Bob Iger Stepping Down, Bob Chapek New CEO

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Same as with Judge's contract, I don't give a blank what the budgets are - I'm not paying it out of my pocket so I don't care. Just pay it and get it done.

And yes, its a mini coaster comparative to going to a real coaster park. But then you see how people have to 'sit down and catch their breath' after riding Cosmic Rewind. Disney guests are mostly wimps when it comes to thrill rides. So they build what they think they can handle.

That part of the debate I couldn't care less about. But unless TSL precludes or prevents them from expanding or adding attractions in the future, then theres no reason to label it underwhelming or adequate in the long term. Provided, of course, that continued expansion does occur.
I most agree with you. Cosmic rewind is a “moderate thrill” However…and even more fun. Hagrids is the best comparison in town.

The closet thing to a medium MGM has opened in 1999…if we’re Honest.

I like slinky fine…it’s supposed to be a middling park ride…but you get 90 minute waits on those In underequipped parks

The last part is the hard part. My instincts tell me that’s EXACTLY what has happened to that park.
 
Last edited:

Smiley/OCD

Well-Known Member
Primeval whirl was a throw up in a mini-crisis…granted. But it had the same goal as slinky dog when you get down to it. Relatively cheap capacity.

I’m not really trying to do a Chester/toy story comparison…obviously one looks better. But isnt an amazing level of investment either way.

One took about 9 months too…that matters.
PW would have been an E ticket on the Seaside or Pt. Pleasant NJ boardwalk…an enjoyable ride for kids, but had no place at AK
 

denyuntilcaught

Well-Known Member
I don't see why it isn't possible. Stupid meddling in politics started the recent mess that, I am absolutely certain, affected Lightyear's box office to some degree.
Number one rule to crisis management is to put stakeholders ahead of reputation. Where Disney messed up is that by not "meddling" they appeared to not support its stakeholders (note, not shareholders, but its actual publics: Cos and guests), and only spoke out after internal pressure, which made Disney appear reactive, not proactive. A failure on all fronts.

Again, it's not really possible for a company to be apolitical. It's a challenge for me to think of one company with the gravitas of Disney that operates apolitically in this day and age.
 

bryanfze55

Well-Known Member
We need more PeopleMovers and Living with the Lands. People should get their “thrills” elsewhere. We have plenty of amusement parks for that. Imagineering used to have a higher aim than “fun” and “thrill.” If you’re going to build IP lands, give us a great dark ride at least. Why shouldn’t Toy Story Land have a dark ride?
 

Cliff

Well-Known Member
Number one rule to crisis management is to put stakeholders ahead of reputation. Where Disney messed up is that by not "meddling" they appeared to not support its stakeholders (note, not shareholders, but its actual publics: Cos and guests), and only spoke out after internal pressure, which made Disney appear reactive, not proactive. A failure on all fronts.

Again, it's not really possible for a company to be apolitical. It's a challenge for me to think of one company with the gravitas of Disney that operates apolitically in this day and age.
It depends on the company. Some companies deliberetly involve themselves in political activism or social justice issues. Its actually the "goal" of some companies. Some companies make products and use their brands to promote the political and social justice philosophy of their shareholders and management.

I dont think Disney is "intentionally" one of these companies. I think their goal is to attract and appeal to as many people as they can...no matter how much they might agree or disagree with their customers.

Look....half of America votes one way and half votes the other. Its bad business for Disney to give a middle finger to half of its consumer base by diving head-long in to political hot bed issues.

Even if Disney were to decide to openly or publically support one party over the other...what "good" would possibly come from that? This is why they need to stay OUT of the political and social justice argument. They gain nothing from jumping into that fight.....ever.
 

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
Just wanted to mention that Lightyear got 5.2 million in preview box office receipts. ("Preview" refers to when a movie "soft-opens" a day before its official premiere, usually on a Thursday).

It's just been announced that "Minions: The Rise of Gru" got 10.75 million during its preview last night.

(tips hat to elephant in the room, strolls away, whistling)
 

kingdead

Well-Known Member
Just wanted to mention that Lightyear got 5.2 million in preview box office receipts. ("Preview" refers to when a movie "soft-opens" a day before its official premiere, usually on a Thursday).

It's just been announced that "Minions: The Rise of Gru" got 10.75 million during its preview last night.

(tips hat to elephant in the room, strolls away, whistling)
That's good news for theaters in general--counterprogramming is back, baby!--and terrible news for Disney. I wonder if it's that people just see the movies as a Disney+ perk now.
 

el_super

Well-Known Member
Even if Disney were to decide to openly or publically support one party over the other...what "good" would possibly come from that? This is why they need to stay OUT of the political and social justice argument. They gain nothing from jumping into that fight.....ever.

What if the split was more 60/40? Would it be worth it to appeal to the majority? What if the demographic that was most likely to spend money on your product was closer to 70/30 or 80/20 toward one side? Would it make sense then?

They're staying in politics because it makes good business sense in the long term to get ahead of these opinions.

Haven't you even been on the Carousel of Progress? Progress is eternal.
 

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
That's good news for theaters in general--counterprogramming is back, baby!--and terrible news for Disney. I wonder if it's that people just see the movies as a Disney+ perk now.

That'd be bad news for "Disney". Disney+ is in deep red territory. Costs the company a lot, doesn't make it a dime.

But I don't think that's quite it. There may be other reasons.

But I'm not gonna poke that elephant.
 

kingdead

Well-Known Member
That'd be bad news for "Disney". Disney+ is in deep red territory. Costs the company a lot, doesn't make it a dime.

But I don't think that's quite it. There may be other reasons.

But I'm not gonna poke that elephant.
Confusing storyline (is it the toy or the man?), movie seems a bit dark visually, leaned too hard into culture war marketing which always seems so grim and lecturey. It's nice that they're being inclusive but not $50 worth of nice and that two women kiss and it's not the toy but like a man but a movie man (?????) are literally all I know about the movie. Like, you know what, if you want to be inclusive, just show your kids lesbian moms on other media for free. Or get to know two moms or two dads! Then you don't have to see a bad movie 😂
 

mikejs78

Premium Member
.half of America votes one way and half votes the other. Its bad business for Disney to give a middle finger to half of its consumer base by diving head-long in to political hot bed issues.

It's a fallicy to believe that just because everyone votes one way or another in a two-party system, that everyone thinks one way or the other on every single issue. In reality, the American political landscape is:
  • Approximately 30% Democratic
  • Approximately 30% Republican
  • Approximately 40% Independent
That 40% shifts tremendously between election cycles. And even among those who are solidly in one party or another, there aren't monolithic views. To say Disney is effectively alienating 50% of the country by being politically active is pure fallacy and doesn't take into account the many nuances of the American political electorate.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
It's a fallicy to believe that just because everyone votes one way or another in a two-party system, that everyone thinks one way or the other on every single issue. In reality, the American political landscape is:
  • Approximately 30% Democratic
  • Approximately 30% Republican
  • Approximately 40% Independent
That 40% shifts tremendously between election cycles. And even among those who are solidly in one party or another, there aren't monolithic views. To say Disney is effectively alienating 50% of the country by being politically active is pure fallacy and doesn't take into account the many nuances of the American political electorate.
It’s actually 55% don’t care/do nothing

Other than that…totally agree with you
 

MrPromey

Well-Known Member
That's good news for theaters in general--counterprogramming is back, baby!--and terrible news for Disney. I wonder if it's that people just see the movies as a Disney+ perk now.

Have you seen it?

I have and I don't think that's the problem.

I also don't think poltical controversy had a ton to do with it, either.
 

Sir_Cliff

Well-Known Member
Sony is still primarily an international technology company - with a strong entertainment presence

Disney is still primarily an American entertainment company


Closer comparison though…for sure
I'd venture to say that there is no entertainment brand that carries quite the cultural clout of Disney. There's a reason Universal Orlando kind of flies under the radar on issues like this and Covid, while everything Disney does or doesn't do is a global headline.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom