A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Quinnmac000]

Does this means we can forget about how awful the first daredevil movie was?

Yes we can because this show very much makes up for it. Its bloody, its not family friendly, and it's exactly what I wanted from Marvel. It's not safe, its edgy, and its gritty.

NOt going to lie though, there is no way they could put this show on public television even if that got out the blood due to the fact its extremely political.

 

[BrianLo]

My point is that just because no one has leaked any new listing to y'all, doesn't mean that nothing new is going there. We still have almost 2 years until opening (according to '74), so instead of getting up in arms because your inside folks aren't so forthcoming with information, why not wait a bit and see what happens. Maybe they haven't fully decided what new attractions will be there for that $800 million. Maybe negotiations are ongoing between Disney and Shendi about what to add. Maybe lots of other things going on as well.

Please don't come back on and say that you know what the plans are, but cannot tell us. That gets real old, and makes us feel like we aren't worthy of your insider stature.

Others were quick to answer, but the proof is in the construction. SDL is one year from opening (it was supposed to be less than 8 months), not 2 years. If It has not begun construction by now (or frankly one year ago), there is no way it will be open in time early to mid 2016.

I too am very hopeful and optimistic the 800 million will see the light of day, that's no small amount. But I've been waiting a year, and so far absolutely nothing has happened. There isn't even 80 million of extra additions, let alone 800 million.

But as of today, there has yet to be any indication of new attractions, ready for opening day. That's what Disney kept hammering home. If that part of their narrative was false, what other part of the 800 million is?

 

[WDWFigment]

I find all of the controversy surrounding Shanghai Disneyland's construction to be interesting, and while I have only skimmed the last couple-dozen pages, I did see the link to the New Yorker profile of Xi Jinping (a long, albeit rewarding read) posted by @the.dreamfinder as well as the news stories posted by @WDW1974 and read those articles in full, as well as other pertinent articles I found via Google. I thought I'd interject some random thoughts...

Much ado is being made about the lack of a Disney Channel in China, as if this is something outcome-determinative for how Disney's park will resonate. Have you guys seen the Disney Channel lately? Unless Dog with a Blog Land is being planned, I don't see a huge benefit in the channel. Moreover (and much more importantly), Disney has had its hits at the Chinese box office (albeit some misses, as well). Live action, including Cinderella, has been huge there--perhaps that market is a big motivation for the slew of remakes that have been announced? Introducing stories that are familiar to us to a new audience? I also see irony in posts from some members who are staunchly against synergy in the US parks--wanting non-IP attractions here because "quality will out"--assuming that quality attractions will not succeed despite their lack of familiar IP in another country.

As for the New Yorker profile and it being "proof" of anything, remember that this deal was done before Xi Jinping rose to power. So his apprehensiveness of Western values is not really indicative of Iger getting a bad deal, as Iger would not have known any of this when the deal was done. Iger may have very well gotten a bad deal, but the reasons for that would be separate and distinct from changes Xi Jinping has made.

On the topic of Jinping, my reading of the profile is of a man who is deeply conflicted: he wants to shut Western influence out, but he also desperately wants to legitimize China in the eyes of the world. Where having a Disney theme park outpost in Shanghai fits into that is anyone's guess, since the guy seems fairly unpredictable, but he could either view it as threatening or legitimizing. I don't think you can leave that article with any sort of resolution on that.

Tying in the Jinping profile with the Dai Haibo news, shouldn't we allow for the possibility that Dai Haibo is being targeted because of political affiliations? I'm not saying that's the case, but I haven't seen it mentioned (again, I haven't read every post) in this thread. It hardly seems far-fetched given the New Yorker profile's statements that some of this "crackdown" is being undertaken for political purposes.

There's also the possibility that the land deals at issue have nothing to do with Disney. Based on the news, this graft occurred before 2009. That removes the $800m from issue (at least from this issue). If he owned the land and sold it to a third party--and that's the transaction where graft or self-dealing occurred--and the third party then sold to Shendi/TWDC, it wouldn't involve Disney at all.

I'm not even remotely suggesting that this Shanghai deal is squeaky clean--just playing a bit of devil's advocate a bit, I suppose because these are some of the first questions that came to my mind while reading these articles and posts, and I haven't really seen this discussed. Something certainly feels amiss (certainly an understatement) with Shanghai Disneyland, and I think there are likely serious issues and concerns with it.

Personally, my biggest concern is not with unethical corporate or political acts, but that this whole thing is a folly that will leave all of Parks & Resorts crippled for years as money is hemorrhaged fixing Shanghai. I certainly hope that's not the case, but the project does seem troubled...

 

[Nemo14]

I find all of the controversy surrounding Shanghai Disneyland's construction to be interesting, and while I have only skimmed the last couple-dozen pages, I did see the link to the New Yorker profile of Xi Jinping (a long, albeit rewarding read) posted by @the.dreamfinder as well as the news stories posted by @WDW1974 and read those articles in full, as well as other pertinent articles I found via Google. I thought I'd interject some random thoughts...

Much ado is being made about the lack of a Disney Channel in China, as if this is something outcome-determinative for how Disney's park will resonate. Have you guys seen the Disney Channel lately? Unless Dog with a Blog Land is being planned, I don't see a huge benefit in the channel. Moreover (and much more importantly), Disney has had its hits at the Chinese box office (albeit some misses, as well). Live action, including Cinderella, has been huge there--perhaps that market is a big motivation for the slew of remakes that have been announced? Introducing stories that are familiar to us to a new audience? I also see irony in posts from some members who are staunchly against synergy in the US parks--wanting non-IP attractions here because "quality will out"--assuming that quality attractions will not succeed despite their lack of familiar IP in another country.

As for the New Yorker profile and it being "proof" of anything, remember that this deal was done before Xi Jinping rose to power. So his apprehensiveness of Western values is not really indicative of Iger getting a bad deal, as Iger would not have known any of this when the deal was done. Iger may have very well gotten a bad deal, but the reasons for that would be separate and distinct from changes Xi Jinping has made.

On the topic of Jinping, my reading of the profile is of a man who is deeply conflicted: he wants to shut Western influence out, but he also desperately wants to legitimize China in the eyes of the world. Where having a Disney theme park outpost in Shanghai fits into that is anyone's guess, since the guy seems fairly unpredictable, but he could either view it as threatening or legitimizing. I don't think you can leave that article with any sort of resolution on that.

Tying in the Jinping profile with the Dai Haibo news, shouldn't we allow for the possibility that Dai Haibo is being targeted because of political affiliations? I'm not saying that's the case, but I haven't seen it mentioned (again, I haven't read every post) in this thread. It hardly seems far-fetched given the New Yorker profile's statements that some of this "crackdown" is being undertaken for political purposes.

There's also the possibility that the land deals at issue have nothing to do with Disney. Based on the news, this graft occurred before 2009. That removes the $800m from issue (at least from this issue). If he owned the land and sold it to a third party--and that's the transaction where graft or self-dealing occurred--and the third party then sold to Shendi/TWDC, it wouldn't involve Disney at all.

I'm not even remotely suggesting that this Shanghai deal is squeaky clean--just playing a bit of devil's advocate a bit, I suppose because these are some of the first questions that came to my mind while reading these articles and posts, and I haven't really seen this discussed. Something certainly feels amiss (certainly an understatement) with Shanghai Disneyland, and I think there are likely serious issues and concerns with it.

Personally, my biggest concern is not with unethical corporate or political acts, but that this whole thing is a folly that will leave all of Parks & Resorts crippled for years as money is hemorrhaged fixing Shanghai. I certainly hope that's not the case, but the project does seem troubled...

Interesting points, Tom.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Does this means we can forget about how awful the first daredevil movie was?

Excuse me, you had Jennifer Gardner in skintight clothing… It wasn't that awful.

 

[GoofGoof]

if you read the statement, the guy was directly involved in the selling of the plot of lands where Disneyland Shangai Resort is.
Perhaps he(he accused official) helped Disney get the land surrounding the first plotted Disneyland area (which then was selected for the resorts and hotels)

Thats what logic would say.
Almost 800m missing.. chinese guy who managed the land plot for Disneyland is now under investigation for bribes and mismanagement.

Was there ever mention that part of what the guy is being investigated for even relates to property Disney is using? I haven't seen that anywhere. Even if what he is accused of directly relates to SDL do we know it has anything to do with the additional $800M? Was this investigation underway before that additional money was announced?

I'm not ruling out that Disney had to "play the game" to get things done at some point during this project. Pretty much anyone in China is doing it. It's very likely that this guy took some money from the SDL project at some point. What I find kinda far fetched is the notion that the entire additional $800M went to pay bribes. I'm not buying that. You are saying that logic would say that, but IMHO logic tells me that it's far more likely that the bulk of that money went towards budget overruns and the rumored issues with buildings that had to be rebuilt since they weren't up to standard. The only thing i think is less likely than the entire $800M being paid out as a bribe is that it's being used for completely new rides. That doesn't really pass the BS test for me either.

 

[Lee]

Excuse me, you had Jennifer Gardner in skintight clothing… It wasn't that awful.

Friend of Spirit's...kinda.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Friend of Spirit's...kinda.

He never mentioned that in all the times we hung out. Ooooops.

 

[Phil12]

Was there ever mention that part of what the guy is being investigated for even relates to property Disney is using? I haven't seen that anywhere. Even if what he is accused of directly relates to SDL do we know it has anything to do with the additional $800M? Was this investigation underway before that additional money was announced?

I'm not ruling out that Disney had to "play the game" to get things done at some point during this project. Pretty much anyone in China is doing it. It's very likely that this guy took some money from the SDL project at some point. What I find kinda far fetched is the notion that the entire additional $800M went to pay bribes. I'm not buying that. You are saying that logic would say that, but IMHO logic tells me that it's far more likely that the bulk of that money went towards budget overruns and the rumored issues with buildings that had to be rebuilt since they weren't up to standard. The only thing i think is less likely than the entire $800M being paid out as a bribe is that it's being used for completely new rides. That doesn't really pass the BS test for me either.

I think that as this story plays out we're going to discover that the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission are all involved in this deal in some way or another. According to this article, real estate and construction in China are the businesses most prone to graft and corruption: http://www.businessinsider.com/china-corruption-in-business-study-2015-1

 

[WDW1974]

This suggestion is nothing more than gossip spread by persons that are self described as Iger haters. There is a lot of speculation and wishful thinking that Bob Iger will be found guilty of something serious enough to make him step down from Disney. Yet, evidence is sorely lacking. If I believed in such innuendo, then I would have expected by now Willow Bay to have left her position at USC Annenberg in order to spend more time with her family.

I have this old fashioned notion of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

No, Phil, it isn't. I posed a 'what if?' question that you turned around on to take a shot at those you view as Iger 'haters' (I do hope you placed me in that group and will be buying me a LE $21.95 pin that comes with membership in that club as I didn't get mine in the mail!)

I'm not sure what Iger would have to do, or be seen as in charge of those who would, in order for there to be regime change. It likely would have to be substantial. Paying off Chinese officials wouldn't be enough because his hands would (like his wife's) be clean by using people 18 times removed to commit the acts.

Now, if what was done is enough to cause the company to take a major stock hit, where the market cap drops by $10 billion in a few days, then I could see the Board getting antsy.

Everytime I place something out as potential evidence to back up my well-founded (again, how much time have you spent in China? how much time have you worked there? how many people in various capacities in high places in both HK and the mainland do you know?) accusations and the bar keeps getting moved further.

In this situation, I'm convinced that your definition of reasonable doubt is quite different from mine.

Oh, and at least myself personally, I'm not finished with Willow. I don't believe in taking a wait and see attitude when it comes to ethics myself.

 

[WDW1974]

Spirited Quick Shot at the Lifestylers:

(or actually Dr. Blondie and the Disney Parks Blog team)

They held a meet yesterday at Atlantic Dance on the BW to show off the new entertainment offerings coming to DCL (largely Star Wars Day on the Fantasy, Tangled musical on the Magic and all sorts of Frozen stuff across the fleet).

I've already noted the huge amount of Lifestylers, Bloggers and Podcasters at the event, but really that was what they wanted. Most people wouldn't be able to attend a 9 a.m. Thursday event because they might have lives ... and have to ... actually ... you know ... work.

No worries about that with this crowd.Wonder who was whoring around for a free cruise ...

 

[WDW1974]

Not to disrupt the hilarious China bribery topic, but film critics have had a chance to see the new Avengers film and apparently the first impression is the movie is so good its being compared to The Dark Knight in terms of overall quality and storyline.

Yes, another individual who thinks real business that effects the way Disney is run isn't important. You could leave the thread if you just can't stop laughing at adult topics.

I really don't care about Avengers reviews. Yeah, the movie is going to make a blankload of money. Great. No one could see that coming. Time to go back to meaty stuff.

 

[Goofyernmost]

"Lets wait and see" is the most common rebuttal these days to any criticism of "the brand". It should seriously just be printed on t-shirts so all the Disney apologists can proudly wear their favorite war cry across their chest.

If the Trader Sams shirts are selling out at $54.99 a piece, it should be no problem moving a few thousand of these babies. Maybe throw in a "New Carpet Monorail" hand towel to boot.

What kind of jaw dropping foolish thing is that to say. The brand or the Disney company has nothing to do with that kind of logic. It is what thoughtful and precise people would say about any unfinished situation. If I had a half a lifetime to go back and see just how foolish so many opinions have been about what was going to happen involving Disney related things on this board alone it would be mind boggling. Calling someone an "apologist", which is stupid to begin with, or a "pixie duster" is a poor replacement for actually having a counter argument that is anything other than opinion.

If you think that the common rebuttal of "lets wait and see" is ridiculous, take a minute to contemplate how ridiculous condemning something before it gets finished can be and how equally tedious it is. There could be a T-shirt for that as well. It would read... My mind is made up... don't confuse me with facts.

I am not the smartest man on the planet, but, life has taught me one thing. If you have the time to analyze and second guess the decisions of others and are that much smarter then any of them, how in the hell do you have time to spend on a discussion board. The real leaders of the country really don't have the time for that. If nothing else they are busy counting their money.

 

[culturenthrills]

Roughly the same size as Aquatica and the smaller of the WDW water parks (Typhoon I think?)--within an acre or two. That 200-foot volcano should hold a number of slides, making ride count roughly equal. My only concern would be the apparent lack of beach space, but I think like Wet n Wild this will continue to go after the teens/20-somethings market who prefer sides to chill-laxin'.

If you look at the map, there's clearly a parking lot by the main entrance (upper left corner).

I am guessing it will be a parking deck. I think the key will be putting in high capacity slides. One of my biggest complaints about Aquatica is that they put in too many low capacity slides. Actually that is one of my complaints about the Orlando water parks. While their theming may be great they are woefully behind on slide technology. Holiday World's Splashin Safari has more slide capacity and state of the art slides than most of the water parks in Florida. The positives is the the two wave pools and the rapids river. Their lazy river was a huge disappointment. One of the things that Disney water parks get right is the giant lazy river that encircles most of their parks.

 

[WDW1974]

What's that in the upper right corner of the picture just above the words "Harry Potter" then?

Just be thankful that these people in the picture are going to be safe from any flying objects from Rip Ride Rockit as Universal is making sure everyone goes through the metal detectors at the ride's entrance. Thankfully, cavity searches haven't begun yet.

I could see Disney taking a look at what Universal has done with the amphitheater and getting ideas. Just think of what they could do at the MK by knocking down a few attractions and put big screen TVs in for guests to watch the fireworks/parades/and Castle shows on.

That's just insane. Are my Parkscope Bois making excuses for this?

It's also been done on Hulk and Dragon Challenge according to a Tweet I read from @skubersky ... I can only guess that some idiot's iPhone went flying and hit another Guest on the head and UNI is now going to have to write a big check. So, this is their lawyers and/or Bill Davis's answer to it.

I'm not emptying my pockets (they are deep, befitting a Faux Top One Percenter) of every last nickel to ride their coasters. That's just insane. And I'm not being wanded and/or felt up to ride either.

 

[WDW1974]

How do you know this? The article in question can still easily be found. What I find strange about this situation is why hasn't Gary Snyder published any more articles on this subject? Mr. Snyder is a writer and has media connections yet he seems to have nothing more to say on the matter. After all the Huffington Post is not the only outlet for Op/Eds. Had I written an article and had it removed from the net, I think I would find another website and write another article explaining what happened. As of now we have no additional explanation from Mr. Snyder.

No, it can't be easily found. Unless you're in say China or Russia. Here?
It's only around largely because some fans were smart enough to sense something stinking and placed it on blogs and sites like this. It was scrubbed from the 'net in the USA.

And you really think people in a position/role like Gary Snyder feel that they have to explain anything?
And did you get the idea that he was a writer by profession? Because I didn't, and my research has proven that not to be the case. He wrote a total of four Op-Eds for the HuffPo over a period of almost a year. That doesn't say writer to me. And since I've been a writer, I sorta do know what I am speaking of.

If indeed they are related then we have full-fledged conspiracy. Conspiracy theories are a fun pastime for fans.

And ignorant fans/people tend to use the term 'conspiracy theory' as an all-everything pass for excusing the inexcusable. Just like 'tinfoil hat'.


BTW, what are you hiding? What are you lying about? What don't you want people to read. I see you clearly edited your post 90 minutes after posting it!!! That can only mean you had something out there that would have harmed YOUR BRAND!

 

[WDW1974]

Number 4 is true with the reason given that the author made unsupported claims as to his credentials.

No, that is a convenient lie/smear campaign against the author that starts and ends at Bob Iger's door.

That statement placed out was libelous and HuffPo attorneys were contacted by attorneys for the writer (I know this for certain from a source at said organization).

If that weren't the case, then it would still be out there because truth is a defense for libel (as I'm sure you know). It wasn't up for what ... 2-3 hours tops?

Number 5 - The idea that Mrs. Iger had the article pulled is an unsourced unattributed allegation at this point. You are, I believe, the first person to claim she had "Ultimate authority".

For argument sake, what if I gave you a name from the HuffPo or maybe even a lawyer's name who represents Snyder? What would you say then? I know ... you'd say they are biased and can't be trusted and you'd still go with what is in your head. I'd have burned a source who is a good and decent human being and ethical journalist simply to make some stranger who doesn't like my world or World views feel better. You can see why no sane person would do that, right?

So you stick with what feels good to you: namely an erroneous belief that Willow Bay or Willow Iger or whatever she calls herself depending on the day had nothing to do with this censoring. Now, I know it as fact. But I also know some people here don't believe me. That's fine, but it changes nothing. You/they are simply mistaken.

Oh, and she doesn't have ultimate authority at the HuffPo. She has the power to do what she did. To this day, Arianna Huffington still has the ultimate power ... and she and Willow are close friends.

 

[WDW1974]

A quick post on something no one has commented on. You may recall me saying that SDL lead WDI designer Bob Weis has a blog ... for Americans ... and it is hosted in China where it is subject to government oversight and censorship.

I guess no one thinks that is odd at all, right? Anyone?

EDIT: Just adding info that was kindly sent my way that corrects a misstatement, but doesn't make it any less weird. The site is hosted by an LA-based company, but he still 'opted' to pick a Chinese domain and not an American one.

 

[VJ]

That can only mean you had something out there that would have harmed YOUR BRAND!

*big GASP!!!!* NO! NOT THE BRAND! ANYTHING BUT THE BRAND!

I'm much more sane in person, I promise.

Okay, maybe not by much...

 

[WDW1974]

My other issue with all of this is the $800 million. Everyone keeps spouting off this number, but Disney is contributing only $344 million of that as per their 43% stake in the venture. The Shendi Group is contributing $456 million of the total. This has been reported ad nauseam in many articles so it is disingenuous for people to act like Disney is paying out the entire sum. Well, they wouldn't have as much to say if they reported it correctly.

Yes, because if Disney paid only $45 million or $145 million in greasing palms, then that would make it OK, right?

As to the $800 million and Disney's piece of it, just because it should be 43% doesn't mean that it is. If Shendi wants more money from Burbank, then they'll get it.