For Reference: Space for a 5th Park at Walt Disney World

[lazyboy97o]

Fair enough, but I find that interesting considering how California Adventure has Avengers Campus.

Disneyland Resort is west of the Mississippi River.

Marvel Agreement between MCA Inc. and Marvel Entertainment Group

Fair enough, however...I already accounted for that: I said further up in this page, let's estimate $7 billion for the 5th Gate. That would allow for more than the record amount for Epic Universe.

$17 billion is about par the course for a decade at Walt Disney World. To give 40% of that to one project means a serious lack of investment elsewhere.

 

[Eric M Blake]

Disneyland Resort is west of the Mississippi River.

Marvel Agreement between MCA Inc. and Marvel Entertainment Group

This certainly explains why only the Guardians have showed up in WDW so far.

However, there is this clause on the time limit for "complete" ownership of the rights in question:

Within 2 years after opening of THE MARVEL UNIVERSE in Orlando, MCA may retain its worldwide exclusivity for up to 5 additional years by designating another location where it intends to develop THE MARVEL UNIVERSE as part of a theme park, and by paying an option fee of $*** per year. Provided such second theme park opens within such 5 year period, MCA shall maintain worldwide exclusivity for an additional two year period after such opening, and thereafter its rights will be subject to the “shrinkage” or “expansion” concept described above (in the manner described below).​

(As stated at the end of the contract, it was written up in 1994.)

The "shrinkage"/"expansion" clause, of course, refers to the Fantastic Four and Avengers characters. However, the contract goes on to emphasize that this protection is maintained by the option fee.

I would imagine that, at some point, Disney--which now owns Marvel--will make a "co-ownership" deal with Universal similar to its deal with Sony regarding the Spiderman characters.

But regardless, this issue does underline why the 5th Gate can't have a Marvel theme. Again, were such a deal to be made, it'll probably point towards expansions of DHS and an update for the Life/Body pavilion in Epcot--and neither has been mentioned in any reports as of now. Thus, both our general points stand.

 

[Eric M Blake]

$17 billion is about par the course for a decade at Walt Disney World. To give 40% of that to one project means a serious lack of investment elsewhere.

This is, again, based on the assumption that the $17 billion is pretty much just maintenance. Again, it's unlikely this is the case as it's linked to an expansion of the workforce. The quotes all point towards the $17 billion being in ADDITION to the "par for the course."

Regardless, I disagree that the 40% means "a serious lack of investment elsewhere," any more than the building of Animal Kingdom or even DHS were. The massive visitor numbers must be helped out somehow--and if Disney is going all out to do so, with this PLUS expansions in MK and renovations in AK, more power to them.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

$17 billion is about par the course for a decade at Walt Disney World. To give 40% of that to one project means a serious lack of investment elsewhere.

I agree with the 5th Gate being a pipe dream at best, and likely counterproductive at worst in terms of cannibalizing your own attendance in Florida.

That being said, to be fair, over the last 10 years WDW has built out a ton of new rides/feature, .while continuing to do maintenance. If you took all the money that was spent over the last 10 years on new rides in existing parks (Galxay Edge, Toy Story, Tron, Rat, Runaway Railway, Pandora (construction began in 2014, so within the decade) and used that money for a new fifth park, you might be able to pull it off with that 17B figure, assuming keeping same maintenance costs this next decade as you had for the previous (impossible) and no new builds in any of the existing parks, instead just new construction in the 5th Gate.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This is, again, based on the assumption that the $17 billion is pretty much just maintenance. Again, it's unlikely this is the case as it's linked to an expansion of the workforce. The quotes all point towards the $17 billion being in ADDITION to the "par for the course."

Regardless, I disagree that the 40% means "a serious lack of investment elsewhere," any more than the building of Animal Kingdom or even DHS were. The massive visitor numbers must be helped out somehow--and if Disney is going all out to do so, with this PLUS expansions in MK and renovations in AK, more power to them.

The number of employees also increased over the past decade without a new park.

The existing parks all seriously lack capacity, and it’s even more so for the non-Magic Kingdom parks. Adding another park doesn’t fix that and the associated issues of crowding. Adequate capacity how you help out the massive visitor numbers. Yet another park with insufficient capacity doesn’t help anything. You also keep just talking about projects at Magic Kingdom and Disney’s Animal Kingdom as though a 10 year road map was presented. What design work will start in five years has not been determined.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

The number of employees also increased over the past decade without a new park.

The existing parks all seriously lack capacity, and it’s even more so for the non-Magic Kingdom parks. Adding another park doesn’t fix that and the associated issues of crowding. Adequate capacity how you help out the massive visitor numbers. Yet another park with insufficient capacity doesn’t help anything. You also keep just talking about projects at Magic Kingdom and Disney’s Animal Kingdom as though a 10 year road map was presented. What design work will start in five years has not been determined.

Agreed to your points again here. But since I am in Devil's Advocate mode, I can see where another gate might fit into an overall strategy, if it is built to offer something completely different from the existing 4 parks. Spending all the infrastructure on a fifth gate, to just cannibalize or redistribute your historic WDW visitors doesn't make much sense. But if your fifth gate is intended not to handle the crowding of the 4 existing parks, but instead to serve an almost entirely new customer base, then i can see it having some legs.

 

[Eric M Blake]

The existing parks all seriously lack capacity, and it’s even more so for the non-Magic Kingdom parks. Adding another park doesn’t fix that and the associated issues of crowding.

Dare I ask, why not?

You'd think that, one way or another, more places to go means better capacity period. Or are you arguing another park would just cause even more visitors? Considering how WDW's been getting record numbers of visitors regardless, post-pandemic...it'll certainly be advantageous either way.

 

[BlakeW39]

They can't use Avengers or Fantastic Four due to the Universal contract.

or the X-Men, or Spider-Man. So essentially none of the most popular characters.

Fair enough, but I find that interesting considering how California Adventure has Avengers Campus.

They have the rights west of the Mississippi, but not east of it

 

[Eric M Blake]

I can see where another gate might fit into an overall strategy, if it is built to offer something completely different from the existing 4 parks. ...if your fifth gate is intended not to handle the crowding of the 4 existing parks, but instead to serve an almost entirely new customer base, then i can see it having some legs.

I actually agree, to a point. After all, all the parks beyond MK were built for a reason. It's also why I've argued that they can't do a Star Wars park or, because of Galaxy's Edge being a thing. Whatever the 5th Gate is, it can't be anything redundant.

That's why earlier I pointed to the old "Beastly Kindom" idea. It would certainly go a LONG ways towards attracting all the major fans of fantasy stories or games or what have you. A park based on the mythological creatures of various cultures around the world.

Plus, image a dinosaur section--but instead of the "archeological dig" theme, it's a realm where dinos are alive....

 

[Eric M Blake]

or the X-Men, or Spider-Man. So essentially none of the most popular characters.



They have the rights west of the Mississippi, but not east of it

I'm aware. I posted a reply, but I guess because I quoted the contract the mods have to approve it.

 

[danlb_2000]

I actually agree, to a point. After all, all the parks beyond MK were built for a reason. It's also why I've argued that they can't do a Star Wars park or, because of Galaxy's Edge being a thing. Whatever the 5th Gate is, it can't be anything redundant.

That's why earlier I pointed to the old "Beastly Kindom" idea. It would certainly go a LONG ways towards attracting all the major fans of fantasy stories or games or what have you. A park based on the mythological creatures of various cultures around the world.

Plus, image a dinosaur section--but instead of the "archeological dig" theme, it's a realm where dinos are alive....

This is one of my problems with a 5th gate. Pretty much any attraction you can come up with would fit thematically into one of the four existing parks, even if they limited themselves to things that were a clean fit. People always talked about a villain's park, but to me that would just be a variation on Magic Kingdom.

 

[danlb_2000]

Dare I ask, why not?

You'd think that, one way or another, more places to go means better capacity period. Or are you arguing another park would just cause even more visitors? Considering how WDW's been getting record numbers of visitors regardless, post-pandemic...it'll certainly be advantageous either way.

... but Disney has no real incentive to reduce crowding in the other parks. Adding a fifth park that did nothing but spread out the crowds would be a bad business move because you would be significantly increasing operating costs without increasing revenue.

 

[Eric M Blake]

This is one of my problems with a 5th gate. Pretty much any attraction you can come up with would fit thematically into one of the four existing parks, even if they limited themselves to things that were a clean fit. People always talked about a villain's park, but to me that would just be a variation on Magic Kingdom.

I agree on the last point--and fortunately, the word is that's what we're probably getting in the area between Fantasyland and the railroad. A villain land.

 

[Eric M Blake]

... but Disney has no real incentive to reduce crowding in the other parks. Adding a fifth park that did nothing but spread out the crowds would be a bad business move because you would be significantly increasing operating costs without increasing revenue.

Well again, they are planning on expanding MK in the "empty" area between Fantasyland, Frontierland, and the railroad (the "Beyond Big Thunder" project).

But let's be honest: There'd be a LOT of hype about the new park. And thus as JMcMahonEsq noted, it could actually attract more visitors--perhaps even the kind that otherwise might dismiss the idea of a Disney vacation.

Honestly a "Beastly Kingdom" (though they seriously gotta rethink that name) with the theme of various cultural mythologies just might be what the doctor ordered.

 

[danlb_2000]

Well again, they are planning on expanding MK in the "empty" area between Fantasyland, Frontierland, and the railroad (the "Beyond Big Thunder" project).

But let's be honest: There'd be a LOT of hype about the new park. And thus as JMcMahonEsq noted, it could actually attract more visitors--perhaps even the kind that otherwise might dismiss the idea of a Disney vacation.

Honestly a "Beastly Kingdom" (though they seriously gotta rethink that name) with the theme of various cultural mythologies just might be what the doctor ordered.

I must be out of the loop, is there really "hype" around a fifth park?

 

[Eric M Blake]

I must be out of the loop, is there really "hype" around a fifth park?

In the sense of articles and YouTube commentators. The news sites reporting the $17 billion announcement and the comments by the man running WDW that the 10 year plan is still in operation...all keep bringing up the idea.

Granted, the "immediate" hype en masse that goes into any detail is about the MK expansion and the AK overhaul of the Dinoland area. Meanwhile, it's the whole "We don't have any direct statements about what the fifth park will entail, BUT..."

 

[danlb_2000]

In the sense of articles and YouTube commentators. The news sites reporting the $17 billion announcement and the comments by the man running WDW that the 10 year plan is still in operation...all keep bringing up the idea.

Granted, the "immediate" hype en masse that goes into any detail is about the MK expansion and the AK overhaul of the Dinoland area. Meanwhile, it's the whole "We don't have any direct statements about what the fifth park will entail, BUT..."

So basically nothing of substance.

 

[Eric M Blake]

So basically nothing of substance.

Not exactly. Studios and companies play this sort of game with the trades before official announcements, to build things up. There's the whole issue that Disney's being deliberately vague about what the $17 billion is for beyond 1) the MK expansion, 2) the AK renovation of Dinoland, and 3) the Mary Poppins ride in Epcot's UK pavilion. And they seems content to let the speculation commence without any interference or discouragement whatsoever.

Again, the fact that the director of WDW is emphasizing that the Florida issues aren't preventing the 10 year plan in any way encourages the question, "What IS the plan beyond those three things? That'll all be done LONG before that decade is out...."

And again, the trades and news sites are assuming a 5th Gate, and Disney is NOT discouraging that hype. They're playing a hype game.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Dare I ask, why not?

You'd think that, one way or another, more places to go means better capacity period. Or are you arguing another park would just cause even more visitors? Considering how WDW's been getting record numbers of visitors regardless, post-pandemic...it'll certainly be advantageous either way.

It doesn’t just mean more capacity. It’s more capacity that costs significantly more which means it has to induce more demand.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This certainly explains why only the Guardians have showed up in WDW so far.

However, there is this clause on the time limit for "complete" ownership of the rights in question:

Within 2 years after opening of THE MARVEL UNIVERSE in Orlando, MCA may retain its worldwide exclusivity for up to 5 additional years by designating another location where it intends to develop THE MARVEL UNIVERSE as part of a theme park, and by paying an option fee of $*** per year. Provided such second theme park opens within such 5 year period, MCA shall maintain worldwide exclusivity for an additional two year period after such opening, and thereafter its rights will be subject to the “shrinkage” or “expansion” concept described above (in the manner described below).​

(As stated at the end of the contract, it was written up in 1994.)

The "shrinkage"/"expansion" clause, of course, refers to the Fantastic Four and Avengers characters. However, the contract goes on to emphasize that this protection is maintained by the option fee.

I would imagine that, at some point, Disney--which now owns Marvel--will make a "co-ownership" deal with Universal similar to its deal with Sony regarding the Spiderman characters.

But regardless, this issue does underline why the 5th Gate can't have a Marvel theme. Again, were such a deal to be made, it'll probably point towards expansions of DHS and an update for the Life/Body pavilion in Epcot--and neither has been mentioned in any reports as of now. Thus, both our general points stand.

The clause you quoted has nothing to do with anything at the present moment. It was something that had to be done years ago and was not done which is why Universal does not have exclusive global theme park rights to Marvel.

Disney has something to offer Sony that they wanted, to be free of the requirement to churn out films every few years. The only thing Disney can offer Universal is cash, and Universal has no incentive to offer Disney a cheap deal.