Frozen complainers are finally making headlines.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Glasgow

Well-Known Member
I have no problem with them milking the Frozen franchise dry. The problem for me is what is being ignored in the meantime. Disney is not a non-profit org .. they have to answer to stock holders just like any other public company - from a strictly business perspective, I have no problem with their business plan. Where the concern lies is in what will become of the Disney name in 5 or 10 years time. My guess is that they'll be fine, regardless of the diehards doom scenarios.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
I have no problem with them milking the Frozen franchise dry. The problem for me is what is being ignored in the meantime. Disney is not a non-profit org .. they have to answer to stock holders just like any other public company - from a strictly business perspective, I have no problem with their business plan. Where the concern lies is in what will become of the Disney name in 5 or 10 years time. My guess is that they'll be fine, regardless of the diehards doom scenarios.

Like Kodak, RCA, Sunbeam, Rockwell, Bell + Howell, American Optical, Pan-Am, - I could go on but ALL these companies did the same things as TWDC and like TWDC they thought they were invincible, What they all share is they are history even though some parts lived on after the bankruptcy auctions.
 

Travel Junkie

Well-Known Member
Agreed - Look at what TDL is doing for Frozen and it's nowhere near the sensation in Japan as compared to US/EU

Having recently returned from Japan, they are just as crazy about Frozen as they are in the U.S. It is EVERYWHERE in Tokyo. That being said they have not overdone it in the parks. There is some merchandise but not a ton (You can actually find a lot more outside of the resort than inside) and other than a brief appearance in Once Upon a Time they are not seen in the shows or attractions currently.

They will have a large presence post Christmas as they kick off their version of Frozen fun in January (which will no doubt be higher quality than what’s in the domestic parks.) A large permanent presence is coming to TDR, but they are smart enough to know they don’t want to burn people out on the brand before the big investment comes. They are doing the right thing and looking at the long term as opposed to squeaking every penny out of people now before they tire of it.
 

Glasgow

Well-Known Member
Like Kodak, RCA, Sunbeam, Rockwell, Bell + Howell, American Optical, Pan-Am, - I could go on but ALL these companies did the same things as TWDC and like TWDC they thought they were invincible, What they all share is they are history even though some parts lived on after the bankruptcy auctions.
No one is saying TWDC is invincible, only that I'm sure they know a lot more about business plans than anyone on this board does. To insinuate that over using the Frozen IP is going to have long term detrimental effects is tantamount to saying that HP at universal is a fad. Frozen is huge, it's profitable and it will fuel other growth, IMO.

Either way, it's a guess.. we can all probably agree, though, that we hope the massive profits are reinvested into other unique properties instead of just into someone's pockets .. that's the real issue.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
No one is saying TWDC is invincible, only that I'm sure they know a lot more about business plans than anyone on this board does. To insinuate that over using the Frozen IP is going to have long term detrimental effects is tantamount to saying that HP at universal is a fad. Frozen is huge, it's profitable and it will fuel other growth, IMO.

Either way, it's a guess.. we can all probably agree, though, that we hope the massive profits are reinvested into other unique properties instead of just into someone's pockets .. that's the real issue.
The profits are being reinvested in stock buybacks not in the business which is the problem
 

kucarachi

Active Member
Honestly if this isn't the cash cow they have hoped for then what is? The marvel stuff is untouchable at Disney parks, and Cars isn't exactly the future. They are still riding the Pirates Movies coattails and that was at least 10 years ago...so expect at least a decade of cold weather in the Parks. What i don't get is all the other Pixar movies they could at least make into 4D shows like the Incredibles.
Frozen has taken over barbie as the best selling brand in the world...universe, galaxy...so why would they stop at any point? You can't blame them one bit.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Honestly if this isn't the cash cow they have hoped for then what is? The marvel stuff is untouchable at Disney parks, and Cars isn't exactly the future. They are still riding the Pirates Movies coattails and that was at least 10 years ago...so expect at least a decade of cold weather in the Parks. What i don't get is all the other Pixar movies they could at least make into 4D shows like the Incredibles.
Frozen has taken over barbie as the best selling brand in the world...universe, galaxy...so why would they stop at any point? You can't blame them one bit.

As a business Disney SHOULD exploit Frozen's success, However they are doing it on the cheap unlike the Pirates franchise - The makeover of PoTC was worthy of the movies success, What Disney is NOT doing is good long term stewardship of the Frozen brand.

Right now Disney is heading in the 'Stitich' direction with the cheap-n-nasty rethemes, Remember 'Stitch Kingdom' where everything was STITCH but NONE of it well done. Look what happened to Stitch as a Disney brand.

Not Good.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
As a business Disney SHOULD exploit Frozen's success, However they are doing it on the cheap unlike the Pirates franchise - The makeover of PoTC was worthy of the movies success, What Disney is NOT doing is good long term stewardship of the Frozen brand.

Right now Disney is heading in the 'Stitich' direction with the cheap-n-nasty rethemes, Remember 'Stitch Kingdom' where everything was STITCH but NONE of it well done. Look what happened to Stitch as a Disney brand.

Not Good.
The makeover of Pirates was just great. I've said it before that Jack Sparrow is one of the most realistic, life-like animatronics I've ever seen and he still works as great as he did when I first saw him. Sadly the rest of the attraction has been neglected like Splash Mountain pre-refurb.
 

prberk

Well-Known Member
No one is saying TWDC is invincible, only that I'm sure they know a lot more about business plans than anyone on this board does. To insinuate that over using the Frozen IP is going to have long term detrimental effects is tantamount to saying that HP at universal is a fad. Frozen is huge, it's profitable and it will fuel other growth, IMO.

Either way, it's a guess.. we can all probably agree, though, that we hope the massive profits are reinvested into other unique properties instead of just into someone's pockets .. that's the real issue.

They know "a LOT more about business plans than ANYONE on this board does." [Emphasis added.]

Don't you think that is a little far? Either you think that the management of the Walt Disney Company is in a league all by themselves, or you are insulting a good number of businessmen and MBAs and just intelligent people on this board. All three exist here. I am senior tax auditor, a current elected president of a statewide association of local tax auditors, a youth director, and a board member of an alumni association. Knowledge of a good business plan comes into play in all of those (yes, including the youth work). I also know that that there are a good number of MBAs here and people who run businesses. (Um, I would say Steve is one...). So, plenty of people who know all about business plans, strategic management theory, and even accounting.

And sometimes a great "business plan" doesn't come from a book, or from Wall Street. Sometimes it comes from within -- someone who just gets it. Sometimes it involves a team (like Walt and Roy). And sometimes it comes from the creative talent driving while the accountants and MBAs work with them to make something awesome and lasting.

And sometimes... sometimes... it comes from the people who cared enough to study what made you in the first place.

My personal thought is that you do have to balance short-term profit and long-term investment. I do not fault the company for selling Frozen. Walt himself was a master at cross-pollenating his business units (a.k.a. using "synergy" in modern "business plan" lingo) in selling an upcoming film on TV and in the parks (like Tinkerbell herself was used). And right now it might also make sense to feature "Big Hero Six" a little bit, too.

As for "Frozen's" place in the business plan, I agree that for "Frozen" they should do some cool overlays and other "easy" stuff this year, like they are doing. But i also think it deserves a long-term, whole new experience in the MK or Studios, not shoehorned into Maelstrom in a way that completely dumps the integrity of World Showcase. And at the same time, add a new country and do some cool NEW non-Frozen things around the resort. Yes, Frozen can be like Walt's term, "a weinie," attracting folks to walk your way; but there should also be other spectacular, memorable things to experience when they get there: things to "write home" about... and attract new visitors (or return ones) down the road. Use the current "Frozen" craziness to attract people and bring new experiences, but also give them reason to come back -- the quality and quantity of the resort.

Of course there is more to the implementation of a "business plan" (staffing, customer service training, inventory management, facilities management, logistics -- you know, things that people on a message board might not really understand), but for now, I will focus on the idea that, yes, they should emphasize "Frozen," but some of us who are talking about other things know a little bit about business, too.
 

kucarachi

Active Member
As a business Disney SHOULD exploit Frozen's success, However they are doing it on the cheap unlike the Pirates franchise - The makeover of PoTC was worthy of the movies success, What Disney is NOT doing is good long term stewardship of the Frozen brand.

Right now Disney is heading in the 'Stitich' direction with the cheap-n-nasty rethemes, Remember 'Stitch Kingdom' where everything was STITCH but NONE of it well done. Look what happened to Stitch as a Disney brand.

Not Good.

I actually don't remember stich kingdom at all. The only thing I've ever seen was some Stitch merchandise and a ride in which the highlight is getting a chilli cheese burp in your face. I think the character has to at least speak English if your going to feature them throughout the park. It's going to at least be another year or two until you see a Frozen ride worthy of the buzz, and i bet it's timed around the sequel...if they play their cards right the sequel could outdo the original, but they could also turn it into the Pirates franchise and make it unwatchable special effects garbage. I'm sure Fantasyland would look a whole lot different if Frozen had come out a year before they made the new plans, now they would have to get rid of something...at this point i would say Tom Sawyer island if you could fill in the moat
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
I actually don't remember stich kingdom at all. The only thing I've ever seen was some Stitch merchandise and a ride in which the highlight is getting a chilli cheese burp in your face. I think the character has to at least speak English if your going to feature them throughout the park. It's going to at least be another year or two until you see a Frozen ride worthy of the buzz, and i bet it's timed around the sequel...if they play their cards right the sequel could outdo the original, but they could also turn it into the Pirates franchise and make it unwatchable special effects garbage. I'm sure Fantasyland would look a whole lot different if Frozen had come out a year before they made the new plans, now they would have to get rid of something...at this point i would say Tom Sawyer island if you could fill in the moat
Sorry but a Frozen ride worthy of the buzz isn't coming to WDW. Unless you consider a makeover done for as cheaply as possible worthy of the buzz of a movie that made over $1 billion in theaters plus the money from DVD/Blu-Ray, the soundtrack, and various merchandise. It is coming to Tokyo though.
 

xstech25

Well-Known Member
It's funny when people say that Frozen makes no sense at Epcot. To me, it makes perfect sense for Epcot because when people plan their vacations, the people with small kids can easily not go to Epcot because they feel it doesn't have enough to do for their kids. Building a Frozen ride there basically guarantees that they are going to go to Epcot when otherwise they may not have. It's similar to how Universal purposely built Harry Potter in 2 separate parks so that people have to buy tickets for both parks. They can loosely tie the theming together because it's a Scandanavian country with a Scandanavian movie, similar to how UO could say you ride the Hogwarts express from Diagon Alley to Hogsmede. Of course the real reason is to get you to buy tickets to both.

They are very clearly investing a bunch of $$ into DAK and DHS over the next 5 years. Avatar and Star Wars will rake people into WDW. In the mean time Epcot will get Frozen, a new Soarin, some other stuff, and then after the big stuff is getting ready to open at DAK and DHS they will start to really take the knife to Epcot. To me this is a strategic move that makes sense. They're not going to just build everything they want for the sake of building it.

Business is business anywhere you go. I mean when was the last time my hometown park of Disneyland got a new major e-ticket? It was like 20 years ago. All the money has gone to DCA.
 
Last edited:

Mike S

Well-Known Member
It's funny when people say that Frozen makes no sense at Epcot. To me, it makes perfect sense for Epcot because when people plan their vacations, the people with small kids can easily not go to Epcot because they feel it doesn't have enough to do for their kids. Building a Frozen ride there basically guarantees that they are going to go to Epcot when otherwise they may not have. It's similar to how Universal purposely built Harry Potter in 2 separate parks so that people have to buy tickets for both parks. They can loosely tie the theming together because it's a Scandanavian country with a Scandanavian movie, similar to how UO could say you ride the Hogwarts express from Diagon Alley to Hogsmede. Of course the real reason is to get you to buy tickets to both.
Doesn't explain at all how Frozen fits in World Showcase other than "let's put it here cause it kind of fits." Harry Potter actually does fit both Universal parks very well since one is based on literature (kind of) and the other is about movies. Plus since both lands are farther away from each other it adds more to the immersion since Hogsmeade and Diagon Alley are not supposed to be close to each other AT ALL. Yes it gets people to go to both parks instead of just one but it's still done very well and with respect to the franchise (unlike the cheapness of Frostrom......). Also, as a final note, Frozen is an American movie. Not Scandanavian.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
It's funny when people say that Frozen makes no sense at Epcot. To me, it makes perfect sense for Epcot because when people plan their vacations, the people with small kids can easily not go to Epcot because they feel it doesn't have enough to do for their kids. Building a Frozen ride there basically guarantees that they are going to go to Epcot when otherwise they may not have. It's similar to how Universal purposely built Harry Potter in 2 separate parks so that people have to buy tickets for both parks. They can loosely tie the theming together because it's a Scandanavian country with a Scandanavian movie, similar to how UO could say you ride the Hogwarts express from Diagon Alley to Hogsmede. Of course the real reason is to get you to buy tickets to both.

They are very clearly investing a bunch of $$ into DAK and DHS over the next 5 years. Avatar and Star Wars will rake people into WDW. In the mean time Epcot will get Frozen, a new Soarin, some other stuff, and then after the big stuff is getting ready to open at DAK and DHS they will start to really take the knife to Epcot. To me this is a strategic move that makes sense. They're not going to just build everything they want for the sake of building it.

Business is business anywhere you go. I mean when was the last time my hometown park of Disneyland got a new major e-ticket? It was like 20 years ago. All the money has gone to DCA.

It's a nice dream but other than some flat rides at DHS, 3'rd track at TSMM at DHS, Avatar land (what version is unknown but the boat ride seems to be on the bubble) and a new nighttime show at DAK.

NOTHING OTHER THAN THOSE HAS BEEN GREENLIGHTED. So until something actually opens the rest of the rumored attractions are nothing more than fanboi fantasies.

But meantime anywhere from 50-115% (depends on accounting method) of TWDC's free cash flow is going into stock buybacks.
 

xstech25

Well-Known Member
I didn't say I think it's a good decision because it perfectly fits World Showcase. I said it's a good decision because they are already spending a ton of money on DAK and DHS, so adding a new land to MK and spending another $300-500 mil there at the same time doesn't make sense. Meanwhile it does make sense to add a smaller ride to Epcot for the reasons I stated (getting people with kids into the park). It doesn't perfectly fit into World Showcase, it "kind of" does. Monsters Inc "kind of " fits in Tomorrowland. I'm sure there are lots of other examples i'm too lazy to think about right now. It's not unprecendeted, it's just business.
 
Last edited:

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I didn't say I think it's a good decision because it perfectly fits World Showcase. I said it's a good decision because they are already spending a ton of money on DAK and DHS, so adding a new land to MK and spending another $300-500 mil there at the same time doesn't make sense. Meanwhile it does make sense to add a smaller ride to Epcot for the reasons I stated (getting people with kids into the park). It doesn't perfectly fit into World Showcase, it "kind of" does. Monsters Inc "kind of " fits in Tomorrowland. I'm sure there are lots of other examples i'm too lazy to think about right now. It's not unprecendeted, it's just business.
That'd be all well and good if there were any issues with getting the kiddies into the park.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Honestly, you either love Epcot or you don't. Kids aren't given enough credit where that place (and even Animal Kingdom) is concerned. Kids WANT to learn. I'm sure there are kids out there who find it boring but I think it's the parents who believe their kids *might* be bored or not find it "fun". I mean, they're not exactly out the door for Gran Fiesta Tour, are they? Or even Nemo at this point.

How soon are parents going to be whining that the wait time is horrible, they can't get a FP for it ... I totally understand Disney shoving FROZEN into World Showcase ($$$). I just don't agree with it. I'm sure wait times will be horrendous. And once Frozen mania starts to calm down (I wouldn't dare say die down before I'm jumped on), they'll release the sequel and it will probably peak again. EVERYTHING wanes in popularity and Frozen will eventually be no different.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Honestly, you either love Epcot or you don't. Kids aren't given enough credit where that place (and even Animal Kingdom) is concerned. Kids WANT to learn. I'm sure there are kids out there who find it boring but I think it's the parents who believe their kids *might* be bored or not find it "fun". I mean, they're not exactly out the door for Gran Fiesta Tour, are they? Or even Nemo at this point.

How soon are parents going to be whining that the wait time is horrible, they can't get a FP for it ... I totally understand Disney shoving FROZEN into World Showcase ($$$). I just don't agree with it. I'm sure wait times will be horrendous. And once Frozen mania starts to calm down (I wouldn't dare say die down before I'm jumped on), they'll release the sequel and it will probably peak again. EVERYTHING wanes in popularity and Frozen will eventually be no different.
Purely anecdotal evidence, but this supports your point:

We went to WDW with another family on our trip (the other family had 2 kids that were first time visitors and the parents hadn't been back since the 90s). There were 4 kids (3 to 6 years old). When planning our trip one of the only disagreements we had was time spent at EPCOT. I wanted to allocate 1.5 to 2 days and they wanted to skip it completely. Their reason was they thought the kids would be bored. We settled on 1 full day. All of the kids loved EPCOT (especially SSE, TT and UOE). They had a great time exploring the exhibits around each of the pavilions too. We ran out of time and didn't get to see everything I would have liked, but we'll be back so no worries. After the trip the other couple said they were surprised how much they liked EPCOT and when they go back they would definitely spend more than 1 day there.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Purely anecdotal evidence, but this supports your point:

We went to WDW with another family on our trip (the other family had 2 kids that were first time visitors and the parents hadn't been back since the 90s). There were 4 kids (3 to 6 years old). When planning our trip one of the only disagreements we had was time spent at EPCOT. I wanted to allocate 1.5 to 2 days and they wanted to skip it completely. Their reason was they thought the kids would be bored. We settled on 1 full day. All of the kids loved EPCOT (especially SSE, TT and UOE). They had a great time exploring the exhibits around each of the pavilions too. We ran out of time and didn't get to see everything I would have liked, but we'll be back so no worries. After the trip the other couple said they were surprised how much they liked EPCOT and when they go back they would definitely spend more than 1 day there.

Exactly. Granted, I'm sure there are some kids and possibly teenagers who are bored to tears but to me I've never believed the argument/excuse used that it's boring.

I people watch, I talk to people (and friends, and friends of friends), etc. I go solo enough to the parks, read enough trip reports, etc. to just not buy the argument it's boring.

And again, kids aren't exactly clamoring for Gran Fiesta. The Nemo craze died down ... yet guess what kids love? Spaceship Earth. Universe of Energy.

It's like folks going into Animal Kingdom with the mindset that it's "just a zoo" and they overlook the fact that it's incredibly well-themed, kids LOVE animals, the cast members are actually very engaging and knowledgable (much like World Showcase cast members). Parents who don't do their own research and don't have the history with the parks go with what other people tell them. If their friends tell them "Epcot will be boring for kids or Animal Kingdom is just a zoo" don't tell me that doesn't play a factor.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
And on the Animal Kingdom note, I loved watching the kids with the cast members who do the Wilderness Explorers. The kids were making an animal noise and got a sticker (and the cast member was genuinely enthusiastic about it). Something so simple yet they ate it up. That's part of what I love about Disney. That's the "little things". Many of which ARE sadly going away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom