This is my opinion too. This show was dynamite from the get-go. Absent some astronomical price-tag, I can't see a good reason why Disney wouldn't have grabbed the theme park rights as well. Iger et al. are paid ungodly sums of money to make decisions about the future, without knowing for sure what's going to happen. I'd say they definitely dropped the ball on this one.
Yes we don't know the cost. And yea, if it's 50bil then of course it's not worth it. But I highly doubt that it would be more than an Avatar, or star wars. And sure, it could very well be, but I just really doubt it.
I'm guessing you don't have a 3 to 7yr old? Because if you did, it was pretty obvious. This wasn't some Nostradamus prediction. I believe it was out around a year before Disney got the broadcast rights. It had a pretty decent following by the time it came to Disney. Nothing is a guarantee, but there was enough information there to tell them bluey was going to be a hit. They just blew it.Well I hope you've made a fortune from all these things you seem to think are obvious, ie its easy to say this now 5 years after the fact.
But being a streaming hit is what matters most to Disney and it's parks decisions. There are always going to be 3 to 6yr olds that the parents need something for them to watch. Also, don't forget get that a whole lot of adults love the show as well. My oldest daughter watched everything they've released just because she loved it. When the time comes, guess who's kids are going to be watching it as well? There's plenty of reasons, outside of it might cost 50bil, that it wouldn't be a good thing to do to get it now.
The creator of the greatest comic strip of all time is notoriously anti-licensing, costing him untold millions.
Well until we know the cost, how about we just assume that its not something cheap at this point, like under the price of Avatar's rights at the time or even under the $4B they paid for LFL. As I'm sure if the rights were still for sale and in a price range Disney is willing to pay they would have by now.
Tell me you don't know the history of Bluey without telling me you don't know the history of Bluey.
variety.com
Once again you're making assumptions that A. Disney isn't actively trying to get the rights, B. That they are even for sale at this point, and C. That they are within a price range Disney is willing to pay and not prohibitively expensive. As I said its easy to just say pony up the money when you don't know all the details while posting on a internet forum.
Tell me you're shilling for Disney without telling me you're shilling for Disney. I know enough about Bluey to know that there was plenty of evidence that the odds of the show being a big hit were pretty high. That's what good executives do, they anticipate. And at the time it would have been a bargain investment. We're talking about a company that took a flyer on a billion dollar star cruiser idea that was doa.
Yea I don't know everything about blueys history. I do know it was being watched by people in the states before it came to Disney in the states. I know plenty of people watching on YouTube before it was at Disney.
Wait, so you're not making assumptions? Of course it's assumptions, you even said while posting on a discussion forum, assumptions are implied. I know we've had this conversation before. Yea I think it's easy to say just pony up. I'm not the one who came out and said the driving force behind what comes to the parks is D+ engagement. Your most popular D+ content isn't in the parks. That's a miss, that's really not debatable.
And if it didn't work out you'd be yelling to high heavens that Iger was the biggest bonehead for spending money on an unproven silly Australian blue dog. It was a gamble either way, and it didn't work out this time. And I've said now a couple times it was a missed opportunity.
It was still a virtually unknown property at the time which is the point.
And yet you're one of the people complaining that Disney is spending too much on D+ content. So I find just a bit ironic that you're being the most vocal now, I don't really see anyone else posting about it, for Disney to spend unknown amounts of money on something from D+.
If you're right, you get praised; if you're wrong, you get criticized. That's the job. That's why Iger gets the big bucks.
No doubt, but it was still worth say given how posters here likes to complain about how much is being spent on stuff for D+.
Sure. Although, in this instance they would be spending on the parks. That's typically less of a complaint here.
You've been here awhile, there are complaints about everything, even for the Parks. And if it came out that Disney spent money on theme park rights for a property that failed you can be sure there would be hundreds of pages of complaints about waste of money while X didn't get funded, etc. So they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. And people wonder why there are rumors of not many from the outside want to be the CEO of Disney.
I do think they've spend too much on D+ content. But there is context that needs to be added. I've said they spend too much, I won't deny it. But if you see what I've written it's things like the Acolyte. Nearly 200mil for a concept that wasn't very successful on the print side of things with unproven show runners. That's a risk, not bluey. I don't have problems spending money where warranted. Never have I said Disney spent too much for star wars, marvel or Pixar... They were all solid investments even not being early on. I complain how lucasfilm has been run, not that they spent 4bil. If they make a decision that is what should be a smart move, and doesn't pan out, that's fine.
I don't know what the theme park rights price tag was in 2018, and I don't know what it is now, and neither do you. But I can safely assume if they are available now and within a reasonable price range Disney would 150% purchase them. Saying anything else is just playing semantics at this point.
That's very true. Even the biggest of doom and gloomers don't really complain about spending on the parks. Do they complain about the final product? Absolutely. As it should be if the product is sub par. Never once did I complain about the money spent on galaxys edge. Do I think the land is fairly mediocre? Yes. But not because of what they spent, but how they spent. I'd approve a star wars land every time though. If done right, it's one of the smartest moves that could be made.
Well what do you know, they were working on it.
Well it appears they came to an agreement after all and are bringing Bluey into the Parks in 2025.
That's good news, it's really smart. It doesn't need an e-ticket so this is a good start. Especially with a film coming.
www.hollywoodreporter.com