trr1
Well-Known Member
is that John or Mike ?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Al Weiss Retirement
- Thread starter menamechris
- Start date
is that John or Mike ?
jt04
Well-Known Member
"Family issues" is a broad description, and can certainly be used in this case as I understand it. I fully expect the particulars to be common knowledge at some point, but I'll let others take care of that.
Cynthia who, if I recall correctly, wasn't married and had no kids? Yeah...
The buying them back part is purely speculation. The rest is not. I assure you such discussions have taken place. Very unlikely to ever happen, though.
Certain posters makes the same point when discussing making DTD more family friendly by arguing that "family friendly" does not always mean a traditional family usually associated with Disney.
Some of these threads are destined for a Ripley's museums archives. :lol:
Whilst the quality of BGW has gone down the tubes sadly within the two years of the ownership change.
MMFanCipher
Well-Known Member
I see. When people said selling I thought they meant selling the whole thing, not selling stakes in the parks.
:wave:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
No, they are talking about selling off the whole thing, but any combination would of course be a possibility as well. The Walt Disney Company owns none of the Tokyo Disney Resort and a minority stake in Disneyland Paris, Hong Kong Disneyland Resort and the upcoming Shanghai Disneyland Resort.
DisneyNut2007
Active Member
BigThunderMatt
Well-Known Member
They may have no ownership of TDL but they have full creative control. And to be quite honest I haven't been to Paris or Hong Kong but TDL is leaps and bounds ahead of WDW (with only two parks mind you).
However, I think this is because Oriental Land Company GETS Walt's original idea for Disneyland and takes pride in their parks. I feel like any American conglomerate that would take a majority stake in Disney Parks would only do so for the money the name itself would bring in and would not invest accordingly.
The model could work any way you want. Sell 70%, keep 30%, sell 40, keep 60, sell 100, keep 0. Once the Walt Disney Company doesn't own 100%, there will be a need for contractual arrangements (with payment terms, etc.) to allow the park entity to use Walt Disney Company intellectual property. With such an arrangement in place, it could work no matter the ownership structure.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Disney has no issue forcing the Oriental Land Company to spend and do more to uphold the guidelines written into the contracts. The also tried to play hardball with the Hong Kong SAR over paying for the current expansion. Euro Disney SCA gets more slack because the more complicated corporate structure. But what company would agree to having more stringent standards imposed on them when Disney has spent how many years now u doing them because they are not cost effective?