Mike S
Well-Known Member
Doing anything to ToT is still a boneheaded move. Why not really show off what you can do and not limit yourself to a reskin? If they touch the WDW Tower, ooooooooh boy...
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
A Spirited Valentine ...
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
The goal was always to do both, we've lost sight of that. Jealous of your D23 attendance, should be a good one.
Since Staggs literally had nothing on the go, it was to get a Marvel E ticket up and running in break neck speed. Ahead of a new build that still takes years even under a Vaughn free WDI. It's a success in the fact that yes, it's actually a good Marvel E, even if the exterior is what it is...
I'd still not worry about WDW simply for the fact you mentioned: if they reskin, they really are limited to what they can use there for a new build, unlike DCA. Second, by the time DHS could afford to take down ToT it's no longer a break neck speed.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
That's marketing for you. I think we can forgive the fandom for lapping it up though. They would have been much better set to market it as the worlds most thrilling water park. Would have been closer to the truth, at least in Orlando.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
I'm getting worried about Super Nintendo World, then I remember that Nintendo and specifically Shigeru Miyamoto are heavily involved in the plans.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
They just have to stay discerning and be critical guardians of their characters/worlds, like JK.
Last edited:
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
This is the one project I wouldn't be worried about. The insiders that are far more willing to be critical are still positive on it. Beijing on the other hand...
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
It's weird with fallon actually thought of not to be good yet people are finding it to be fantastic and their favorite ride and on the other hand people were more hyped for VB and yet it ended up getting a rushed/more unpopular reception. (The biggest issue more likely was the lack of workers with everything being built in orlando at the same time using the same contractors and companies).
Kman101
Well-Known Member
I liked Fallon a bit more than I expected to. The interior is really very nice as well.
lentesta
Premium Member
I ... kinda think that.
I got an offer to be someone's "+1" to the media event. The group doing the invite asked me not to write anything bad about Pandora, because they didn't want to jeopardize future access. So I'm reasonably sure that everyone understands the quid pro quo that comes with media events.
One of the groups who got into Pandora first shared with me the details of how Disney PR negotiated the coverage in exchange for access (allegedly). It was exceptionally specific (allegedly). The subject of the story was chosen by Disney (allegedly). Specific comparisons to specific Universal attractions were to be made (allegedly). Key words were suggested (allegedly). That sort of thing (allegedly).
I don't think Disney would try that with, you know, the NY Times. But an organization that's heavily dependent on Disney / special access for revenue?
clemmo
Well-Known Member
As did I. Kong on the other hand besides the massive animatronic was imo a little underwhelming. I'm worried F&F will be much of the same.
ParentsOf4
Well-Known Member
I wish I could provide a simplistic, pat answer but the reality is that no one knows for certain. If someone did, then that person should be running the company!
As @seascape writes, the best way to do this is to "invest in things that will make more money" but it's unclear to Wall Street what these things might be. Since Wall Street does not like uncertainty, they prefer Disney leadership that spends billions every year on stock buybacks.
Corporate Disney is in a bit of a pickle. They already have made the acquisitions that make the most financial sense while Iger & Co. lack the creative genius of Walt Disney or even Michael Eisner to identify organic growth opportunities. Frankly, corporate Disney has gone overboard with film sequels and theme park tie-ins and is out of creative ideas.
A new CEO is needed yet Wall Street would rather play it safe with the unimaginative Bob Iger instead of finding a dynamic leader capable of producing dynamic growth. Steady, 5.2% annual revenue increases (Iger's average over his first 11 years) are preferred to the 15.3% increases seen during the previous 30 years. After all, Iger's austerity (i.e. cost cutting) measures have produced annual net income growth that nearly matches the previous 30 years (12.7% vs. 13.2%). Why bother with creative investment when you can employ financial gurus to budget-cut your way to success?
As a result, I see no end to the multi-billion dollar buybacks for the foreseeable future.
Last edited:
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
THAT bad?
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
hopefully he will be as perfectionist as J.K Rowling for HP or James Cameron for Avatar.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
Well I liked it. It's a fun, ridiculous movie, which is what I went in expecting.
Kman101
Well-Known Member
I think Kong is fun. I've been on it several times and guests on the jeep seem really into it. The screen usage is terrible in it though for the most part. It gets knocked a bit on here but I think it's better than some think it is.
Thanks Len. Well, I stand corrected and I was obviously wrong. It appears there is little chance of any objective look at anything new at Disney coming out of the media preview events.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
I would much rather have outsider IP originating from the country in question in World Showcase then just shoving in Disney movies. Same reason why I wish they had done the Godzilla ride back in the 90s.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
It's the best thing they've done so far outside of Potter. Ride vs. ride it's better than Gringotts imo.