Differing saturation of sponsorship in the parks?

[Batphobic]

Can anyone explain to me why Epcot is so saturated with sponsorship while the other parks aren't so much?

When I'm in FW I feel like I'm walking through an engulfing commercial.

Why does the entrance fee manage to finance the other parks just fine but Epcot can't stay open without the big-time sponsorship?

Know what I mean? I know there is definitely some company representation in the other parks, it just doesn't seem like it's on such a grand scale.

 

[marni1971]

Because EPCOT Center was built using a large chunk of sponsors money. In 1979 it was the largest private construction project in the world, and one company couldn`t fund it. The topics covered in each pavilion were tied to a specific line of industry or science and the sponsors went hand in hand with the topic and their line of work.

Since then, Epcot has hung onto its format - just - of companies paying for the exposure. Today isn`t like it used to me; it is rather mild. The roster used to be an impressive whos who of American industry - in iteslf a nod to Walts original EPCOT. Energy, Seas, Norway, Canada and ironically America are now all unsponsored. The American Adventure used to be co sponsored by American Express and Coca Cola.

The other parks used to be largerly sponsored too. RCA and FEDEX, Delta and Eastern, Energiser, Monsanto, Sony - they all had a hand once.

 

[Figment632]

Because EPCOT Center was built using a large chunk of sponsors money. In 1979 it was the largest private construction project in the world, and one company couldn`t fund it. The topics covered in each pavilion were tied to a specific line of industry or science and the sponsors went hand in hand with the topic and their line of work.

Since then, Epcot has hung onto its format - just - of companies paying for the exposure. Today isn`t like it used to me; it is rather mild. The roster used to be an impressive whos who of American industry - in iteslf a nod to Walts original EPCOT. Energy, Seas, Norway, Canada and ironically America are now all unsponsored. The American Adventure used to be co sponsored by American Express and Coca Cola.

The other parks used to be largerly sponsored too. RCA and FEDEX, Delta and Eastern, Energiser, Monsanto, Sony - they all had a hand once.

Well put as usual Martin, didn't a lot of attractions in DL back in the day have sponsorship?

 

[Phonedave]

It was also supposed to be an "expert" collaboration type of situation.

Believe it or not, Imagineers do not know everything. They may be cutting edge when it comes to park design, but there are others in specific scientific fields that are light years ahead.

By having a sponsor who presumably was in the field in question - such as Nestle with The Land (food science) or GM with Test Tracl, you not only got money to build the pavillion or land but you also had access to up to date information and technology. - Again, in theory.

Nobody has to sponsor the Tea Cups, because last I checked, Tea Cup physics was not something that was a heavy research item. (However, I would NOT be suprised if somewhere, someone has a government grant to do just that)


-dave

 

[Figment632]

It was also supposed to be an "expert" collaboration type of situation.

Believe it or not, Imagineers do not know everything. They may be cutting edge when it comes to park design, but there are others in specific scientific fields that are light years ahead.

By having a sponsor who presumably was in the field in question - such as Nestle with The Land (food science) or GM with Test Tracl, you not only got money to build the pavillion or land but you also had access to up to date information and technology. - Again, in theory.

Nobody has to sponsor the Tea Cups, because last I checked, Tea Cup physics was not something that was a heavy research item. (However, I would NOT be suprised if somewhere, someone has a government grant to do just that)


-dave

I don't think it is about anything else other than $$$$$$.

 

[Big Cheese]

I don't think it is about anything else other than $$$$$$.

^ I really dont see how it bothers people. The alternative is to close.:shrug:

 

[Figment632]

^ I really dont see how it bothers people. The alternative is to close.:shrug:

Yea I don't mind it especially when it is done well like Fed-Ex and SM. I would much rather another sponsor have been brought in than WOL closing.

 

[Ashitaka]

Nobody has to sponsor the Tea Cups, because last I checked, Tea Cup physics was not something that was a heavy research item. (However, I would NOT be suprised if somewhere, someone has a government grant to do just that)

But it could be sponsored. Can't you just see it?

The Mad Tea Party, now sponsored by Dramamine.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Because EPCOT Center was built using a large chunk of sponsors money. In 1979 it was the largest private construction project in the world, and one company couldn`t fund it. The topics covered in each pavilion were tied to a specific line of industry or science and the sponsors went hand in hand with the topic and their line of work.

Since then, Epcot has hung onto its format - just - of companies paying for the exposure. Today isn`t like it used to me; it is rather mild. The roster used to be an impressive whos who of American industry - in iteslf a nod to Walts original EPCOT. Energy, Seas, Norway, Canada and ironically America are now all unsponsored. The American Adventure used to be co sponsored by American Express and Coca Cola.

The other parks used to be largerly sponsored too. RCA and FEDEX, Delta and Eastern, Energiser, Monsanto, Sony - they all had a hand once.

Agreed by everything, but isn't the Seas funded (in parts) by Universities and some small companies?