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

[lazyboy97o]

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.

There is no 10 year plan. Disney is being vague because even they don’t know what they will spend the money on, they just know it’s an amount they are likely to spend.

 

[danlb_2000]

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.

The 5th gate has been in the RCID planning document for at least 13 years now.

 

[Eric M Blake]

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.

I assume I'm missing something here. If that clause is irrelevant, then how is the contract relevant in whether or not Universal has exclusive rights to Fantastic Four or Avengers in a park "east of the Mississippi"?

 

[Eric M Blake]

The 5th gate has been in the RCID planning document for at least 13 years now.

Not surprising. So they want to do it, but there's been obviously long delays for a variety of reasons.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I assume I'm missing something here. If that clause is irrelevant, then how is the contract relevant in whether or not Universal has exclusive rights to Fantastic Four or Avengers in a park "east of the Mississippi"?

Because the contract has different contingencies. What you quoted was how Universal could have secured exclusive global rights. It had nothing to do with retaining the rights east of the Mississippi River.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not surprising. So they want to do it, but there's been obviously long delays for a variety of reasons.

Including the ability to support development in a planning document has nothing to do with Disney wanting to do it, working on it or it being delayed.

 

[danlb_2000]

Not surprising. So they want to do it, but there's been obviously long delays for a variety of reasons.

Not necessarily. The planning document is about how to best use the RCID resources. To be able to plan, you have to set a cap on what the plan could support. So the plan isn't saying "we plan to build a fifth park", it is saying "if we decide to build a fifth park this plan will still be valid".

 

[Eric M Blake]

Because the contract has different contingencies. What you quoted was how Universal could have secured exclusive global rights. It had nothing to do with retaining the rights east of the Mississippi River.

Again, the deal for retaining the rights east of the Mississippi still had a deadline that could only be prolonged through X; then, after a total 9 years at the max from the opening of Universal Orlando, it could only be maintained through a regular payment to Marvel.

Clearly that deal still stands.

 

[Eric M Blake]

Not necessarily. The planning document is about how to best use the RCID resources. To be able to plan, you have to set a cap on what the plan could support. So the plan isn't saying "we plan to build a fifth park", it is saying "if we decide to build a fifth park this plan will still be valid".

Fair point...but I'm curious, then, why you brought up the 13 years. Unless you're saying that clause is what the trades are basing their assumption on?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Again, the deal for retaining the rights east of the Mississippi still had a deadline that could only be prolonged through X; then, after a total 9 years at the max from the opening of Universal Orlando, it could only be maintained through a regular payment to Marvel.

Clearly that deal still stands.

That is not what that clause states. Universal pays for the license but that’s not what you quoted. Again, you quoted what Universal had to do to keep the global rights. They didn’t act so the rights shrank as defined in the contract.

Fair point...but I'm curious, then, why you brought up the 13 years. Unless you're saying that clause is what the trades are basing their assumption on?

Because it was in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan that came out in 2010.

 

[Eric M Blake]

That is not what that clause states. Universal pays for the license but that’s not what you quoted. Again, you quoted what Universal had to do to keep the global rights. They didn’t act so the rights shrank as defined in the contract.

Just because it wasn't the quote I posted doesn't mean I wasn't also referring to that clause. I was. In the end, you're giving the same point I was making, so let's move on.

 

[danlb_2000]

Again, the deal for retaining the rights east of the Mississippi still had a deadline that could only be prolonged through X; then, after a total 9 years at the max from the opening of Universal Orlando, it could only be maintained through a regular payment to Marvel.

Clearly that deal still stands.

We have discussed this contract quite a bit here over the years. It is very clear that the east of the Mississippi rights are in perpetuity.

 

[danlb_2000]

That is not what that clause states. Universal pays for the license but that’s not what you quoted. Again, you quoted what Universal had to do to keep the global rights. They didn’t act so the rights shrank as defined in the contract.


Because it was in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan that came out in 2010.

And the fifth gate was likely in the plans prior to 2010, although we don't have access to that document to confirm.

 

[Eric M Blake]

We have discussed this contract quite a bit here over the years. It is very clear that the east of the Mississippi rights are in perpetuity.

Goes to show just how desperate Marvel was at the time, giving Universal that kind of authority.

At lead they're getting constantly paid....

Which kinda means Disney is getting constantly paid.

 

[Goofyernmost]

We have discussed this contract quite a bit here over the years. It is very clear that the east of the Mississippi rights are in perpetuity.

Perpetuity or until hell freezes over or Universal does not utilize the parts of the genre that they purchased the right too.

 

[danlb_2000]

Goes to show just how desperate Marvel was at the time, giving Universal that kind of authority.

At lead they're getting constantly paid....

Which kinda means Disney is getting constantly paid.

Yeah, that contract definitely favors Universal. It even limits the increase in the fees to the rate of inflation, so Universal is paying a bargain basement price for one of hotest franchises.

 

[pdude81]

Well, the actuality of this thread is that the OP has stated that the entire point of this thread was just for reference. Whatever that means. No reply or speculation was requested or wanted, so you are incorrect on it's purpose.

I saw an article on one of the usual clickbait sites with the same breakdown that was shown in the first post. So I assume OP was trying to get some feedback on suitability for the article or get some additional use out of their research. Otherwise someone just blatantly ripped off that post to get paid afterward.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I saw an article on one of the usual clickbait sites with the same breakdown that was shown in the first post. So I assume OP was trying to get some feedback on suitability for the article or get some additional use out of their research. Otherwise someone just blatantly ripped off that post to get paid afterward.

It’s information that has been recycled several times over the years for clicks. Always a big “scoop” that someone “discovered”.

 

[Eric M Blake]

I saw an article on one of the usual clickbait sites with the same breakdown that was shown in the first post. So I assume OP was trying to get some feedback on suitability for the article or get some additional use out of their research. Otherwise someone just blatantly ripped off that post to get paid afterward.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was the latter, but obviously it depends on which was posted earlier.

Regardless, it's certainly good to analyze what locations in the property COULD be used, however likely or unlikely it might be to happen in the near future. Certainly the fact that areas deemed "unsuitable" can and have been used for parking space frees up park designers a LOT, with the potential shape of it etc.

 

[Eric M Blake]

On that note, I find THIS area very interesting.

Now, obviously two things need to be kept in mind:

First, the proximity to MK...but there's enough of a "yellow" gap to prevent any real issue.

Second, and more importantly...it's literally JUST north of the golf course. So obviously they'd need to take into account the need for peace and quiet in the general vicinity

So the question, then, is how much of the "marginally suitable" can be worked with. Because that's a big area for potential use, right there!