatic acts and it's
one of those situations that has been going on for
at least ten years. So I.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
Like some of the solutions. I mean, I'm not opposed
to the tourist tax. I'm really not. I think if
because one of the things that we have to recognize,
and I think this goes back to some of the
other anti tourism stories as attractions. As organizations, Yes, we
have to generate revenue and we have to draw tourism
because that will help our hoteliers and our restauranteers and
(15:55):
the local mall et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But
we also have to be cognizant of the community and
the neighborhood that we operate in, because the moment you
knock that relationship to the ground, then you've got all
kinds of other trouble. So you know, to to just
put on a flat tax for everybody. We're just going
(16:17):
to do an amusement tax or a museum tax or
whatever you want to call it that applies to everyone.
Then you're not being you're not recognizing that the locals
who have supported you for all these years are now
getting their handslapped because of something that's completely out of
their control.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Which is the additional tourism.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
So I think what you're saying a little bit is
that Macron's plan had elements of it that were good
because it was yea was directly it was only taxing
the people who are not local. But on the flip
side that it was too long because of that reason,
because it you know, because it's not taking funds immediately
and it's doing other things. It's taking too long and
(16:58):
so therefore there is no operational adjustment.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Correct. So I think you're saying too far.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Down the well to have a six year plan. They
need an immediate fix and then a six year recovery.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Yeah, they both.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
So he needs to work with the local operators to
be like, how can we adjust this but also make
a six year plan.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
Think of it as taking out a mortgage on a home.
You know, there are different cultures buy homes in different ways.
Some people some cultures live in live with their parents,
or live in very small homes until such time as
they can buy a home outright, so it takes them
twenty years before they can buy a house. More common
in the United States is the concept of mortgage.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
We will get a you.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
Know, someone to buy the house up front in essence,
and then we'll pay back the mortgage company with an
interest rate. To me, because this sounds like it's already
gone way too far down the well. To me, that
seems like the only solution is to basically say, okay,
here's our bailout money, and we're going to use these
taxes or these budgetary changes to pay us back for
(18:07):
solving the solution.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Now.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Yeah, yeah, if you think of it like a business,
they should be able to get a loan based off
of the current demand, right basically, well, or.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
Just rebudget I mean I make that sound overly simple,
but just reevaluate, reevaluate the budget. And is there a way,
you know, when when one house is on fire, you
don't put water on the entire neighborhood. Let's figure out
a way to take all of the water that's being
spread over the other organizations and really focus it in. Now,
will that upset other organizations? Yes, short term, But that's
(18:40):
you know, that's why I say there's no one I
sit here very smugly and say, well, this is what
they should do, but there is no one solid answer.
These are options that they should be discussing and hopefully
find something that works best for their specific situation.
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Well, moving on, let's our second story. Here is also
an update for something we covered previously, which is the
Netflix Houses. So previously we talked about how I think
we've talked about this for years. I think about how
the concept of Netflix, basically basically Netflix, over the past
many years, has been experimenting with in person experiences. We
(19:18):
know that obviously there's horror Nights, and there's those part
where they've worked with partners, but there's also where they've
made their own experiences, and mostly these are pop up stores.
The ones I've been to were mostly the Stranger Things
pop up stores, where it's more it is a themed experience,
but it's like a themed shopping experience, right and so
earlier or I don't remember when, whenever this was announced,
(19:40):
we talked about it on the show, and it was
the concept that they're making kind of like an fec basically,
which is called Netflix House, and we weren't sure what
it was going to look like at the time, but
we assumed that it was going to be a collection
of these experiences because they already have tested them effectively
in other places and just bringing them together makes sense,
(20:02):
and so news came out this week that I think
that's sort of what's happening, but I'm still not clear. Basically,
Netflix House will open in twenty twenty five and Philadelphia
and Dallas, followed by a third venue in twenty twenty
seven in Las Vegas. The Philadelphia location will include attractions
(20:22):
based off Wednesday and One Piece, and the Dallas kind
of part will feature Stranger Things and squid Games. Netflix
announced to lineups on June seventeenth, So it was just
this week, and there are pictures out that kind of
show sort of blueprints or mockups, I would say, and
(20:42):
from the mock ups, I'm just I can't really tell
because I.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
Just pulled it up and I'm looking at it, going, oh,
this is a little tricky. Yeah, so I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
You know, it looks cool. It definitely looks cool. It
looks large, and of course these are larger than they
were previously. The only other interesting things is an article
here from A Trash's magazine points out that both of
these venues are in one one hundred thousand square foot
department stores at two highly frequented malls. So I like again,
(21:21):
we liked the story originally, I'm just unsure of what
it's going to actually be like, and I still can't
tell from these renderings even though we have ips. I
think I like the idea. I don't want to go
on like a huge ransom. But I was talking to
somebody recently, no one's going.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
To stop you.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
I don't know if it's commentary so to put it
in context, And I was explaining this to somebody recently
as I was ranting about my low YouTube ad revenue.
But I was saying that basically, for the first time
last month, for the first time ever, streaming surpassed cable
and TV viewership in America, which I think, depending on
(22:04):
your generation, you're probably surprised at on either end of it, right,
you're probably surprised at that, and you know, so it's
interesting that what pushed it over the edge was retired folks,
as older folks moving from TV and cable into watching YouTube,
and YouTube has now become a more washed streamer than Netflix.
(22:24):
And I think many times people don't realize that YouTube
is a streamer in the same way that Netflix is.
It really is, and people they watch YouTube on their TVs,
and this is what is pushing this number over and
so all of the places we talk about in the
entertainment are kind of in this battle, even though we
don't realize it right. Comcast is in this battle because
(22:45):
as people cut cables, it impacts its bottom line, which
impacts its ability to get capital to put into new
theme parks and all that. That's why they've been rushing
to diversify, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But Netflix
and YouTube are also all interwheuned into this, and to me,
I think that Netflix, in a way, YouTube is doing
(23:06):
to Netflix what Netflix did to cable TV because YouTube,
the cost of content on YouTube is less than half
of what Netflix spends for its content, and we've already
talked about how Netflix is spending less than other people.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
So it's this huge race to the bottom.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
And it's because effectively, YouTube only pays for content if
that content makes money, and then even when they pay
for it, it's only an advertising split. So you can
have a creator like us, even on this channel, where
we are making years of content for YouTube, but we
don't get paid for it because we have to reach
(23:40):
a certain threshold, and that threshold is pretty high. So
there's that base level. But then even when we do
get paid, we only get a percentage. So basically it's
like someone going out and saying, you're going to produce
the content and I'm going to sell ad space on it,
but I'm only going to give you money if I
sell adspace, and so then you're making this asset for years.
So it's just a much cleaner I mean, it's a
(24:03):
they're making. The business model is just entirely different versus Netflix.
It has to invest every year in new content or
they lose subscribers or whatever. They have to spend the money.
So I think you're going to see that erosion of
Netflix's base in that, like Netflix, it's just a worst
business model when when people are just when there, when
so many people are willing to make so much content
(24:24):
for basically for free or for very little money on YouTube,
then that puts Netflix in a bad place because they
have to pay for their content unlike YouTube. Okay, that's
the background, so similar I think to what Comcast is
doing is Netflix probably sees the right on the wall
and they're like, oh, our business model is eroding because
just you, YouTube can scale infinitely basically and you and
(24:47):
Netflix cannot and yes, while there's always going to be
the appetite for HBO, there's still HBO and that's that's
that's the other problem is that they're almost crunched from
both angles, right, And so I think this, similar to
what Comcast is doing, is a play at diversification. They
look at Disney, they look at Universal and they say, oh,
(25:07):
we also have incredible IP and look at Disney's flywheel
that makes them so much money. And the theme parks
are have a better valuation than Disney plus and they
hear everything that's going on there and they're probably thinking,
what if we made theme parks and we made a
flywheel based off of our good ips and the same thing.
We could invest less in better ips, just like Disney
(25:29):
talked about with Marvel, less in better ips, and then
if we had other forms of revenue that would lead
to better revenue, and if we could attack markets that
are less, you know, that have less competition, Like they're
not going into Los Angeles or Orlando, right, They're going
into places that last and Dallas and Philadelphia, right, which
(25:49):
have great markets, and I assume great viewership numbers, great
percentage of viewers, but also they're not competing with the
Disney or Universal except for the kids or maybe in Dallas.
So I think that's what this is. This is a
larger This is a larger competitive play that is about
diversifying their revenue before it is too late, in the
(26:12):
same way that Comcast is also trying to diversify before
it's too late. And I think it's a very similar
model even to some of the stuff that we've seen
from Universal and that they're trying to make an fec
of some sort of thing where they're collecting interactive elements
based off of the different eyeps that they have, And
as I mentioned before, how well or not this will
do is going to really come down to the execution,
(26:34):
just like with Horror Unleashed, Right, It's like what it
they've shown that they're putting in a place that has
high foot traffic natively, and then they've chosen very popular
ips like one Piece Grow incredibly popular. We talked about
this last time when we talked about the Universal FanFest nights.
So they've chosen popular eyeps and they put them in
(26:54):
locations to gather foot traffic. I'm not sure what else
they could do. Really kind of like they've set a
really good age. Now it comes down to the execution
and their team and their research, and Disney was not
built in a day. That's the other thing we just talked.
We didn't talk about it yet, but the concept of
epic universe. You know, theme parks take like a decade
to really get into the groove of what the park
(27:16):
is going to become and flesh out all the experiences.
And I'm not sure that Universal or Netflix understands that
that there's a time Anyway, I'm done, Scott.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
What I think is interesting? No, I agree with a
lot of what you said. I think what I think
is interesting about this particular story is, you know, they're
they're going. First of all, they're utilizing they're utilizing these
old anchor stores quite honestly, Yep, they're they're so they're
going in and they're probably getting the space for pennies
(27:48):
on the dollar because these anchor stores used to be
what pulled people into these males and King of Pressure
Mall in Philly is huge or what huge? Yeah, it
was at one time.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
And it's iconic too, right, that's a thing iconic.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
Yes, I've been going there, so I have family in
that or had family in that area, and I've been
going to that mall since I was six years old,
so it's yeah, And it used to be it used
to be a destination location when I was little, so
it does have that iconic status. So my guess is
the mall owners are looking at it going, oh, here's
a way we can pull people in, which, first of all,
(28:23):
I think is way overdue in so many other locations.
I know whether they've tried it in different different spots
here and there, but finding a different, a different way
to utilize those gigantic anchor stores is I think going
to be imperative to the brick and mortar world that
we used to live in. So I think that's I
think that's great. I think that's probably working to their
(28:44):
advantage because they're they're getting they're probably getting this these
spaces for significantly less than they used to go for
as a retail. Because the mall owners are thinking, here's Netflix,
They're going to bring in a gazillion people, and all
of our other stores are going to do well so
they can stay in their lifecasions. I think that is
important to address. I agree with you one hundred percent
(29:05):
on it all comes down to execution. I'm hoping that
the execution includes creature comforts because in looking at in
looking at the maps, they seem even though they're one
hundred thousand square feet, they seem tight, and they don't
seem to have a very natural flow to them. It
almost looks like a series of escape rooms.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Is the vibe that I'm getting.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Now, again, I have no idea, and I may be
way off, but it almost looks like a series of
escape rooms where you'll do one ip, than the next
IP and the next ip. The problem there is what
if I don't care about the second ip. So we'll see,
and again I may be wrong, there may be a
central hub in this space that I'm just simply not seeing.
(29:48):
Kind of hope there is, because I think that would
be beneficial. And then finally, the thing that you hit
on that the moment we started talking about this particular story,
it was exactly what I thought is, they've looked at Disney.
They've seen that Disney, no matter how much they try,
their streaming is not performing the business model for their
Their streaming business is not nearly as impactful or not
(30:10):
nearly as profitable as their parks. So they're going we're
leaving money on the table here and you know as YouTube,
which I'm sorry, sorry content creators. I really hope that
YouTube does not put Netflix out of business because I
can only watch so many reality based content. I don't
want to watch your recipe for how to make a
(30:30):
caterpillar cake. But we need higher in production. We need
higher in production than is willing to go on YouTube
for free. So I'm hoping that that's not complete. I'm
hoping that we do have some sense of quality. Don't
misunderstand me. I have lots of content creators that I follow,
Philip being one of them, lots of content creators that
(30:50):
I follow. But I am hoping that as we move forward,
we find that there is a place in the market
for all these things. And I think that Netflix is
doing that by saying we're not just the big blockbuster
things on TV, where the big blockbuster things you can
walk through, where the big blockbuster things that you can
participate in, interact in, and it will continue to build
a stronger audience for the content that they are indeed
(31:14):
creating the high end, you know, studio quality content that
they are creating. So well, speaking of high quality content,
this is about all the high quality content we can
give you this week because our time's up, so on
behalf of Philip Bernandez and myself Scott Swinson. This is
Green Tag Theme Park in thirty and we will see
you next week. Unless you're going to tune in, you're
one of our followers, one of our subscribers on unhinge,
(31:37):
and then you can go watch that and listen to
us rant and find out what we really think
From our studios this week in Los Angeles in Tampa.
This is green Tag Theme Park and thirty. I'm Philip.
He is Scott Swanson of Scott Swinson Great Development And
on Green Tag we break down the top theme park
news each week and explain white matters to business professionals.
And this week we are covering the third act in
the Louver.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Drama, which is what I will be calling it from
There we go, There we go. Yeah, it's so funny.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
So we we've reported on challenges. I think challenges is
fair that the Louver has been facing and this is
the this is the the Paris Louve, not the not
the Abu Dhabi Loof. But yeah, it's uh, well it's
become very it's become very dramatic.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
It is so great. I'm just and it's so French. Also,
I mean, I'm sure it's.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
It's like because just because I like it.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
But I also it's one of those things where I'm like,
I don't know if this would happen, you know, in America, definitely, but.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So it's been going in a mare. Who knows what
would happen in America. We just don't know that as true.
That's also true.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
That's a good point, Scott, though we do know that
in the last several episodes we talked about the background
for this, which is background is so here.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
I'll let you recap act one the Loopes Act one.
Speaker 1 (01:17):
Act one is that after the pandemic there was revenge
travel and also due to more interest in international locations
that are not necessarily the USA, you have seen a
like spike in visitor attendance at the Loup. And we're
not talking like five extra people. We are talking double
the capacity that these rooms were meant for. We're talking
(01:39):
twenty thousand people trying to see the Mona Lisa every day.
You know, we're talking just a lot, like an incredible
amount of what the infrastructure is not meant to contain.
And so that was sort of act one. Act two
was that there was a like leaked memo, like quote
unquote leaked memo from the director of the Louver and
(02:01):
it leaked out to the press, but it was it
was from the director being written to the government and
basically the director outlined all the terrible things that was
like there's damage to the infrastructure that the bathrooms, like
the staff just can't can you know, keep up the
upkeep and also make it habitable for people and all
this kind of stuff. And then at that point we
(02:22):
covered the plan and Macron had a plan, right. The
plan was basically we've done and talked about it where
it seemed like politically he didn't want to try and
like appropriate money for the louver, and so what he
did politically was like basically put announcers going to there
was gonna be a tax on visitors, like a you know,
(02:45):
a fee to visit them, like extra fees to visit
things that residents would be exempt from. And then he
would they would collect those over the next six years
ish and use them.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
To renovate the building.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
And then what happened was now we're to Act three,
which is that the staff did not like that. So
so basically they went on strike, which is great. I
just think it's great from a just I mean, you know,
it's a bad situation. I think it's it's a legitimate
(03:20):
way to kind of help or to bring attention back
to it. But basically they just said, we can't wait
six years for help, basically, and they said that they
called his plan, they say, the seven hundred to eight
hundred million euro plan renovation plan was hypocritical and it
masks a deeper crisis because while Macron is investing in
(03:41):
new entrances and exhibit spaces, the loose annual operating subsidies
from the French state have shrunk by more than twenty
percent over the past decade, even as as I mentioned,
Busard numbers of sword. So they're kind of pointing to
a systemic problem, which is that there hasn't been investment
to match the amount of additional attendance that is coming in,
you know, and that they can't wait six years.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
But in fact they have reduced the support as the
attendance goes up. It's not even they're not even holding
status quo and they're not adding more more financial support
for additional visitors. They're actually going down. They're supplying financial
support for additional visitors.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
And so they're basically saying that the chronic understaffing and
the situations there with the ticket agents and the security
just everything is just untenable, is what they're saying. And
if you look at the pictures in the piece that
from the Associated Press, I mean the lines and these
I mean, it is it is crazy like to see
that I mean it, it does look really bad, and
(04:44):
so I'm not sure the reality, of course we're not
there on the ground, but the pictures are pretty look
pretty bad. But so yeah, the Love temporary closed because
the staff went on strike, and whether or not it's
going to reopen or reopen importions is TBD as when
(05:04):
we're recording this and then to see how how the
long term stuff.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Will work on it.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
But they this actually the AP brought it into context
for that area that across southern Europe that this is
not the only anti tourism protests happening, that there were
thousands rallied in Venice and Libson and beyond denouncing an
economic model they say displaces locals and erodes city life,
and Barcelona activists sprayed tourists with water pistols, a theatrical
(05:31):
bid to cool down runaway tourists. So that is we
talked about that last time. Also because Japan, of course,
we had covered previously how Japan was like putting up
new fences and kind of like having to put up
signage and do things that they didn't normally have to
do because the visitors didn't have the same sense of
(05:52):
care that the locals did. For some of their historic properties,
and that they're putting capacity limits and prices, and so
this seems to be sweeping across a lot of the areas.
We're not seeing it here in the US, or I
have not seen anything about any of it here in
the US.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
But well, and you know, there are many countries who
are saying don't come to the US right now.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
So there's that, yes, there's that. There's but it is
an interesting thing. We talked about the trend last time,
where Scott and I I think advocated that tourism writ
large is a good thing, but infrastructure, especially what Scott
said about creature comforts, is also a good thing. And
it's definitely about having the balance. And I think we
(06:32):
we as tourist and professionals, can't take for granted. I
think that all of the folks in these situations also no,
you know, they're not necessarily tours and professionals that have
the same background that we do.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
And or even if we think.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
About Scott's background in managing amount people for a large facility,
like you don't necessarily have that if you're the guy
who's in charge of bringing up, you know, the tickets
and stuff at Mountain, like, that's not necessarily in your background.
So we talked about last time how that could be
part of it. But this is definitely an escalation, and
I just think it's funny.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Well, and it's interesting because I think that you know
you're right, this is this is creature comfort. But this
is creature comfort both for the guests and for the
employees and for the team members. That is being that
has has gotten to the point where it needs to
be fixed, and it needs to be fixed sooner rather
than later based on what we've read. Again, as you said,
(07:29):
we're not boots on the ground, so we can't we
cannot advocate for this based on first person experience. This
is sort of trying to read between the lines, I
guess and figure out, you know, what is what is
really going on. Suffice to say that it was to me.
To me, the thing that is most interesting about the
(07:50):
Love specifically is it's it is, and I think Philip
alluded to it. It is the current plan is a
white wash up to cover up the fact that they
have been reducing quietly and slowly reducing funding. Now, the
next question is, if the Lover is so popular, what's
(08:12):
happening to all of the money generated by that popularity,
is that it is the business model such that that
is what they need just to keep their head above water.
Because if that's the case, there's another problem. You know,
having worked with both profits and nonprofits, I am a
firm believer, and there are nonprofit organizations that will disagree
(08:34):
with me, but I am a firm believer that a
nonprofit should operate as though they are for profit and
use their nonprofit status to continue to use it towards
R and D, to continue to develop, to continue to grow.
And I will say, based on my experience in working
with nonprofits, if you're looking for grant money, not necessarily
(08:55):
government grant money, but grant money from sponsorship and from corporations,
And that's thing. Corporations want to see that their money,
their investment, is going to be utilized to its best
possible outcome. So they want to see that you know
how to run your organization. They want to see that
you are focused as much on the basic infrastructure as
(09:16):
you are the sexy new exhibit or the sexy new
ride or whatever that is that's going to come up
in the future. So there is a balance here, you know,
I know you are thrilled by the fact that they've
gone on strike and you think that's really fun. Having
spent enough time on the other side of that, I
think this is a I think this is a very
(09:37):
sad situation because basically, and maybe I'm wrong, but what
I'm hearing, because we've seen the leaked memo in act too,
the management of the Loop are stuck between a rock
and a hard place. They don't have the funding that
they need, primarily from the government, and they have very
(10:03):
disgruntled staff. So you know, when we say quote unquote leaked,
that kind of makes sense that that got out, yep,
so that it would light a fuse, you know, it
would it would force some some hand. It did force
some hand, which was the let's do taxes. Let's you know,
(10:23):
let's basically add tariffs to people visiting the Louver and.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
We'll see how.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
That pans out. And the idea of we can't wait
six years. That's that's where I think there's a little
bit of a a questioning, you know, is this, would
it be possible, for example, for the government to reevaluate
the budget for next year so that they could start
(10:49):
getting that funding in and then utilize the additional tourist
tax for lack of a better description, the additional tourist tax,
to then bring that money back into their coffers so
that we can get the apparently very very much needed
(11:10):
improvements made so that the guest experience continues to be
something special, continues to be something desirable. And you know,
and I'm sure that there's an argument people sitting out
there going, but wait, they've already got people breaking down
the doors, They've already got twice capacity. Why why is
that even a concern? Because eventually the pendulum will swing
(11:32):
back the other way. Eventually people will go, yeah, we
went to the Louver. It sucked, it was horrible. Yeah,
we didn't get to you know, we got to we
got to one gallery. We had to wait two hours
to see the Mona Lisa, and that even then it
was across the room of crowded people because the Mona
Lisa kids is not that big.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
People are saying that there's some people in the story
actually quoted that are being like what you see when
you go into mon Lisa's elbows and cell phones. You
don't see the Mona Lisa, right.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
And a posting vamp on the other side of the room.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Yeah, so I'm wondering what do you think about changing
the capacity, because apparently there is currently a like a
capacity as in like a whatever. I think it's they've
set it. I think thirty thousand is already a limit,
like they've already set a limit on daily attendance. I
(12:21):
guess my question is what about dropping that to where
it's actually supposed to be, which is fifteen, and then
just saying just like dynamic pricing in a way right
where you're just saying, look like it's fifteen.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
So the Disneyland model, Yeah, just be.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Like it's max fifteen and you get therapy times where
it's more expensive, Like like, why not in this case
because of the urgency of the situation, why not put
that effect and then that could affect real change immediately
for the staff members. And it's and there's got to
be I'm not sure about how it works in France,
(12:57):
but like you know, if the room was built for
X and you're putting why in it, it seems like
there's also a danger just in the amount of people
in the room for fire code and for evacuation. So
I mean it seems to me like those things I'm
curious about, like why if they already have a capacity
limit or you know, a restriction on the number of
(13:18):
tickets sold for a day, why is it so high
and why aren't they they just take that down? Is it?
Speaker 2 (13:25):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Yeah, I have no idea what that what that number
is based on, you know, it's I don't know, I
don't know.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
Whether that is.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
It was set at the first number because they felt
that would make a good guest experience. Then when they
realized we have people knocking down the doors and people
get you know, if you let fifteen fifteen thousand and
thirty thousand, you know, you were letting in thirty thousand,
and then you cut it down to fifteen thousand, then
you have fifteen thousand complaints? So is that more negative?
Speaker 2 (13:54):
You know, it's it's all one of the.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Things that I if you get nothing else from this show,
one of the things that I want you to remember
is there is no silver bullet. There's no magic bullet.
That is just one way to go and it makes
everything right. It's always a balancing act. It is always
a balancing act. So is there going to be more complaint,
more negative publicity generated from reducing the number down and
(14:21):
increasing the price, whether that's through dynamic pricing or just
you know, we're gonna let half as many people in
and we're gonna double the price. You know, that's the
simple math solution. I like simple math because I'm not
very good at it, but that's the simple math solution.
Is that going to create more negativity than keeping letting
(14:42):
everybody in but making their experience less than it should be.
I don't know the answer, but these are all the
kinds of questions that they need to be having right now,
because you know, even because so I was in Paris
ten years ago, twelve years ago, and we didn't go
to the loof because you it was even back then
(15:02):
it was too crowded. This is pre COVID. Even then,
we couldn't get in day of because I was only
there for a day because I was on a cruise ship.
But we couldn't get in, so we opted not to
go to the loose. So this is not a new problem.
That's the thing that I think is frustrating.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
This is not new. This is something as you know,
even in the short time that we've been reporting it,
it's already now had three very dramatic acts and it's
one of those situations that has been going on for
at least ten years. So I.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
Like some of the solutions. I mean, I'm not opposed
to the tourist tax. I'm really not. I think if
because one of the things that we have to recognize,
and I think this goes back to some of the
other anti tourism stories as attractions. As organizations, Yes, we
have to generate revenue and we have to draw tourism
because that will help our hoteliers and our restauranteers and
(15:55):
the local mall et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But
we also have to be cognizant of the community and
the neighborhood that we operate in, because the moment you
knock that relationship to the ground, then you've got all
kinds of other trouble. So you know, to to just
put on a flat tax for everybody. We're just going
(16:17):
to do an amusement tax or a museum tax or
whatever you want to call it that applies to everyone.
Then you're not being you're not recognizing that the locals
who have supported you for all these years are now
getting their handslapped because of something that's completely out of
their control.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Which is the additional tourism.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
So I think what you're saying a little bit is
that Macron's plan had elements of it that were good
because it was yea was directly it was only taxing
the people who are not local. But on the flip
side that it was too long because of that reason,
because it you know, because it's not taking funds immediately
and it's doing other things. It's taking too long and
(16:58):
so therefore there is no operational adjustment.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Correct. So I think you're saying too far.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Down the well to have a six year plan. They
need an immediate fix and then a six year recovery.
Speaker 2 (17:11):
Yeah, they both.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
So he needs to work with the local operators to
be like, how can we adjust this but also make
a six year plan.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
Think of it as taking out a mortgage on a home.
You know, there are different cultures buy homes in different ways.
Some people some cultures live in live with their parents,
or live in very small homes until such time as
they can buy a home outright, so it takes them
twenty years before they can buy a house. More common
in the United States is the concept of mortgage.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
We will get a you.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
Know, someone to buy the house up front in essence,
and then we'll pay back the mortgage company with an
interest rate. To me, because this sounds like it's already
gone way too far down the well. To me, that
seems like the only solution is to basically say, okay,
here's our bailout money, and we're going to use these
taxes or these budgetary changes to pay us back for
(18:07):
solving the solution.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Now.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Yeah, yeah, if you think of it like a business,
they should be able to get a loan based off
of the current demand, right basically, well, or.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
Just rebudget I mean I make that sound overly simple,
but just reevaluate, reevaluate the budget. And is there a way,
you know, when when one house is on fire, you
don't put water on the entire neighborhood. Let's figure out
a way to take all of the water that's being
spread over the other organizations and really focus it in. Now,
will that upset other organizations? Yes, short term, But that's
(18:40):
you know, that's why I say there's no one I
sit here very smugly and say, well, this is what
they should do, but there is no one solid answer.
These are options that they should be discussing and hopefully
find something that works best for their specific situation.
Speaker 2 (18:54):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Well, moving on, let's our second story. Here is also
an update for something we covered previously, which is the
Netflix Houses. So previously we talked about how I think
we've talked about this for years. I think about how
the concept of Netflix, basically basically Netflix, over the past
many years, has been experimenting with in person experiences. We
(19:18):
know that obviously there's horror Nights, and there's those part
where they've worked with partners, but there's also where they've
made their own experiences, and mostly these are pop up stores.
The ones I've been to were mostly the Stranger Things
pop up stores, where it's more it is a themed experience,
but it's like a themed shopping experience, right and so
earlier or I don't remember when, whenever this was announced,
(19:40):
we talked about it on the show, and it was
the concept that they're making kind of like an fec basically,
which is called Netflix House, and we weren't sure what
it was going to look like at the time, but
we assumed that it was going to be a collection
of these experiences because they already have tested them effectively
in other places and just bringing them together makes sense,
(20:02):
and so news came out this week that I think
that's sort of what's happening, but I'm still not clear. Basically,
Netflix House will open in twenty twenty five and Philadelphia
and Dallas, followed by a third venue in twenty twenty
seven in Las Vegas. The Philadelphia location will include attractions
(20:22):
based off Wednesday and One Piece, and the Dallas kind
of part will feature Stranger Things and squid Games. Netflix
announced to lineups on June seventeenth, So it was just
this week, and there are pictures out that kind of
show sort of blueprints or mockups, I would say, and
(20:42):
from the mock ups, I'm just I can't really tell
because I.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
Just pulled it up and I'm looking at it, going, oh,
this is a little tricky. Yeah, so I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (20:57):
You know, it looks cool. It definitely looks cool. It
looks large, and of course these are larger than they
were previously. The only other interesting things is an article
here from A Trash's magazine points out that both of
these venues are in one one hundred thousand square foot
department stores at two highly frequented malls. So I like again,
(21:21):
we liked the story originally, I'm just unsure of what
it's going to actually be like, and I still can't
tell from these renderings even though we have ips. I
think I like the idea. I don't want to go
on like a huge ransom. But I was talking to
somebody recently, no one's going.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
To stop you.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
I don't know if it's commentary so to put it
in context, And I was explaining this to somebody recently
as I was ranting about my low YouTube ad revenue.
But I was saying that basically, for the first time
last month, for the first time ever, streaming surpassed cable
and TV viewership in America, which I think, depending on
(22:04):
your generation, you're probably surprised at on either end of it, right,
you're probably surprised at that, and you know, so it's
interesting that what pushed it over the edge was retired folks,
as older folks moving from TV and cable into watching YouTube,
and YouTube has now become a more washed streamer than Netflix.
(22:24):
And I think many times people don't realize that YouTube
is a streamer in the same way that Netflix is.
It really is, and people they watch YouTube on their TVs,
and this is what is pushing this number over and
so all of the places we talk about in the
entertainment are kind of in this battle, even though we
don't realize it right. Comcast is in this battle because
(22:45):
as people cut cables, it impacts its bottom line, which
impacts its ability to get capital to put into new
theme parks and all that. That's why they've been rushing
to diversify, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But Netflix
and YouTube are also all interwheuned into this, and to me,
I think that Netflix, in a way, YouTube is doing
(23:06):
to Netflix what Netflix did to cable TV because YouTube,
the cost of content on YouTube is less than half
of what Netflix spends for its content, and we've already
talked about how Netflix is spending less than other people.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
So it's this huge race to the bottom.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
And it's because effectively, YouTube only pays for content if
that content makes money, and then even when they pay
for it, it's only an advertising split. So you can
have a creator like us, even on this channel, where
we are making years of content for YouTube, but we
don't get paid for it because we have to reach
(23:40):
a certain threshold, and that threshold is pretty high. So
there's that base level. But then even when we do
get paid, we only get a percentage. So basically it's
like someone going out and saying, you're going to produce
the content and I'm going to sell ad space on it,
but I'm only going to give you money if I
sell adspace, and so then you're making this asset for years.
So it's just a much cleaner I mean, it's a
(24:03):
they're making. The business model is just entirely different versus Netflix.
It has to invest every year in new content or
they lose subscribers or whatever. They have to spend the money.
So I think you're going to see that erosion of
Netflix's base in that, like Netflix, it's just a worst
business model when when people are just when there, when
so many people are willing to make so much content
(24:24):
for basically for free or for very little money on YouTube,
then that puts Netflix in a bad place because they
have to pay for their content unlike YouTube. Okay, that's
the background, so similar I think to what Comcast is
doing is Netflix probably sees the right on the wall
and they're like, oh, our business model is eroding because
just you, YouTube can scale infinitely basically and you and
(24:47):
Netflix cannot and yes, while there's always going to be
the appetite for HBO, there's still HBO and that's that's
that's the other problem is that they're almost crunched from
both angles, right, And so I think this, similar to
what Comcast is doing, is a play at diversification. They
look at Disney, they look at Universal and they say, oh,
(25:07):
we also have incredible IP and look at Disney's flywheel
that makes them so much money. And the theme parks
are have a better valuation than Disney plus and they
hear everything that's going on there and they're probably thinking,
what if we made theme parks and we made a
flywheel based off of our good ips and the same thing.
We could invest less in better ips, just like Disney
(25:29):
talked about with Marvel, less in better ips, and then
if we had other forms of revenue that would lead
to better revenue, and if we could attack markets that
are less, you know, that have less competition, Like they're
not going into Los Angeles or Orlando, right, They're going
into places that last and Dallas and Philadelphia, right, which
(25:49):
have great markets, and I assume great viewership numbers, great
percentage of viewers, but also they're not competing with the
Disney or Universal except for the kids or maybe in Dallas.
So I think that's what this is. This is a
larger This is a larger competitive play that is about
diversifying their revenue before it is too late, in the
(26:12):
same way that Comcast is also trying to diversify before
it's too late. And I think it's a very similar
model even to some of the stuff that we've seen
from Universal and that they're trying to make an fec
of some sort of thing where they're collecting interactive elements
based off of the different eyeps that they have, And
as I mentioned before, how well or not this will
do is going to really come down to the execution,
(26:34):
just like with Horror Unleashed, Right, It's like what it
they've shown that they're putting in a place that has
high foot traffic natively, and then they've chosen very popular
ips like one Piece Grow incredibly popular. We talked about
this last time when we talked about the Universal FanFest nights.
So they've chosen popular eyeps and they put them in
(26:54):
locations to gather foot traffic. I'm not sure what else
they could do. Really kind of like they've set a
really good age. Now it comes down to the execution
and their team and their research, and Disney was not
built in a day. That's the other thing we just talked.
We didn't talk about it yet, but the concept of
epic universe. You know, theme parks take like a decade
to really get into the groove of what the park
(27:16):
is going to become and flesh out all the experiences.
And I'm not sure that Universal or Netflix understands that
that there's a time Anyway, I'm done, Scott.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
What I think is interesting? No, I agree with a
lot of what you said. I think what I think
is interesting about this particular story is, you know, they're
they're going. First of all, they're utilizing they're utilizing these
old anchor stores quite honestly, Yep, they're they're so they're
going in and they're probably getting the space for pennies
(27:48):
on the dollar because these anchor stores used to be
what pulled people into these males and King of Pressure
Mall in Philly is huge or what huge? Yeah, it
was at one time.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
And it's iconic too, right, that's a thing iconic.
Speaker 3 (28:02):
Yes, I've been going there, so I have family in
that or had family in that area, and I've been
going to that mall since I was six years old,
so it's yeah, And it used to be it used
to be a destination location when I was little, so
it does have that iconic status. So my guess is
the mall owners are looking at it going, oh, here's
a way we can pull people in, which, first of all,
(28:23):
I think is way overdue in so many other locations.
I know whether they've tried it in different different spots
here and there, but finding a different, a different way
to utilize those gigantic anchor stores is I think going
to be imperative to the brick and mortar world that
we used to live in. So I think that's I
think that's great. I think that's probably working to their
(28:44):
advantage because they're they're getting they're probably getting this these
spaces for significantly less than they used to go for
as a retail. Because the mall owners are thinking, here's Netflix,
They're going to bring in a gazillion people, and all
of our other stores are going to do well so
they can stay in their lifecasions. I think that is
important to address. I agree with you one hundred percent
(29:05):
on it all comes down to execution. I'm hoping that
the execution includes creature comforts because in looking at in
looking at the maps, they seem even though they're one
hundred thousand square feet, they seem tight, and they don't
seem to have a very natural flow to them. It
almost looks like a series of escape rooms.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Is the vibe that I'm getting.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
Now, again, I have no idea, and I may be
way off, but it almost looks like a series of
escape rooms where you'll do one ip, than the next
IP and the next ip. The problem there is what
if I don't care about the second ip. So we'll see,
and again I may be wrong, there may be a
central hub in this space that I'm just simply not seeing.
(29:48):
Kind of hope there is, because I think that would
be beneficial. And then finally, the thing that you hit
on that the moment we started talking about this particular story,
it was exactly what I thought is, they've looked at Disney.
They've seen that Disney, no matter how much they try,
their streaming is not performing the business model for their
Their streaming business is not nearly as impactful or not
(30:10):
nearly as profitable as their parks. So they're going we're
leaving money on the table here and you know as YouTube,
which I'm sorry, sorry content creators. I really hope that
YouTube does not put Netflix out of business because I
can only watch so many reality based content. I don't
want to watch your recipe for how to make a
(30:30):
caterpillar cake. But we need higher in production. We need
higher in production than is willing to go on YouTube
for free. So I'm hoping that that's not complete. I'm
hoping that we do have some sense of quality. Don't
misunderstand me. I have lots of content creators that I follow,
Philip being one of them, lots of content creators that
(30:50):
I follow. But I am hoping that as we move forward,
we find that there is a place in the market
for all these things. And I think that Netflix is
doing that by saying we're not just the big blockbuster
things on TV, where the big blockbuster things you can
walk through, where the big blockbuster things that you can
participate in, interact in, and it will continue to build
a stronger audience for the content that they are indeed
(31:14):
creating the high end, you know, studio quality content that
they are creating. So well, speaking of high quality content,
this is about all the high quality content we can
give you this week because our time's up, so on
behalf of Philip Bernandez and myself Scott Swinson. This is
Green Tag Theme Park in thirty and we will see
you next week. Unless you're going to tune in, you're
one of our followers, one of our subscribers on unhinge,
(31:37):
and then you can go watch that and listen to
us rant and find out what we really think
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.