GM Out, Cars In?

[Missing20K]

GM is likely to drop, but Disney has not made any plans public for what would replace GM. I can tell you this: Cars isn't going to be a part of any changeover. When a sponsor drops, a new sponsor is searched for, and if no sponsor can be found, we don't add a new franchise to bump up the cost just a little bit more on ourselves.

Yeesh...

Why did you add Nemo to the Living Seas?

 

[DisneyCane]

If GM does pull out (which to me doesn't make sense because if you are trying to turn the company around marketing is a big part of it and exposure like test track is marketing - heck, I ended up buying a Chevy Avalanche because I saw one at test track) don't bet on another car company stepping up anytime soon. They're all in big trouble right now. Toyota was just asking the Japanese Governement for a $2 Billion loan. Not as much as GM is asking for but it's not like they or any other car manufacturer is rolling around in cash right now. New car sales were the lowest in total volume in 40 years last month. When you think of the population increase in that time span it really shows how bad sales are.

 

[jt04]

If GM does pull out (which to me doesn't make sense because if you are trying to turn the company around marketing is a big part of it and exposure like test track is marketing - heck, I ended up buying a Chevy Avalanche because I saw one at test track) don't bet on another car company stepping up anytime soon. They're all in big trouble right now. Toyota was just asking the Japanese Governement for a $2 Billion loan. Not as much as GM is asking for but it's not like they or any other car manufacturer is rolling around in cash right now. New car sales were the lowest in total volume in 40 years last month. When you think of the population increase in that time span it really shows how bad sales are.

Not necessarily a bad thing though as I am routing for an RSR at DHS and a real transportation pavilion in Epcot.

 

[JEANYLASER]

win too! I was thinking the PEP Boys to be the Sponsor of this attraction!

 

[sbkline]

According to the Orlando Sentinal and the site that can't be named, GM may be leaving Test Track by the end of the month and the speculation is that if another car company can't be found to act as sponsor, Pixars' Cars may be the way forward. Thoughts?

If true, it would be just one more step in the dumbing down/cartoonization of Epcot.

Why not just gut every attraction there and turn it into a friggin cartoon??? :brick:

 

[jakeman]

Thread drifting a little.

I wonder if they had updated the Living Seas prior to Nemo with a little fish called Demo, or Memo, or somethig and kept the same storyline and retheming, with the interactive technology of Turtle Talk, would it be this poorly received? Could people, just for a second, get past their high minded ideals about what they think that Epcot should be and see that children are engaged and learning in the pavilion?

 

[larryl9797]

If GM does pull out (which to me doesn't make sense because if you are trying to turn the company around marketing is a big part of it and exposure like test track is marketing - heck, I ended up buying a Chevy Avalanche because I saw one at test track) don't bet on another car company stepping up anytime soon. They're all in big trouble right now. Toyota was just asking the Japanese Governement for a $2 Billion loan. Not as much as GM is asking for but it's not like they or any other car manufacturer is rolling around in cash right now. New car sales were the lowest in total volume in 40 years last month. When you think of the population increase in that time span it really shows how bad sales are.

bean counters cant stand spending money on intangables or indirect revenue generators.
Esp a big nut like TT costs.
Anyone have sponsorship figures for the last contract?

 

[WDWFigment]

A couple things I think are worth noting:

1) I know we as Americans are typically Americentrists/isolationists, but the American auto industry isn't the only one tanking right now. With the exception of a handful of minor players, every auto company in the world is in trouble right now. Toyota and Honda may seem like profitable and good fits, but they aren't safe from the economic problems, either.

I'm not saying I don't think they would be good fits, but the argument shouldn't center around American companies not being viable on the rationale that those companies are in trouble. Everyone is in trouble.

2) All of this talk about shuttering or demolishing Test Track is a little foolish, in my opinion. It's far from a personal favorite, but let's take a step back here. It's one EPCOT's most popular attractions. There is a lot to be fixed at WDW. If I were to enumerate a list of what needs to be fixed, Test Track probably wouldn't crack the top 20. Maybe not even the top 50. Why focus on this? Attraction refurbishment/construction funds are a finite resource. Why encourage TDO to use this on a non-priority area? :shrug:

The original EPCOT Center isn't coming back. We may get some new attractions in the vein of the original EPCOT, but overall, it's not coming back. Why not pick your battles a little more wisely? Test Track closing just leaves another dormant space in Future World (unless you honestly believe they would tear down a popular attraction and rebuild it...ha) and would make the lines longer at every other attraction.

With or without a sponsor, Test Track isn't going anywhere.

 

[Lee]

Sounds good...However, if we DON'T get a new sponsor is Cars imminent?

Not at all.
Cars shouldn't even be in this conversation, as I'm told it isn't even a consideration.

 

[WDWFigment]

Thread drifting a little.

I wonder if they had updated the Living Seas prior to Nemo with a little fish called Demo, or Memo, or somethig and kept the same storyline and retheming, with the interactive technology of Turtle Talk, would it be this poorly received? Could people, just for a second, get past their high minded ideals about what they think that Epcot should be and see that children are engaged and learning in the pavilion?

You didn't see anyone complaining about the original Journey into Imagination, and its character. :shrug:

I don't think people really care about having characters in Future World (they'll say they do), but really, they are averse to Pixarization/Character Invasion.

Figment gets a pass from most because he's unique to EPCOT. A character created specifically for an attraction seems to win brownie points from fanboys.

 

[jakeman]

You didn't see anyone complaining about the original Journey into Imagination, and its character. :shrug:

I don't think people really care about having characters in Future World (they'll say they do), but really, they are averse to Pixarization/Character Invasion.

Figment gets a pass from most because he's unique to EPCOT. A character created specifically for an attraction seems to win brownie points from fanboys.

I think that is my point. Figment is okay and Nemo is not? There is no consistency to the arguments, and what overriding theme there is in them, there are so may caveats that no wonder TDO can't do anything right with Epcot.

 

[bgraham34]

If true, it would be just one more step in the dumbing down/cartoonization of Epcot.

Why not just gut every attraction there and turn it into a friggin cartoon??? :brick:

While I agree with you that turning every attraction into a so called cartoon is all too common, Disney must also change with the times. Things aren't so simple as they once were.

 

[The "Pro"]

As some have already stated, I really don't think they would demolish or leave empty a very popular attraction. There always are moderate to extensive wait times.

 

[wickedfan07]

I think that is my point. Figment is okay and Nemo is not? There is no consistency to the arguments, and what overriding theme there is in them, there are so may caveats that no wonder TDO can't do anything right with Epcot.

I agree with both of your posts.

As long as the characters are helping to facilitate learning in the pavilion, thee's absolutely nothing wron with it. Nemo gets kids and their parents through the door and holds their attention. If something Cars-related were added to the Transportation Pavilion, it would be a great addition as long as it helped faciliate learning. If they just plunked down Radiator Springs Racers where Test Track is with the reasoning that "Cars characters fit because this section of the park has always been about motor vehicles," then that's a bad choice. RSR doesn't look like it's going to hold much educational value, and one of the goals of Epcot (past or present, it's still the same) is to inform.

So in a nutshell, if you're going to add a character to Epcot, make sure s/he's doing something to inform as well as entertain.

 

[dazzer68]

just been announced that GM ( as they own vauxhall motors) has asked the british government for £440 million to help keep them afloat. i know this isnt being asked to keep the sponsorship going, but it might help.

 

[imagineer boy]

I think that is my point. Figment is okay and Nemo is not? There is no consistency to the arguments, and what overriding theme there is in them, there are so may caveats that no wonder TDO can't do anything right with Epcot.

Figment is okay because he's a character original to the park while the other characters are simply cashing in the success of already existant movie franchises.

I don't think characters from movies need to be put in just to get kids to learn. You can do that perfectly well without any characters. My local science center is a good example, no characters but kids have a blast and learn a great deal too.

 

[WildcatDen]

Hey, if they keep it up

That's what she said. . .

 

[nibblesandbits]

You didn't see anyone complaining about the original Journey into Imagination, and its character. :shrug:

I don't think people really care about having characters in Future World (they'll say they do), but really, they are averse to Pixarization/Character Invasion.

Figment gets a pass from most because he's unique to EPCOT. A character created specifically for an attraction seems to win brownie points from fanboys.

Thank you!

I have been thinking about this question for a while now...but have never really formulated into words. This has been something that's been bothering me for a while now, the acceptance of one character, but bringing in Nemo or Donald Duck, well that goes against everything Epcot...

Figment is okay because he's a character original to the park while the other characters are simply cashing in the success of already existant movie franchises.

I don't think characters from movies need to be put in just to get kids to learn. You can do that perfectly well without any characters. My local science center is a good example, no characters but kids have a blast and learn a great deal too.

Well, 1. our science center gets people because there's not as much to do here as there is in Florida. If we had Epcot and the Science Center here, I bet most families would go to Epcot, rather than the Science Center, but alas the Science Center is all we got, so therefore, people go to it.

Second of all...what's wrong with adding characters that kids identify with (IE movie characters, they already know them and are attached to them...it's better for Disney than starting from scratch on a character that might not be so loved anyway) to an attraction to get them excited about coming there and then learning while they are there? I know that the last time I went into the Seas, I took some time (something I normally don't do) to explore the pavillion a little bit and learn about the sea. Judging the info I have about the old pavilion, I probably wouldn't have spent as much time there, if any, in the state it was in before. I'm not sure I ever had been in there before actually. And if I don't remember, that isn't good.

The characters act as a weinie in this instance. They are the draw to get people inside...and there is nothing wrong with that. Do I want to see it everywhere in Epcot? No, but when it's appropriate, then I think it could enhance a pavilion, much like it did with The Seas.

 

[flynnibus]

Now that I've ranted, I don't think a sponsorship is important

Does that mean you personally are ponying up the millions the sponsor pays ongoing as part of the deal too? Who's picking up that tab?

The sponsorship funds aren't just profit for Disney.. they are part of the funding that supports the thing.

 

[jakeman]

Figment is okay because he's a character original to the park while the other characters are simply cashing in the success of already existant movie franchises.

I don't think characters from movies need to be put in just to get kids to learn. You can do that perfectly well without any characters. My local science center is a good example, no characters but kids have a blast and learn a great deal too.

A character is a character. If, for some reason I can find a movie with Figment prior to the opening of Epcot, would you then raise a giant fuss over him being a "movie" character rather than an Epcot original? It also goes back to my original post, if it was Demo the Jellyfish from 1982, would it be an issue?

It's a double standard.

Also, let's be honest, if your science center had the rights to Disney characters, can you really say they wouldn't use them?