News Disney and Fox come to terms -- announcement soon; huge IP acquisition

[Sirwalterraleigh]

In what metric is Bond the biggest global movie franchise ever?

Most number of movies...the first true “global”
Box office draw franchise.

 

[Rodan75]

In what metric is Bond the biggest global movie franchise ever?

I believe this was true at a point at least 10 yrs ago, based on ticket sales. I'm not sure if it is true any more though, I want to say something like Harry Potter finally surpassed it globally and Marvel may have finally pass it globally now as well. I stopped paying super close attention to those records when it seemed like they were being broken every year.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I believe this was true at a point at least 10 yrs ago, based on ticket sales. I'm not sure if it is true any more though, I want to say something like Harry Potter finally surpassed it globally and Marvel may have finally pass it globally now as well. I stopped paying super close attention to those records when it seemed like they were being broken every year.

There have been 24 bond films...and it has been widely credited as being thr first “global” franchise...a serial film run that had large appeal/box office in the Far East, Europe and North America - in particular.

Sometimes a cake is just a cake.

 

[seascape]

Actually there have been several articles in recent months from the investor class about Disney's need for a 5th gate....

A major expansion of MK going outside its existing foot print would dramatically increase its capacity and accomplish the same thing as a 5th gate. Also major expansion between Africa and Asia in AK. Them looking at where the SW hotel is supposedly going and SW:GE, there is room for a major expansion of SW so there is no need right now for a 5th gate. The expansion capacity they can use right now is larger than adding 2 more gates.

 

[AnotherDayAnotherDollar]

Most number of movies...the first true “global”
Box office draw franchise.


?

There have been 24 bond films...and it has been widely credited as being thr first “global” franchise...a serial film run that had large appeal/box office in the Far East, Europe and North America - in particular.

Sometimes a cake is just a cake.

No one who knows anything about box office would ever consider biggest as in "most number of movies" released. That's a ridiculous metric. And now you're changing from biggest to first.....Twilight Saga has more movies released and were released before the Avengers. I guess that's a bigger franchise.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

"Feathered friend"? "Lovely assistant"? You think very highly of yourself, don't you? I'm not your friend though I know why you want to be passive aggressive.

No one who knows anything about box office would ever consider biggest as in "most number of movies" released. That's a ridiculous metric. And now you're changing from biggest to first.....Twilight Saga has more movies released and were released before the Avengers. I guess that's a bigger franchise.

Lovely assistant is Captain America

Feathered Friend - tribute to the great burgess Meredith - mister penguin

I don’t have a name for you...as it should be.


And your argument about box office is subjective...as is my upfront subjective assessment of bonds film importance. “Subjective” means opinion based...fyi (how’s that for PA??? )

But it doesn’t involve a current box office gross chart...which means a many can’t comprehend it - it seems. I would really like it to be more “out of the box” around here...but I get the shortcomings. I am not 25 and remember making cases before google (seriously, are you? That does matter).

The reason Bond was even brought up was to show that even successful things can fade/return/grow/diminish...as could be the case for marvel.

Marvel is the biggest thing going right now...which is going to be on display again over the next weekend. But that isn’t a guarantee on this planet...maybe Pluto...

But now we’re spiraling out to sea like maverick and none of us are gonna get back to the summer camp before lights out/curfew...

 

[mikejs78]

A major expansion of MK going outside its existing foot print would dramatically increase its capacity and accomplish the same thing as a 5th gate. Also major expansion between Africa and Asia in AK. Them looking at where the SW hotel is supposedly going and SW:GE, there is room for a major expansion of SW so there is no need right now for a 5th gate. The expansion capacity they can use right now is larger than adding 2 more gates.

Oh I agree that there's much they can (and should) do before even considering the idea of a 5th gate. I was simply responding to the assertion that Wall Street doesn't want a 5th gate.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Oh I agree that there's much they can (and should) do before even considering the idea of a 5th gate. I was simply responding to the assertion that Wall Street doesn't want a 5th gate.

The cost of infrastructure spending and longterm labor/overhead allocation makes more Gates unpalatable...

What happened when DAK opened was the average stay went from 5.90 days to only 6.75 (ballpark...those are long ago internal numbers that are a part of TDO’s oral history) when Eisner was targeting more like a 2 day gain. Then the analysis saw that it’s societal - 7 day limit - not a reflection on imagineering.

That’s fighting an immoveable object for dozens if not hundreds of reasons and I suspect a lot of the reason why they have gone into the shell on the construction till somewhat recently...

What changed? 2 big things in particular we have been discussing.

But the expansion of the parks - with existing/paid for infrastructure - makes so much more sense now. We are seeing it.

One question that remains is where they would even put a theoretical “marvel land”?

Mk? Not likely...and they are not exactly leading towards large future expansion at studios.

So if that ever comes...there will be a discussion that has to be had in the halls of power.

Lots more DVC to be built first

 

[mikejs78]

What happened when DAK opened was the average stay went from 5.90 days to only 6.75 (ballpark...those are long ago internal numbers that are apart of TDO’s oral history) when Eisner was targeting more like a 2 day gain. Then the analysis saw that it’s societal - 7 day limit - not a reflection on imagineering.

How did they determine that it was societal? One could also argue that it was because, at opening, DAK wasn't even a full-day park. Hence the average going from 5.9 to 6.75 makes some sense in that context as well.

But the expansion of the parks - with existing/paid for infrastructure - makes so much more sense now. We are seeing it.

It does. IMO if they were smart, they would expand the three non-MK parks to really take > 1 day to see and appreciate (1-2 days), and MK to potentially take 3 days. Guests may not stay longer, but they may be more likely to come back sooner to experience what they missed the first time around.

One question that remains is where they would even put a theoretical “marvel land”?

Mk? Not likely...and they are not exactly leading towards large future expansion at studios.

So if that ever comes...there will be a discussion that has to be had in the halls of power.

It makes most sense in DHS.. But yeah, they haven't shown that there are plans to expand the studio further, although that may change as the hoards of humanity descend upon DHS once Galaxy's Edge opens...

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

How did they determine that it was societal? One could also argue that it was because, at opening, DAK wasn't even a full-day park. Hence the average going from 5.9 to 6.75 makes some sense in that context as well.

There are limits to even the mighty disney’s Power...

7 days is the “American number”...that is the standard vacation. I think mike thought he could eclipse it but it doesn’t hold for a clientele that needs 50,000,000 plus gate clicks each year that is still 85% or so american at a given time.

It is what it is.

So what happened when they added dak, a bunch or hotel rooms, blizzard and the west side was park cannibalization. Less Epcot and more other things - for example. Split days.

A fifth gate would most likely do that to a greater scale - MK this time being the victim - and they would sink - conservatively - $10 bil plus huge daily operational expenses to do it.

I’m no accountant...but I don’t think I need to be.

 

[Stripes]

What happened when DAK opened was the average stay went from 5.90 days to only 6.75 (ballpark...those are long ago internal numbers that are a part of TDO’s oral history) when Eisner was targeting more like a 2 day gain. Then the analysis saw that it’s societal - 7 day limit - not a reflection on imagineering.

It's not just average length of stay anymore though. It's capacity and growing competition. Universal is drawing a sizable portion of Orlando marketshare. A fifth park would go a long way to recapturing that marketshare, increasing capacity, and encouraging on-site occupancy.

The 7-day vacation is societal, but right now there's a whole lot of people that aren't spending all 7 days at Disney.

 

[seascape]

I visit WDW 4 times a year but only once in a full 10 days. The other 3 times are 4 or 5 days.

 

[Lensman]

For the amount of time people vacation in WDW I’m not really a fan of having a 5th gate. I think there’s plenty they can do with the existing 4 parks which they are doing. I do wish they were sticking to 2 cruise ships though and the money they are putting on the 3rd was going to Hollywood studios instead

It could be argued that the cruise ships are, for some people, a 3-4 day 5th gate. Disney certainly markets a visit to the parks as a great adjunct to a 3-4 day Disney cruise.

You have an “entry level” kinda view of things that shows a lack of historical wisdom/perspective...then you post a chart.

Let's not be reduced to name-calling. And I think you know you're above ad hominem.

The reason Bond was even brought up was to show that even successful things can fade/return/grow/diminish...as could be the case for marvel.

But isn't that a truism? All things fade/return/grow/diminish. The most durable IP on the planet, Disney animated characters, have faded/returned/grown/diminished. And they are the IP basis of a good portion of the parks. The parks themselves, independent of IP, have faded/returned/grown/diminished in popularity, but they have endured.

Interestingly, the most durable IP, the mouse himself, has rarely been turned into box office success.

The popularity of the various Marvel characters has been cyclical as well. But they have endured and even evolved. At this point I don't think they could be considered a fad.

The cost of infrastructure spending and longterm labor/overhead allocation makes more Gates unpalatable...

What's your thinking about Universal's opening Volcano Bay and the rumors surrounding it acquiring land for a 4th gate?

I agree that another gate at WDW is not in the cards for the near to medium term future. But I think that substantial ($1-3 bn beyond the current plans) expansion at DHS, DAK, or Epcot isn't out of the question.

What happened when DAK opened was the average stay went from 5.90 days to only 6.75 (ballpark...those are long ago internal numbers that are a part of TDO’s oral history) when Eisner was targeting more like a 2 day gain. Then the analysis saw that it’s societal - 7 day limit - not a reflection on imagineering.

That’s fighting an immoveable object for dozens if not hundreds of reasons and I suspect a lot of the reason why they have gone into the shell on the construction till somewhat recently...

What changed? 2 big things in particular we have been discussing.

But the expansion of the parks - with existing/paid for infrastructure - makes so much more sense now. We are seeing it.

One question that remains is where they would even put a theoretical “marvel land”?

Mk? Not likely...and they are not exactly leading towards large future expansion at studios.

So if that ever comes...there will be a discussion that has to be had in the halls of power.

Lots more DVC to be built first

What 2 big things are you referring to?

Also, the remainder of that post seems more disconnected than your usual posts. You might want to clean it up a bit. Not sure if you intended to hit send as quickly as you did.

How did they determine that it was societal? One could also argue that it was because, at opening, DAK wasn't even a full-day park. Hence the average going from 5.9 to 6.75 makes some sense in that context as well.

It does. IMO if they were smart, they would expand the three non-MK parks to really take > 1 day to see and appreciate (1-2 days), and MK to potentially take 3 days. Guests may not stay longer, but they may be more likely to come back sooner to experience what they missed the first time around.

It makes most sense in DHS.. But yeah, they haven't shown that there are plans to expand the studio further, although that may change as the hoards of humanity descend upon DHS once Galaxy's Edge opens...

Yes, and I think DVC and catering to the superconsumer is what changed to move the bar from 1 week to 2 weeks. Also multiple visits throughout the year.

And cruising fits into this model as well since that's another activity that people go on multiple times a year, year after year.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It's not just average length of stay anymore though. It's capacity and growing competition. Universal is drawing a sizable portion of Orlando marketshare. A fifth park would go a long way to recapturing that marketshare, increasing capacity, and encouraging on-site occupancy.

The 7-day vacation is societal, but right now there's a whole lot of people that aren't spending all 7 days at Disney.

True that competition is a much bigger factor now...much more than disney could have dreamed before Comcast entered the fray...


...but...from an operational expenditure/overhead standpoint, less parks are better for Disney because it maximizes the return on outlay - once the vacation limit threshold of 7 days is met. More or less that’s consistent.

Disney would rather operate 4 parks with 15,000,000 gate clicks annually than 5 with and average of 12,000,000...

Sucks for us though, don’t it?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I visit WDW 4 times a year but only once in a full 10 days. The other 3 times are 4 or 5 days.

So 25/4 = 6.25...and there our magic number.

The idea that Disney is targeting “2 week” vacationers is not feasible for what WDW is: a mass destination.

If EVERYONE with free time and lots of cash go there - sure. But those qualities get them to Bora bora and Aspen too...

Long story short: Disney isn’t good enough to achieve that in large enough numbers...even if the build marvel land

All the “other” people can’t do it consistently in large enough numbers...no matter how long food and wine is.

 

[seascape]

True that competition is a much bigger factor now...much more than disney could have dreamed before Comcast entered the fray...


...but...from an operational expenditure/overhead standpoint, less parks are better for Disney because it maximizes the return on outlay - once the vacation limit threshold of 7 days is met. More or less that’s consistent.

Disney would rather operate 4 parks with 15,000,000 gate clicks annually than 5 with and average of 12,000,000...

Sucks for us though, don’t it?

You are right that competition is good for us and makes Disney better. However, Disney gained a percent of the market back in 2017 to again have 70% of the Orlando Thempark Market. After Star Wars Galaxy Edge opens with the additions to Epcot, their market share will be even higher and in 2021 they will probably be higher again. Disney has so much being built right now and besides Toy Story Land which won't matter for most of us, if FoP is any indication Disney will kill it while Universal has blown it with King Kong, Jimmy Fallon and Fast and Furious.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It could be argued that the cruise ships are, for some people, a 3-4 day 5th gate. Disney certainly markets a visit to the parks as a great adjunct to a 3-4 day Disney cruise.

Correct...good point.

Let's not be reduced to name-calling. And I think you know you're above ad hominem.

Objection, Goes to pattern...it’s always the same: snit and charts. Movies, parks, anything that isn’t 100% pro management...same old. I’ve seen this fish before. Judge me as you wish...I’m looking for exchange of ideas - even if I don’t agree with them - not parental guidance.

But isn't that a truism? All things fade/return/grow/diminish. The most durable IP on the planet, Disney animated characters, have faded/returned/grown/diminished. And they are the IP basis of a good portion of the parks. The parks themselves, independent of IP, have faded/returned/grown/diminished in popularity, but they have endured.

Interestingly, the most durable IP, the mouse himself, has rarely been turned into box office success.

The popularity of the various Marvel characters has been cyclical as well. But they have endured and even evolved. At this point I don't think they could be considered a fad.

Agree...which was the same point I was making before the “oh yeah, like Disney princesses...”

When in fact no Disney princesses were made/marketed between 1959 (sleeping beauty) and 1989 (little mermaid).

That’s just the facts. I have a hard time giving credibility with such a blaring error in context.

What's your thinking about Universal's opening Volcano Bay and the rumors surrounding it acquiring land for a 4th gate?

I agree that another gate at WDW is not in the cards for the near to medium term future. But I think that substantial ($1-3 bn beyond the current plans) expansion at DHS, DAK, or Epcot isn't out of the question.

Loss of share - the thing that really matters in Orlando - is now a major issue. I’m actually shocked at how fast Comcast has turned it. When that happens - and it seems it will...there will be some hard conversations in disneydom. But...that doesn’t mean a fifth gate for a lot of reasons/ labor and park cannibalization being by far the biggest two.

Reinvestment in existing parks makes by far the most sense.

What 2 big things are you referring to?

Also, the remainder of that post seems more disconnected than your usual posts. You might want to clean it up a bit. Not sure if you intended to hit send as quickly as you did.

Loss of revenue/profit from a major TWDC division where tech/society is permenantly changing and the threat of Comcast in the market - one of the two other companies that can challenge disney from a financial perspective.

Did I ramble? Yeah...it happens...I’ll stand at 17.

Yes, and I think DVC and catering to the superconsumer is what changed to move the bar from 1 week to 2 weeks. Also multiple visits throughout the year.

And cruising fits into this model as well since that's another activity that people go on multiple times a year, year after year.

The market is correct...the frequent traveler/upper middle class...but the time necessary and lack of lower income component doesn’t work for Disney mass parks. That’s just a semi-educated guess/prediction.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

You are right that competition is good for us and makes Disney better. However, Disney gained a percent of the market back in 2017 to again have 70% of the Orlando Thempark Market. After Star Wars Galaxy Edge opens with the additions to Epcot, their market share will be even higher and in 2021 they will probably be higher again. Disney has so much being built right now and besides Toy Story Land which won't matter for most of us, if FoP is any indication Disney will kill it while Universal has blown it with King Kong, Jimmy Fallon and Fast and Furious.

Ok...but how does that play into this discussion? And make no mistake this is the best one we’ve seen for awhile....

70% is lower than Disney wants, but is acceptable at higher prices. 60% would be catstrophic for them. Like it or not: there is a limited pool of customers. They world isn’t “increasing its value”...it’s redistributing it and concentrating on gilded age levels.

They could build a fifth gate now...but you need another 10-15 annual visitors to make it worth while and there isn’t a line stretching to Indiana waiting to go. Those that want to go are already going and that’s why the levels have only increased gradually - but still impressively - since the phase 2/3 expansion period ended.

 

[Stripes]

True that competition is a much bigger factor now...much more than disney could have dreamed before Comcast entered the fray...


...but...from an operational expenditure/overhead standpoint, less parks are better for Disney because it maximizes the return on outlay - once the vacation limit threshold of 7 days is met. More or less that’s consistent.

Disney would rather operate 4 parks with 15,000,000 gate clicks annually than 5 with and average of 12,000,000...

Sucks for us though, don’t it?

I can understand the efficiency argument, but the same argument could be applied against Epcot, DHS, and DAK.

I'll be very interested to see the RCID 2020 plan, to see if it shows a maximum addition of more than 1 major park. To me, that would indicate that they intend to build a fifth park.

I genuinely think the odds of getting another gate before 2030 are substantial.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I can understand the efficiency argument, but the same argument could be applied against Epcot, DHS, and DAK.

I'll be very interested to see the RCID 2020 plan, to see if it shows a maximum addition of more than 1 major park. To me, that would indicate that they intend to build a fifth park.

I genuinely think the odds of getting another gate before 2030 are substantial.

But you missed how that average “7” tied into all of this...the average visit grew greatly under the Eisner era expansion but has dead ended and I bet dimes to dollar has remained so or even declined since DAK. That isn’t an Orlando, disney thing...it’s your jerk boss not giving you more than 5 days or getting back for lacrosse camp or before winter break is over...

That’s why a 5th gate may effectively do nothing...if you go there instead of going to Epcot and buying spaten from the dudes in the lederhosen.