future expansion question. ..

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

Right now? That's exactly the scenario. In the future, there will almost undoubtedly be a new property they want to put in there somewhere ("What's that? J.K.'s working on Fantastic Beasts, a Harry Potter spin-off? Cha-CHING!") and they're going to have to make the choice as to whether or not said hypothetical IP is worth more than depriving Disney of Marvel. Again, this is most likely years away, but it's something that will happen, especially since Universal is limited in what they can do to update the Marvel attractions they have- remember, the movie versions are off-limits, unless I'm mistaken.

Do you see how many people want to see Marvel characters in Disney parks? Marvel is a gold mine and Uni would be stupid to give it up. I'm sure Uni is done expanding Potter, they can't let it take over their parks because not everyone is a HP fan.
Disney has been sitting on Stars Wars for years... so many great things could be done with it and what did we get? Star Wars weekends and a 3-D ride... Disney could bring Marvel to Disneyland and Star Wars to WDW and rake in the money!
I have never heard that movie versions are off limits but it could be true. However, I don't see Disney doing anything amazing with Marvel characters in their parks. They tend to make things kid friendly while Universal is definitely pushing thrills for older children and adults.

 

[Matt_Black]

Do you see how many people want to see Marvel characters in Disney parks? Marvel is a gold mine and Uni would be stupid to give it up.

Well, right now, both companies have reasons to let the deal stand as it is. On Disney's end, it's advertising for their movies and comics and tv shows and, hey, if Uni wants to sell Marvel merch in their stores, then that's royalty money that Disney put almost no effort into getting.

I'm sure Uni is done expanding Potter, they can't let it take over their parks because not everyone is a HP fan.

Well, I used the spin-off as just an example. Given Transformers, should Michael Bay's TMNT be successful, or should he try his hand at another property (Michael Bay's Silverhawks) then that could also be a possibility. Still the spin-off could reach a bigger fan base and, depending on how it's handled (it's set in the '30s, if I recall correctly) some people might not even realize the connection, or care. Honestly, I don't give a crap about HP, but a theme park world set in a noir-ish supernatural New York where sorcerers in pinstripe suits chase monsters? That sounds pretty @$%#-ing awesome.

Disney has been sitting on Stars Wars for years... so many great things could be done with it and what did we get? Star Wars weekends and a 3-D ride...

That's... not entirely accurate. Up until a year and a half ago, Disney did not own the IP, so anything they did in the parks had to go through Lucasfilm and (maybe, not sure on this) 20th Century Fox. Now that they own it, they could, and they've apparently been testing the waters with surveys and such ("Would you like a restaurant based on the Mos Eisley Cantina?" Why are you asking a question when you know the answer is a resounding YES?!?)

They tend to make things kid friendly while Universal is definitely pushing thrills for older children and adults.

A thrill-ride based on a near six decade old sci-fi anthology show doesn't necessarily strike me as "kid friendly". And Tower of Terror is one example. Now, granted, Magic Kingdom tries very hard to keep things in general "G-Rated" and that's spread a little to the other parks. And, yeah, you could conceivably do a Marvel fifth gate that caters to both kids and older guests. Marvel has many kid friendly properties- PowerPack, Lockjaw & The Pet Avengers, Big Hero 6 (if the upcoming animated film is successful), and more.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Right now? That's exactly the scenario. In the future, there will almost undoubtedly be a new property they want to put in there somewhere ("What's that? J.K.'s working on Fantastic Beasts, a Harry Potter spin-off? Cha-CHING!") and they're going to have to make the choice as to whether or not said hypothetical IP is worth more than depriving Disney of Marvel. Again, this is most likely years away, but it's something that will happen, especially since Universal is limited in what they can do to update the Marvel attractions they have- remember, the movie versions are off-limits, unless I'm mistaken.

The problem with your hypothetical is you still do not account for how secure, cheap and stable the Marvel deal is for Universal. Outside of a cataclysmic economic event that would suddenly drive up inflation, the Marvel deal is a sure thing. Set fees. No renegotiations or expiration. That is not the case for other licensed properties and definitely will not be the case for future licensing deals.

 

[Matt_Black]

The problem with your hypothetical is you still do not account for how secure, cheap and stable the Marvel deal is for Universal. Outside of a cataclysmic economic event that would suddenly drive up inflation, the Marvel deal is a sure thing. Set fees. No renegotiations or expiration. That is not the case for other licensed properties and definitely will not be the case for future licensing deals.

Let's look at it this way- assuming again that they are limited to the comic versions and cannot use any updates showcasing movie versions without the permission of the studio that holds the film rights (which might not be accurate and someone with more intricate knowledge of if and how this is covered in the contract, please let me know), they're kind of stuck with the rides the way they are now. You know how some folks on this board complain about how dated Ellen's Universe of Energy is? Yeah, people like the Marvel rides now, are they still going to like them in 5 or 10 years? ESPECIALLY if Disney does Marvel rides in the other parks around the world. "Man, I heard the Iron Man ride in Hong Kong Disney is AMAZING. Why can't Universal do something like that here?"

 

[lazyboy97o]

Let's look at it this way- assuming again that they are limited to the comic versions and cannot use any updates showcasing movie versions without the permission of the studio that holds the film rights (which might not be accurate and someone with more intricate knowledge of if and how this is covered in the contract, please let me know), they're kind of stuck with the rides the way they are now. You know how some folks on this board complain about how dated Ellen's Universe of Energy is? Yeah, people like the Marvel rides now, are they still going to like them in 5 or 10 years? ESPECIALLY if Disney does Marvel rides in the other parks around the world. "Man, I heard the Iron Man ride in Hong Kong Disney is AMAZING. Why can't Universal do something like that here?"

The walk around characters were updated a few years ago and clearly took a more realistic direction such as has been done with the films. The land is not dependent on the films, and even then the costumes change between films and other actors fill in all the time for other projects like video games. And seeing that the now decade plus old Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man is still considered one of the greatest attractions in the world and recently got an upgrade that has only helped it keep that position, I doubt Universal is concerned about being outdone by Disney.

 

[Matt_Black]

The walk around characters were updated a few years ago and clearly took a more realistic direction such as has been done with the films. The land is not dependent on the films, and even then the costumes change between films and other actors fill in all the time for other projects like video games. And seeing that the now decade plus old Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man is still considered one of the greatest attractions in the world and recently got an upgrade that has only helped it keep that position, I doubt Universal is concerned about being outdone by Disney.

We'll see.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

That's... not entirely accurate. Up until a year and a half ago, Disney did not own the IP, so anything they did in the parks had to go through Lucasfilm and (maybe, not sure on this) 20th Century Fox. Now that they own it, they could, and they've apparently been testing the waters with surveys and such ("Would you like a restaurant based on the Mos Eisley Cantina?" Why are you asking a question when you know the answer is a resounding YES?!?)



A thrill-ride based on a near six decade old sci-fi anthology show doesn't necessarily strike me as "kid friendly". And Tower of Terror is one example. Now, granted, Magic Kingdom tries very hard to keep things in general "G-Rated" and that's spread a little to the other parks. And, yeah, you could conceivably do a Marvel fifth gate that caters to both kids and older guests. Marvel has many kid friendly properties- PowerPack, Lockjaw & The Pet Avengers, Big Hero 6 (if the upcoming animated film is successful), and more.

I'm sorry but I do not find Tower of Terror thrilling... it seems toned down... at least in my most recent visits, the ride has been extremely "light" up 2 down 1, up 1 down 2, and repeat. ToT could have been much more scary... it has Haunted Mansion qualities to me, plays up scary theme but not frightening.
Besides ToT, what ride at Disney isn't "kid friendly" ? Even five years old are riding Everest.

 

[Matt_Black]

Anyway, to kind of go back to the original premise, if contractual obligations were no longer an issue, you could totally do a 5th gate. Here's how I'd do it.

Kind of do the hub type thing. The entrance and main thoroughfare is Marvel New York, with forced perspective versions of Stark Tower, The Daily Bugle, and what have you. From there, you can go to mystic realms (catch all for things like Asgard and the dimensions for the probably inevitable Dr. Strange movie), other lands (Latveria, Wakanda, etc.), and outer space (Guardians of the Galaxy, Silver Surfer, etc.). So, about four "lands".

 

[Homer fan]

Anyway, to kind of go back to the original premise, if contractual obligations were no longer an issue, you could totally do a 5th gate. Here's how I'd do it.

Kind of do the hub type thing. The entrance and main thoroughfare is Marvel New York, with forced perspective versions of Stark Tower, The Daily Bugle, and what have you. From there, you can go to mystic realms (catch all for things like Asgard and the dimensions for the probably inevitable Dr. Strange movie), other lands (Latveria, Wakanda, etc.), and outer space (Guardians of the Galaxy, Silver Surfer, etc.). So, about four "lands".

No doubt you can fill a 5th gate with Marvel, but my original question was whether any of the relevant parks (assuming MK or DHS) would have the room to just expand. I think a 5th gate would be overdoing it and feel that it would be better for Disney to just add another land to one of its existing parks.

 

[Matt_Black]

No doubt you can fill a 5th gate with Marvel, but my original question was whether any of the relevant parks (assuming MK or DHS) would have the room to just expand. I think a 5th gate would be overdoing it and feel that it would be better for Disney to just add another land to one of its existing parks.

The question isn't so much one of room, but theme. Marvel, with few exceptions, really wouldn't fit in MK. You put it in DHS, people will complain about how that park's concept is getting further diluted. You'd have to go character by character and park by park and find who works where. "Okay, we'll put the Guardians of the Galaxy in Tomorrowland; in AK, we'll have Black Panther meet in Africa and Ant-Man on Discovery Island; in...."

 

[lazyboy97o]

No doubt you can fill a 5th gate with Marvel, but my original question was whether any of the relevant parks (assuming MK or DHS) would have the room to just expand. I think a 5th gate would be overdoing it and feel that it would be better for Disney to just add another land to one of its existing parks.

If you really want to know details beyond, "Yes, there is room to expand all of the parks," you can read the Reedy Creek Improvement District Comprehensive Plan. It outlines all of the land suitable for building (including additional parks) as well as a variety of means for expanding the parks that range from the simple to the extreme (such as moving World Drive to accommodate more expansion of the Disney-MGM Studios). It is not an account of what will happen or what Disney is planning, but strategies for potential possibilities.