THE WATERPARKS FROM FEASIBILITY TO OPERATION DELIVERING THE BUSINESS PLAN. Roger Currie Neuman Aqua Ltd / Water Technology Inc. 28 th September 2017

Transcription

1 THE WATERPARKS FROM FEASIBILITY TO OPERATION DELIVERING THE BUSINESS PLAN Roger Currie Neuman Aqua Ltd / Water Technology Inc. 28 th September 2017

2 WTI & Neuman Aqua

3 Great Wolf Lodge

4 Alton Towers

5 Sandcastle Waterpark Blackpool

6 YAS Waterworld

7 The Common Link of all these successful waterparks: THEY WERE ALL FOUNDED ON AN INTERROGATED FEASIBILITY & MAXIMISED THE BUSINESS PLAN

8 For that to happen: The Feasibility Study & Business Plan have to be right The Concept & design development need to be driven by the plan The project delivery has to be on cost & on time Good News! There is a proven process for doing this

9 Process and Sequence: 1. Business Plan & Feasibility Study 2. Concept Plan = Fulfil the Business Plan & Operational Needs 3. In-Park Capacity, Day Capacity & Annual Attendance 4. Guest Mix Age, Family, On-site/Off-site 5. Dwell Time Short, Medium or Long Stay? 6. Active/Passive ratio Water Area, Deck Area, Attraction Content Attraction & Ride Mix Signature Ride/Attraction?

10 This in turn determines: Parking Provision Entrance and Reception Areas Utility &Technical Plant Requirements Food & Beverage Areas Changing and Toilet Facilities Deck and Seating Sizing Staffing Numbers etc.

11 Awareness of Industry Trends: Meeting the demands of Entertainment Value & Guest Experience Accommodate the whole Guest Mix Guest Interaction & Interactivity Theming and Sensory Shared Participation Qualitive rather than Quantitive Integration of Viewers and Queuers Attractions linked to Operational objectives

12 IT ALL STARTS & FINISHES WITH THE BUSINESS PLAN Horse Before Cart!

13 Feasibility Drives the Concept: A few current examples which also highlight a difference between new build & refurbishment (known operational data & identified guest expectations): Liseberg Bluestone Public Sector Example

14 Aim right at the start - 1mm out at offset can miss the target by a kilometer! = OR

15 Liseberg, Gothenburg New Build Development Waterpark & Hotel On Established Theme Park Site Extensive Feasibility & Market Testing Interfacing Theme Park, Hotel & Day Visits Second Gate & Phased Programme Separate presentation to follow, but to highlight

16 Liseberg waterpark market & feasibility synthesis Contents min min min 2018 Forecast Resident Market min 2.1 m 0-60 min Source: ESRI, official statistics and LDP Markets Small resident market but loyal to Liseberg with high repeats Large domestic tourist market with Liseberg a driver of the visit ,398 m to Gothenburg for 2,426 many Hotel market 0.3 m Strong business, 2,070 events and leisure market Liseberg 0.7 m Urban park, exceptional 5,839 penetration performance 2018 Forecast Tourist Market Domestic International 3.4 m 0.9 m Further strengthen the destination An additional day of entertainment, a reason to stay overnight Benchmarking European waterparks, international waterpark hotels, Gothenburg hotels, Swedish resorts Headlines Flatten seasonality, enhance park attendance, Design Day 3,400 people, peak on-site 1, rooms 60% growing to 74% occupancy leisuredevelopment.co.uk Page 16

17

18

19 Bluestone Bluestone - a highly successful resort of which Blue Lagoon is the onsite waterpark 9 year track record, waterpark fulfilled original business plan Triggered by assessment on existing slides, opportunity to undertake a review was recognised. Arising from the feasibility process:

20 Bluestone 125,000 annual resort visits 1,650 max on site Waterpark annual visit: 320,000+ (over 60% resort guests, 1.6 visits per stay) Waterpark onsite capacity 600 average 2 hour stay - 2,500 visits per day max On-site guest priority, off-site guests as supplement Hold to existing in-park day numbers, focus on enhanced customer experience Address provision of younger family members significant guest % under 6 Expand rather than replace phased & programmed approach (masterplan) Address infrastructure to needs of expansion Theming opportunity

21 BLUE LAGOON - IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1 D A B C D REMOVE SNACKBAR REMOVE STAIR TO FIRSTLEVEL FIRST LEVEL PLATFORM CANREMAIN* SECOND LEVEL PLATFORM CANREMAIN** B C E INSTALL SNACK CART NEARENTRY A F E F INSTALL POOL AND ACTIVITIES FOR 2-6 YEAR OLDS AT AREA UNDER FIRST LEVEL PLATFORM - MAXIMIZING ALL SPACE AVAILABLE CONSTRUCTING IN THIS MANNER REQUIRES NO EXISTING ATTRACTIONSOR ACTIVITIES TO BE CLOSED WHILE PHASE 1 IS COMPLETED F D A C F B * WHILE REMOVING THE FIRST LEVEL PLATFORM IS PREFERABLE - FOR ADDITIONAL CLEARANCE & HEIGHT AND AMORE PLEASING GUEST EXPERIENCE - HOWEVER THERE IS A COST TO ELIMINATE IT. AS WELL, SEVERAL CIRCULATION CONDITIONS MUST BEADDRESSED. ** THE SECOND LEVEL PLATFORM SERVES NO PURPOSE OTHER THAN OBSERVATION AND CAN REMAIN EVEN IF THE FIRST LEVEL PLATFORM IS REMOVED, HOWEVER MAINTAINING ACCESS FROM THE FIRST LEVEL MUST BE CONSIDERED.

22 BLUE LAGOON - IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 2 A B CLOSE EXISTING KIDDIEAREA REMOVE ALL EXISTING PLAYELEMENTS C. REMOVEBOAT A C B C D. RECONFIGURE POOL TO BE ZERO GRADE ENTRY AT OPENSIDES E INSTALL PLAY ELEMENTS FOR 0-2 YEAR OLD BABIES ANDTODDLERS G E D F G REMOVE ROCKWWORKTHEMEING CREATE SEATING AREA FOR PARENTS BETWEENPHASE1ANDPHASE2 C B F E

23 BLUE LAGOON - IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 3 A. CLOSE EXISTING KIDDIEAREA B. REMOVE ALL EXISTING PLAYELEMENTS C. REMOVEROCKWORK D A E B D. RELOCATESNACKCARTTOTHISAREA E HOLD AREA FOR FUTURE EXPANSIONOPTIONS: - INTERACTIVE PLAYSTRUCTURE - TUBE SLIDECOMPLEX - FAMILY RAFT SLIDECOMPLEX - HIGH-THRILL BODYSLIDES - ACTIVITY POOL C B

24 BLUE LAGOON - IMPROVEMENTS OTHER OPPORTUNITIES A. INSTALL WATER PARK LOGO ON REAR OF WAVEPOOL B. LEVERAGE DOLPHIN MASCOT. CONSIDER INTRODUCTION OF WALK AROUND CHARACTER FOR PHOTOS AND SHOWS. C ENCLOSE OUTDOOR DECK WITH LIGHT- WEIGHT GLASSEDENCLOSURE: - OPENABLE IN SUMMER -PROVIDES ADDITIONAL SHELTERED CAPACITY ALL YEAR - ALLOWS YEAR-ROUND USE OF DECK - SNACK CART / BAR OPPORTUNITIES A B D THEME ALL WATERFOUNTAINSAND SPRAYS. THIS CAN BECOME A CHOREO- GRAPHED SHOW TOMUSIC. C D

25 Best Value Maximise % of investment cost into what Guest will see and use Contain enabling works/infrastructure costs more than 50%? Enablement = Impact on Guest and on Operations (water, air, light, viewing, lifeguarding). If disproportional, think again.look at other options! Adaptation to suit site requirements Access/space issues doors, headroom, working areas Building issues floor loads, power, water source, water treatment, HVAC (if indoor) Use cheapest build areas minimize costly space

26 Public Sector

27 Extended children s facility 20 years old Successful meeting community needs Need for new children s facility Initial bidding based on three levels of product expenditure wide % range Infrastructure costs similar for each

28

29 Changing Rooms 150, , , Cost Evaluation (1) Option 1 - Basic Feature Purchase (2) 100, , , Feature hydraulics (3) 30, , , Exsisting Filtration 25, Option 2 - Mid Range Separate Filtration 100, , UV Upgrade (4) 30, , , Rockwork Waterfall (5) 20, Removal of Ozone 25, Relining Slides 60, , Not needed if replaced Exsisting Ride Theme 25, , Option 3 - Full Range Slide Features (6) 10, , , Replacement Slides (7) 275, Additional New Ride 250, Aquatic Sub Total (8) 280, , , Steel Structure Upgrade (9 190, , , Changing Rooms 150, , , Building/Structural Survey 2, , , HVAC Survey 2, , , Builders Works - TBD (10) 50, , , HVAC Work - TBD (11) Assume none? 50, , Future or Additional Options Grand Budget 675, , ,235, Risks / Lifespan Under 5 years 5-10 years 10 years + 10 years + Recommended Next Steps: HVAC Survey, Structural Survey, Proceed with more detailed design to determine the Children's feature scope and extent of ride investment, Establish total project scope, programme, budget and method to deliver, Undertake selected reference visit - (1) Option scopes are notional- several mix/match opportunities between them, particularly between 2 & 3 (2) Notional division of costs - variances can be applied up or down (3) Proportional spread of hydraulic requirements (4) Costs for Ozone replacement awaited (5) Budgeted in option 3 - could apply to any option Building/Structural Survey 2, , , HVAC Survey 2, , , Builders Works - TBD (10) 50, , , HVAC Work - TBD (11) Assume none? 50, , Grand Budget 675, , ,235, Risks / Lifespan Under 5 years 5-10 years 10 years + 10 years + Recommended Next Steps: HVAC Survey, Structural Survey, Proceed with more detailed design to determine the Children's feature scope and extent of ride investment, Establish total project scope, programme, budget and method to deliver, Undertake selected reference visit - (1) Option scopes are notional- several mix/match opportunities between them, particularly between 2 & 3 (2) Notional division of costs - variances can be applied up or down (3) Proportional spread of hydraulic requirements (4) Costs for Ozone replacement awaited (5) Budgeted in option 3 - could apply to any option (6) Nominal spread of costs - could be switched between options (7) Replacement slide does not have to be done as option 3 (8) Aquatic Budget Totals are potentially distorted by cross matching, especialy on additional new ri (9) Option 3 reduction reflects new ride, not requiring exisiting ride steel upgrade (10) Totally notional figure - requires proper costing after building structure survey feedback (11) Totally notional figure - requires proper costing after HVAC survey feedback

30 Outcome The respective mark-up of the Play Equipment versus that of enablement: Option 1 (5 year plan) - Basic at nominally 280,000 showed a circa 240% increase to 675,000 retaining existing plant but limited guest benefit to. Option 2 (5-10 year plan) - Mid-Range assessment of 450,000 to 945,000 is just over 100% and border-line guest benefit. Option 3 (10+ year plan) - showed a product spend of 770,000 with a 60% increase to 1,235,000, guest value check.

31 Outcome The more invested on the feature ride budget (guest experience) in context to the optimum viable spend, proportionally reduces the enabling/infrastructure/essential repair costs. Mid-longer term requirements, justify greater spend return Improved guest experience (and thereby business plan objectives) is significantly greater than that offered by the more modest outlays on the aquatic elements. Ride replacement rather than renewal

32 Horses Lead Bullseye!