Disney Buying LucasFilm! WHOA

[fractal]

If so, that proves that Iger is a wimp. How many failures did Walt have? But he stayed the course and believed in creating new, high-quality characters, movies and shows. He took risks all the time. If he hadn't, we wouldn't have any Disney theme parks to discuss here. Oh wait, that's right, Iger wants to SELL those...

I hear you - but one man's "wimp" is another's "prudent businessman". Walt was one of a kind and a great role model - but he did need Roy to reel him in from time to time.

Instead of losing hundreds of millions maybe billions more trying to create a sci-fi/fanstasy franchise they decided to buy Marvel and one that even George Lucas couldn't screw up.


Two birds in the hand may be worth several billion in the bush.

If John Carter was the mega-hit they had hoped it would be then I doubt we would be having this discussion - and don't forget ( I know it's hard ) The Prince of Persia.

 

[Computer Magic]

I am guessing you are just stating the obvious (not being sarcastic, for a change, here) because I well understand exactly what Disney does and why.

Bring it down a notch. I'm actually someone that enjoys your posts. Not everyone is on top of the business side of Disney as you and I.

 

[WDW1974]

I was referring to this...


"Despite most analysts and folks in the industry (and even ME) thinking this was a very good deal, Wall Street didn't agree today as WDC shares plunged 1.92%."

Yes. And I addressed it ... it was a small part of a larger post that looked at many parts of the deal.

 

[Magenta Panther]

unfortunately Roy Disney jr only won half the battle. He got Eisner removed but Iger wan't Roy's first choice. This is probably better for another thread another time.

I completely agree with you. Roy didn't like Iger. Iger sweet-talked him into accepting him, I believe - but there's no way Roy would be happy with what Iger's actually done. The broken yeti alone would have sent Roy into fits. It's funny, a lot of the negative reaction out there to this latest purchase is coming from Star Wars fans who fear that Disney will "ruin" the franchise. Me, I couldn't care less about Star Wars. It's had a long semi-successful run. Six movies; why the heck would anyone want more? It's DISNEY that's being "ruined" by Bob Iger's manic buying spree as far as I'm concerned.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I would say Disney's weak point is they can't create anything anymore for the most part. They rely on the creativity of others ... the IP to make their machine work. Whether you like the IP or not doesn't change the fact that Disney's own creativity has largely dried up.

Do you think part of this is the negative stigma of the Disney name with the male demographic? Personally, I think this is a huge problem and it's why they're better offer buying intellectual property that meets the demands of that demographic.

While I think there's certainly some truth to the issue of creativity in "Disney proper", I really think that content produced under the Disney name carries that unfortunate stigma. What confuses me beyond belief is why they went with the name Disney XD instead of something more generic.

 

[donaldtoo]

Today, LucasFilm.Tomorrow...Oprah! And beyond...!
Muahahahaha!

 

[Computer Magic]

I completely agree with you. Roy didn't like Iger. Iger sweet-talked him into accepting him, I believe - but there's no way Roy would be happy with what Iger's actually done. The broken yeti alone would have sent Roy into fits. It's funny, a lot of the negative reaction out there to this latest purchase is coming from Star Wars fans who fear that Disney will "ruin" the franchise. Me, I couldn't care less about Star Wars. It's had a long semi-successful run. Six movies; why the heck would anyone want more? It's DISNEY that's being "ruined" by Bob Iger's manic buying spree as far as I'm concerned.

Well Disney is known for beating something to death and over saturate market.

 

[fractal]

Yes. And I addressed it ... it was a small part of a larger post that looked at many parts of the deal.

you still don't understand - the stock fell ( not "plunged" ) to reflect the dillution of the stock ( 40 million more shares will be issued )- it had nothing to do with Wall Street not agreeing with your assesment of the deal.

 

[doctornick]

Remember: Wizarding World of Harry Potter doesn't take up that much real estate, but it's still a draw that people are structuring their vacations around. A big roll-out of a "Star Wars Land" that takes up, say, half of Echo Lake at DHS, including where Sounds Dangerous, Indiana Jones, and Backlot Express are now, plus Star Tours staying put, would be a huge national media story. There's actually a lot of space there (Epic Stunt Spectacular takes up a TON of space). It would be enough room for an immersive land, the size of WWHP or Carsland or FE. This could be the shot in the arm DHS needs, and it could raise attendance enough to justify further spending on the park.

Agreed. While I fantasy about a full or half a park devoted to Star Wars, that space you described would be sufficient for a significant SW presence and immersive land -- it's exactly the space I was thinking and mentioned in another thread.

A reasonable roll out would be to put a permanent Jedi Academy in the Sounds Dangerous theater (which has been previously proposed) for a quick Phase 1. Phase 2 you can replace Backlot Express with Mos Eisley and replace IJ stunt show and use the expansion pad behind it for a bigger E-ticket and second c-ticket attraction. That's "enough" but if they wanted to do more down the line, you can use the American Idol bldg or some of the land behind Star Tours/Backlot Express.

 

[WDW1974]

Agree.

I think the failure of John Carter had much to do with the Lucas and Marvel deal.

I dunno. John Carter, which I still haven't seen, was set up for disaster from the start. Rich Ross had NO business running a film unit, let alone a major studio.

But you see it everywhere. ... Even in something great like Cars Land. I think a non-toon themed Route 66 area with maybe one Cars ride could have been spectacular (and I've heard WDI had some great plans/concepts), but they went the easiest route. Don't create. Don't innovate. Just take ...

 

[Vader2112]

I would say Disney's weak point is they can't create anything anymore for the most part. They rely on the creativity of others ... the IP to make their machine work. Whether you like the IP or not doesn't change the fact that Disney's own creativity has largely dried up.

74 would you say this is the case with the majority of the enertaienr industry. Like offering remakes of 20 year old movies and television. The talent / imagination pool is drying up. I think Star Wars fans could have put out 3 better movies that the prequels. Look out Broadway as well shows after movies, tv and super Heros things all already know to the public. The industry is to worried to take a gamble on an original idea that I might fail.

 

[Magenta Panther]

The stock was down to reflect the dillution of ownership when they issue 40 million shares to fund half of the cost. If Wall street didnt like the deal the stock would have been down 5-6 pts.

Additionaly, as I previously posted in this thread, Fitch maintained their A debt rating on Disney's debt despite the $2 billion cash outlay and stock dillution. They feel that Disney will be able to recoup their investment in 24 months. - but nice try.

I read the same optimistic stuff about the Muppets purchase years ago. Sorry, not buying it.

 

[fractal]

I read the same optimistic stuff about the Muppets purchase years ago. Sorry, not buying it.

Whether you "buy it" or not is immaterial. I was responding to the comment that Wall Street didn't like the deal.

 

[WDW1974]

Bring it down a notch. I'm actually someone that enjoys your posts. Not everyone is on top of the business side of Disney as you and I.

Yes, but you were responding to my post. And I'm sorta used to being pounced upon everytime I might state something that actually is ... gasp ... not completely right!

And I'd venture to say that 95% of the folks here truly have very little to no grasp of how a company like Disney operates and big media in general. They simply look at Disney Buys LucasFilm=FIFTH GATE BASED ON STAR WARS IS COMING!!!!

 

[Computer Magic]

Yes, but you were responding to my post. And I'm sorta used to being pounced upon everytime I might state something that actually is ... gasp ... not completely right!

And I'd venture to say that 95% of the folks here truly have very little to no grasp of how a company like Disney operates and big media in general. They simply look at Disney Buys LucasFilm=FIFTH GATE BASED ON STAR WARS IS COMING!!!!

Fair enough. I'll be more clearer when I agree to your post with a comment. :lol

I try to be a realistic fanboy. Is that a oxymoron?

 

[WDW1974]

Do you think part of this is the negative stigma of the Disney name with the male demographic? Personally, I think this is a huge problem and it's why they're better offer buying intellectual property that meets the demands of that demographic.

No. I think that's a convenient excuse that gets trotted out. ... They can buy Marvel, for instance, but that won't drive people to visit WDW or take a DCL cruise or watch ESPN or buy stuff at Disney Stores they wouldn't have before. All it means is Disney will make money off of it ...it's not growing the business organically.

While I think there's certainly some truth to the issue of creativity in "Disney proper", I really think that content produced under the Disney name carries that unfortunate stigma. What confuses me beyond belief is why they went with the name Disney XD instead of something more generic.

That stigma wasn't there in the 1990s though, was it?

Disney XD was named after many focus groups. I have no idea why either.

 

[WDW1974]

you still don't understand - the stock fell ( not "plunged" ) to reflect the dillution of the stock ( 40 million more shares will be issued )- it had nothing to do with Wall Street not agreeing with your assesment of the deal.

Yes, I do get it. I said my wording wasn't the best.

Although I could also argue that if the market was that bullish on it that it would have canceled the dillution out, but I don't care ... it isn't an important point.

If you'd like me to say I was wrong ... I .... nah, I don't see the need.

can we move on?

 

[cheezbat]

Agreed. While I fantasy about a full or half a park devoted to Star Wars, that space you described would be sufficient for a significant SW presence and immersive land -- it's exactly the space I was thinking and mentioned in another thread.

A reasonable roll out would be to put a permanent Jedi Academy in the Sounds Dangerous theater (which has been previously proposed) for a quick Phase 1. Phase 2 you can replace Backlot Express with Mos Eisley and replace IJ stunt show and use the expansion pad behind it for a bigger E-ticket and second c-ticket attraction. That's "enough" but if they wanted to do more down the line, you can use the American Idol bldg or some of the land behind Star Tours/Backlot Express.

IF a Star Wars land got built and they did something like you suggested, they sure as heck better place an Indy ride in the MK if they're ousting the show. Indy needs to remain a presence in the parks. I like Star Wars, but love Indy. If they added all the Star Wars stuff but killed off Indy, they'd lose my business at DHS.

 

[WDW1974]

74 would you say this is the case with the majority of the enertaienr industry. Like offering remakes of 20 year old movies and television. The talent / imagination pool is drying up. I think Star Wars fans could have put out 3 better movies that the prequels. Look out Broadway as well shows after movies, tv and super Heros things all already know to the public. The industry is to worried to take a gamble on an original idea that I might fail.

Nope.

There is as much talent out there now as ever before. It just isn't being allowed to create. The original ideas get buried for the tried and true, yet that doesn't get us anywhere we haven't been before and where's the fun in that?

Disney isn't the only company that is risk averse, which is why we get the same crap. And they'll milk it as long as they can. But Iron Man ain't James Bond. They aren't gonna make 23 of those films. And I'm guessing we're close to a poing where some comic films will soar and others will crash and burn very badly.

 

[fractal]

Yes, I do get it. I said my wording wasn't the best.

Although I could also argue that if the market was that bullish on it that it would have canceled the dillution out, but I don't care ... it isn't an important point.

If you'd like me to say I was wrong ... I .... nah, I don't see the need.

can we move on?

Let's.

You did say in your post that this decision was likely made recently - It seemed that Disney was trying to create a sci-fi/fantasy frachise for the young boy/teenager crowd. it is my opinon that the failure of John Carter ( and the hit to earnings and the stock ) along with the previous failure of Prince of Persia pushed Iger to go with proven winners; Marvel and Lucas. Do you think there is any validity to that?