Can the East Coast Marvel Problem Really Be Solved? (Discussion)

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Everyone misses the easiest solution to the problem, reroute the Mississippi to cut right thru the middle of Florida, thereby relocating WDW west of the Mississippi. Problem solved.
 

yoda_5729

Well-Known Member
I don't know for sure if this is accurate, but isn't it true, that though Disney cannot build any Marvel property east of the Mississippi (that Universal is currently using), they still are able to be profiting directly from their competition, in terms of merchandise sales in their greatest competitors own parks? Everytime a Spider-Man doll (or Bart Simpson doll) is sold in Universal, I would think Disney gets some of that, if not even possibly a share of overall profits, or a users fee for using the property. Realistically, we all know how timid Disney is at times in terms of building projects, or cutting budgets for projects, but with this they actually generate income with no expenses what-so-ever with the upkeep employee, and building fees falling on Universal. I would think the deal also allows Disney influence in Universal in ways that normally they never would have had.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I don't know for sure if this is accurate, but isn't it true, that though Disney cannot build any Marvel property east of the Mississippi (that Universal is currently using), they still are able to be profiting directly from their competition, in terms of merchandise sales in their greatest competitors own parks? Everytime a Spider-Man doll (or Bart Simpson doll) is sold in Universal, I would think Disney gets some of that, if not even possibly a share of overall profits, or a users fee for using the property. Realistically, we all know how timid Disney is at times in terms of building projects, or cutting budgets for projects, but with this they actually generate income with no expenses what-so-ever with the upkeep employee, and building fees falling on Universal. I would think the deal also allows Disney influence in Universal in ways that normally they never would have had.
The terms are in the contract. Disney doesn’t get as much as you seem to think.
 

yoda_5729

Well-Known Member
The terms are in the contract. Disney doesn’t get as much as you seem to think.

I'll be the first to admit, I'm not overly skilled at reading through legal contractual passages, but doesn't article V discuss merchandising fees, plus an annual fee? there appears to be designated 10,000 square foot area dedicated to Marvel inside the parks for merchandise, that MCA has to buy, or at least meet an undisclosed amount each year or pay the differences?
 
Last edited:

danlb_2000

Well-Known Member
Let’s be honest with ourselves. Disney would have not allowed it. Period.

Universal has done their part keeping Spider-Man and Hulk up to date with their refurbs and redos. Then again, it is a must for Universal to do so if they do not wish to get penalized by Disney for breaking any of the contractual agreements.

The contract would have given Disney little power to stop it. The only criteria they can use to reject something is that it didn't fit the style guide.

I am still not convinced that the Spiderman and Hulk updates were needed to be in compliance with the contract. The contract says "Each THE MARVEL UNIVERSE shall be operated and maintained in a first class manner consistent with the highest standards of the theme park industry". That's a pretty vague statement.
 

danlb_2000

Well-Known Member
Except they’re not. Many of the depictions are rooted in the animated television shows of the 90s. The language is that they must conform to the style guides and character designs have changed.

The question is, do they need to be continuously updates to match changes in the style guide, or the designs locked in to whatever the style guide said at the time things were originally designed?
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
The question is, do they need to be continuously updates to match changes in the style guide, or the designs locked in to whatever the style guide said at the time things were originally designed?
The updates to The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man and the walk around characters do not look like the 90s. It makes no sense for Marvel to force a licensee into outdated imagery, especially with a perpetual deal.
 

danlb_2000

Well-Known Member
The updates to The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man and the walk around characters do not look like the 90s. It makes no sense for Marvel to force a licensee into outdated imagery, especially with a perpetual deal.

I was thinking the other way around, can Marvel force universal into New designs?
 

SteamboatJoe

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Not too easily. The other side of the contract notes with good faith effort. They do not want to break anything legally on their end either.
So if Marvel incorporates MCU character designs into the comics, they would be fair game?
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
My take-away from this thread... neither Disney nor Universal thinks they have a "Marvel problem", as they seem perfectly content with the status quo, or at least, not bothered enough by the status quo that they would want to spend the time and billable attorney hours needed to change it.
 

ppete1975

Well-Known Member
so it could happen... several diff ways.
Heres a simpler one

Universal is allowed to keep marvel rights in their parks (indefinitely and no longer pay marvel licensing fees)
Disney gives away a high value property (simpsons family guy and all the other fox animation they have)
lots of money
This allows universal to build a ton of stuff and keep the simpsons area (i dont know what that deal looks like longterm) add bobs burgers family guy
allows them to keep and update their marvel area (for free) ... prob not add new rides



disney gets the right to use the name marvel and build marvel attractions at its parks.
nothing else
 

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

Top Bottom