Yeah, it's kind of long...but the one shareholder's meeting I went to, had some mighty long questions...
"Mr Iger, in 2006 you explained that you had a major realization while watching a parade that the Disney company had not created meaningful new characters in over a decade, and this realization helped cement the acquisition of Pixar and revitalization of Feature Animation. Which could then be leveraged into growth in other business units such as Consumer Products and Parks & Resorts.
Given the recent success of Frozen, this strategy would appear to be paying off. It has certainly proven to be a merchandising juggernaut, and Frozen characters now appear in many Disney parades. But the only permanent, domestic Theme Park presence is via extremely low capacity "Meet & Greet" locations, and the replacement of the former Maelstrom attraction at WDW. Which to explain to the non-theme park crowd, was a short, middling capacity, dark ride. A space never designed to house the components necessary to create one of Disney's signature "E-ticket attractions."
It seems, that given the global phenomenon Frozen has become, it should be destined to be part of some sort of major project. If only because it would be necessary to service the tens of thousands of people that will want to experience it on a daily basis. Current WDW visitors are familiar with the frustrations of securing a time to experience on things like Toy Story Mania, and the recent Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, despite the arrival of FP+. Those familiar with the Maelstrom space, are already imagining all sorts of doomsday scenarios for wait times and FP+ availability. I can't imagine the company was happy with the shortages that plagued merchandise in terms of lost and delayed sales, but it feels like a similar situation is set to unfold within Parks & Resorts.
Does this small scale course of action for Frozen, say more about predictions concerning the long-term success of Frozen, or the ability of Parks & Resort to deliver the first-class, E-ticket attractions Disney is historically known for? Is Parks & Resorts in the same creatively deficient place that you realized Feature Animation was, while watching that parade? Creating new popular, and marketable character properties, isn't much good if they, to use a sports metaphor, "are being wasted by playing the wrong position, or stuck sitting on the bench." Yes, Parks and Resorts are using the Frozen property, but are they using it in a way that is unnecessarily limiting or to maximize their potential for business growth? Your competitor leveraged the Harry Potter franchise into lands in two Orlando based parks, and is seeing enormous growth in their theme park business. Frozen meet & greets and a replacement for a dark ride, come off sounding so small for such a successful property, don't you think?
And on a related note, Disney enjoys the benefits of becoming home to another major IP with Star Wars. Despite announcements that a future theme park presence is "coming," and considering the construction time for recent projects such as New Fantasyland and Avatar... Should Disney be afraid of missing the "window of opportunity." Again to use a sports metaphor, 'squandering a player's talent by having him to ride the bench in the prime years of his career.' Why not have theme park attractions come on line, more concurrent with the movies?"
