Al Lutz reporting marketing push for 2011

[Dizmentia]

Duffy has been discussed on Disney message boards for quite some time now---so much so that I was looking for a really small version at Walt Disney World last year to get as souvenirs for my teddy bear-obsessed co-workers (and these ladies are 36-55 years old). I really thought I'd find them, but I only saw one large version of the Disney Bear (way too pricey for that kind of souvenir). Duffy should do well with a wide assortment of merchandise choices. I think it's pretty clever---more so than the "Monster" line of plush toys.

 

[wm49rs]

Yeah, as is, FL does well to appeal to everyone. And the FLE won't hurt FL at all.

I don't have a problem with the M&G's other than the money being used on them. Other than creating space in FL, I don't see how it helps the rest of the park. I could even see it hurting by investing so much in one area that really doesn't need that BIG of an expansion to cover its problems, that it neglects the other areas and parks.

There's a good thread in the FLE section started by Lebeau that details the many (and I do mean many) advantages of the FLE. Everyone talks about the demographics, the desires for some high-end E ticket ride, but what the FLE is delivering is capacity, dining, and the need to center one section of oen park on some very lucrative franchises. Money pulled in from the Fairies and Princesses (and these are billion-dollar franchises) can go towards funding future projects (like the MI2 coaster that's been rumored) throughout the parks.

Now, I'm not crazy about the focus or M&Gs myself. But I recognize that every little girl (and their accompaning family) will leave CRT or BBB and have a dedicated destination of their own, instead of getting their makeup wet on SM or their har tousled on BTMRR. Let them have their area, take up their day with M&Gs, dining at the BaTB restaurant, and riding TLM to their hearts desire. I'l take the lessened capacity and enjoy the rest of MK......

 

[misterID]

There's a good thread in the FLE section started by Lebeau that details the many (and I do mean many) advantages of the FLE. Everyone talks about the demographics, the desires for some high-end E ticket ride, but what the FLE is delivering is capacity, dining, and the need to center one section of oen park on some very lucrative franchises. Money pulled in from the Fairies and Princesses (and these are billion-dollar franchises) can go towards funding future projects (like the MI2 coaster that's been rumored) throughout the parks.

But see, that's not a guarantee, though. From the profits they've made in the past they'd have no problem investing more into the park. They just haven't.

I do see the advantages for FL. I'm just not sold about how this will help the rest of the park.

Now, I'm not crazy about the focus or M&Gs myself. But I recognize that every little girl (and their accompaning family) will leave CRT or BBB and have a dedicated destination of their own, instead of getting their makeup wet on SM or their har tousled on BTMRR. Let them have their area, take up their day with M&Gs, dining at the BaTB restaurant, and riding TLM to their hearts desire. I'l take the lessened capacity and enjoy the rest of MK......

Yeah, I think the M&G's will be very crowded and very popular with small kids and their parents and will help with the crowds and flow of FL. Again, I think its a cool idea, but it could be something that could be accomplished with half the money and space used, imo. Seriously, I think 1 or just 2 M&G's with the restaurant and TLM ride would do the same.

 

[thelookingglass]

Neither does Fantasyland itself. The FLE is being exapnded for a target demographic, but nothing (save for ToonTown) is being lost.......

But we aren't talking about the existing Fantasyland, we're comparing FLE to Potter.

I'm not sure if you were trying to suggest that WWoHP is geared at young boys, or if you were just pointing out that it has elements that are geared at young boys.

Either way, I have a hard time believing that anyone actually thinks that the FLE, at least what we know of it, is not targeted at a very specific demographic (young girls).

 

[wm49rs]

But we aren't talking about the existing Fantasyland, we're comparing FLE to Potter.

I'm not sure if you were trying to suggest that WWoHP is geared at young boys, or if you were just pointing out that it has elements that are geared at young boys.

Either way, I have a hard time believing that anyone actually thinks that the FLE, at least what we know of it, is not targeted at a very specific demographic (young girls).

The expansion is, yes. A very lucrative and profitable demographic, in the billions. But many of the complaints about the FLE are how the other groups are losing out. The only contraction in association with the FLE is the loss of TT, which was essentially a temporary locale to begin with. Boys (or any other demographic) aren't losing out because of the FLE, it's just that another demographic is gaining.

 

[wm49rs]

But see, that's not a guarantee, though. From the profits they've made in the past they'd have no problem investing more into the park. They just haven't.

I do see the advantages for FL. I'm just not sold about how this will help the rest of the park.

Perhaps, but the potential for improvements and future rides would be lessened if WDW did not seek to tap into these franchises.

 

[Thrill]

I don't know why every other thread around here turns into a discussion about FLE or Harry Potter, but here goes:

Honestly, I'm not too sure that Disney is overly concerned about WWoHP. I can't imagine anyone going down to Florida from too far away and visiting only Universal. Considering that the prices are about the same, and that Universal is done in three days or so, it could mean that they actually end up spending a few days at WDW that they otherwise wouldn't have spent. People who are closer to the Orlando area might be more inclined to make a trip to Universal over WDW, but that's not really Disney's focus.

Even if it is cutting into profits, there's a good chance that the fad wears off pretty quickly, and everything will be moving normally within a few months. Perhaps Star Tours 2 is part of Disney's plan to bring fans of a franchise back to WDW, and if it's based off of the original trilogy, it might do an okay job of getting back those profits. I can't see Star Tours taking on all of the losses for a larger franchise, but there's a possibility that it makes up for a piece of it. Maybe we'll see some more exclusive merchandise over at Star Tours' gift shop to get some merchandise sales that attempt to rival Harry Potter's.

As for FLE, it's not in any way directed at WWoHP. To me, it seems like this may be a fair response as far as merchandise sales go, considering that these are two large franchises, but it in no way is taking any attention away from WWoHP. In fact, it will be three years before it's complete, and by then, I think the WWoHP fad will wear out.

 

[fosse76]

I don't know why every other thread around here turns into a discussion about FLE or Harry Potter, but here goes:

Honestly, I'm not too sure that Disney is overly concerned about WWoHP. I can't imagine anyone going down to Florida from too far away and visiting only Universal. Considering that the prices are about the same, and that Universal is done in three days or so, it could mean that they actually end up spending a few days at WDW that they otherwise wouldn't have spent. People who are closer to the Orlando area might be more inclined to make a trip to Universal over WDW, but that's not really Disney's focus.

You're delusional if you honestly believe that. A great many people skip Disney. And I think a lot of people give Disney too much credit. A good portion only visit for a few days, which is why it isn't until after what, 5 days, that each additional day is only $3. I know people who only go to Disney maybe one or two days, and those are the ones with small children. Disney isn't the only thing in Orlando, and people know this.

Even if it is cutting into profits, there's a good chance that the fad wears off pretty quickly, and everything will be moving normally within a few months.

Prove it is a fad.

Perhaps Star Tours 2 is part of Disney's plan to bring fans of a franchise back to WDW, and if it's based off of the original trilogy, it might do an okay job of getting back those profits. I can't see Star Tours taking on all of the losses for a larger franchise, but there's a possibility that it makes up for a piece of it. Maybe we'll see some more exclusive merchandise over at Star Tours' gift shop to get some merchandise sales that attempt to rival Harry Potter's.

Star Wars and Harry Potter both have fan bases that could rival each other in terms of passion...and possibly even numbers. They both have their detractors as well. But I'm not convinced that Star Wars could really rival Potter, as its heyday is long over. The new films didn't really create any new fans. And Star Wars merchandising is pretty limited. Jo Rowling created such a diverse world, merchandising opportunities are endless.

As for FLE, it's not in any way directed at WWoHP. To me, it seems like this may be a fair response as far as merchandise sales go, considering that these are two large franchises, but it in no way is taking any attention away from WWoHP. In fact, it will be three years before it's complete, and by then, I think the WWoHP fad will wear out.

Prove it's a fad. I'm sure Star Wars was considered a fad as well. Disney is making a huge mistake if they think princess-related merchandise will compete with Potter. That merchandise will appeal only to girls (and a few select boys), whereas Potter's merchandise appeals to every demographic.

 

[Krack]

If only EPCOT had a set of popular characters that could serve as goodwill ambassadors for the park ...

 

[_Scar]

I hate Duffy so much.

How about market one of the many Disney characters we have already?

UGH.

 

[brianplace]

more complex than it looks?

a) disney doesn't have a popular bear character.
b) lots-o-strawberry-smelling bear hasn't exactly struck gold.
c) mickey's copyright expires in less than 15 years
d) any new character they come up with has a copyright of at least 70 years (thanks, Disney lawyers!)
e) so wouldn't it be interesting to associate a very cute, "NEW" character with the venerable iconic Mickey Mouse? so a generation can grow up with it? so Mickey's own copyright expiration won't be as big of a deal?

I don't think any decision Disney makes is taken lightly. Comparing this to the short-term success of Potterland is laughable. Disney develops ideas for _years_ before they see the light of day. They are one of the most calculating companies in existence.

I don't think this is just about making a quick buck.

 

[Tigger1988]

a) disney doesn't have a popular bear character.
b) lots-o-strawberry-smelling bear hasn't exactly struck gold.

a) does the name Winnie the Pooh mean anything to you?
b) Lotso plushes are sold out around the parks, and they can barely keep him in stock for a few days. Interest is obviously there, despite the fact that Disney has made very little merch featuring the character (finding a PVC toy of him is liking pulling teeth).

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

Disney focuses on the kiddy market because they are easy to please, cheaper to construct for and have a never ending source of consumers because the parents believe in nostalgia and force feed the young.

However away from fansites on this side of the pond there are more and more people saying no to Disney because the price and kiddie marketing message is not for them. The under 8 market may be lucrative but so is the over 8, and that market is more likely to provide a whole family experience.

Flogging made in China fluffy bears is just a continuation of sacrificing hard won premium brand status for short term shareholder benefit.

 

[cmwade77]

a) disney doesn't have a popular bear character.
c) mickey's copyright expires in less than 15 years
d) any new character they come up with has a copyright of at least 70 years (thanks, Disney lawyers!)

c) Actually, even if the copyright lapses, Mickey Mouse is still trademarked, so he couldn't be used anyway.
d) New characters (as with all new works) would have a copyright of at least 100 years.

 

[trr1]

Al Lutz is reporting the new marketing push for 2011 is Duffy the bear. Now duffy is supposed to be mickey's stuffed bear that accompanys him wherever he travels to. He says its already huge over in japan.

:hurl: we are NOT Japan

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

 

[Captain Chaos]

TDO's concept art for the AA that will replace Disco Yeti...

 

[JimboJones123]

Duff Bear for me,
Duff Bear for you,
I'll have a Duff,
You'll have one too.

 

[BrerFrog]

c) mickey's copyright expires in less than 15 years
d) any new character they come up with has a copyright of at least 70 years (thanks, Disney lawyers!)

I don't know much about the copyright business, so could someone explain to me why?

 

[_Scar]

I'd love to see good ole' PedoBear dolls in the stores. I hear kids love him and he loves kids.


BTW, I saw no Lotso plush in WDW. If he was then he was sold out before I got to see or he was never sold there. I purchased my plush of him online.



And more BTW- wouldn't it be awesome if Universal acquired the rights to Mickey Mouse?!!? LOL