Guardians of the Galaxy coming to Energy Pavilion at Epcot

[Jeffxz]

Good points. To me there are only three possible scenarios here.

1. GoTG is clear the Disney to use and that won't change in 2018.
2. Disney has worked this out with Uni and can use the characters.
3. All the rumors of a GoTG ride coming to WDW are 100% BS, because I doubt Disney would have gotten as far as rumored without first being sure they have the rights.

I'd like to suggest one more possibility here that might fit:

4. GoTG is clear for Disney to use and that won't change in 2018, but they can't advertise or promote it

From the contract:

If the particular character is not used by MCA, such character will not be advertised or promoted by means of (x) spot television buys, billboards, personal appearances, or print advertisements which are (y) viewed, located or primarily directed to persons within 300 miles of Orlando. In other words, regional (i.e. covering a multi-state geographic region) or national television or print media buys, or brochures would not be prohibited within such 300 mile radius.

I don't recall seeing any official Disney ads for any of the Marvel stuff they have done over the last few years - Strange M&G, groot/starloard M&G, dhs movie previews, dhs Movie Magic. It seems like Disney is relying on bloggers and word of mouth for these things to get out and are not officially promoting them.

Would Disney be willing to spend a few hundred million dollars on an attraction and not advertise locally for it? No Billboards, No tourist magazines, No hotel lobby ads, No local television buys etc.

It seems like this this would be a part of the contract that could be easily renegotiated or amended between the two parties if Universal was willing, but if they aren't I don't know how Disney could justify spending E-Ticket money and not be allowed to fully market it.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I'd like to suggest one more possibility here that might fit:

4. GoTG is clear for Disney to use and that won't change in 2018, but they can't advertise or promote it



I don't recall seeing any official Disney ads for any of the Marvel stuff they have done over the last few years - Strange M&G, groot/starloard M&G, dhs movie previews, dhs Movie Magic. It seems like Disney is relying on bloggers and word of mouth for these things to get out and are not officially promoting them.

Would Disney be willing to spend a few hundred million dollars on an attraction and not advertise locally for it? No Billboards, No tourist magazines, No hotel lobby ads, No local television buys etc.

It seems like this this would be a part of the contract that could be easily renegotiated or amended between the two parties if Universal was willing, but if they aren't I don't know how Disney could justify spending E-Ticket money and not be allowed to fully market it.

If that's the case, why not make one that's more thematically appropriate?

 

[Rodan75]

I'd like to suggest one more possibility here that might fit:

4. GoTG is clear for Disney to use and that won't change in 2018, but they can't advertise or promote it



I don't recall seeing any official Disney ads for any of the Marvel stuff they have done over the last few years - Strange M&G, groot/starloard M&G, dhs movie previews, dhs Movie Magic. It seems like Disney is relying on bloggers and word of mouth for these things to get out and are not officially promoting them.

Would Disney be willing to spend a few hundred million dollars on an attraction and not advertise locally for it? No Billboards, No tourist magazines, No hotel lobby ads, No local television buys etc.

It seems like this this would be a part of the contract that could be easily renegotiated or amended between the two parties if Universal was willing, but if they aren't I don't know how Disney could justify spending E-Ticket money and not be allowed to fully market it.

Well...they could get crazy technical on that...and not have any local advertisements in Central Florida media and advertise the heck out of it outside of Florida, where WDW gets most of their guests from. The clue to avoiding the clause is included in the clause:

(i.e. covering a multi-state geographic region) or national television or print media buys, or brochures would not be prohibited within such 300 mile radius
​

When you go back and re-read the contract, it seems Fox Star Wars Merchandising level crazy for Universal to have waived their right to exclusivity by not taking the worldwide rights when they had the chance. As @lazyboy97o has pointed out, the original exclusivity clause covers everything you could possibly imagine. I know Uni was going through some tough times, but talk about a fumble.

Now there are enough holes in the contract that Disney can work around, if they make the uncovered Characters popular enough to utilize.

 

[Mike S]

Well...they could get crazy technical on that...and not have any local advertisements in Central Florida media and advertise the heck out of it outside of Florida, where WDW gets most of their guests from. The clue to avoiding the clause is included in the clause:

(i.e. covering a multi-state geographic region) or national television or print media buys, or brochures would not be prohibited within such 300 mile radius
​

When you go back and re-read the contract, it seems Fox Star Wars Merchandising level crazy for Universal to have waived their right to exclusivity by not taking the worldwide rights when they had the chance. As @lazyboy97o has pointed out, the original exclusivity clause covers everything you could possibly imagine. I know Uni was going through some tough times, but talk about a fumble.

Now there are enough holes in the contract that Disney can work around, if they make the uncovered Characters popular enough to utilize.

They did have worldwide rights. They just expired due to lack of use. All USH had was a restaurant.

 

[Rodan75]

They did have worldwide rights. They just expired due to lack of use. All USH had was a restaurant.

understood...which seems so silly in hindsight.

You are our resident Uni expert, so is a Marvel expansion still on the IoA list? For awhile a top shelf 'Avengers' attraction was rumored for after Kong and FatF, although that seems to be before the Nintendo stuff really picked up speed.

 

[asianway]

I'd like to suggest one more possibility here that might fit:

4. GoTG is clear for Disney to use and that won't change in 2018, but they can't advertise or promote it



I don't recall seeing any official Disney ads for any of the Marvel stuff they have done over the last few years - Strange M&G, groot/starloard M&G, dhs movie previews, dhs Movie Magic. It seems like Disney is relying on bloggers and word of mouth for these things to get out and are not officially promoting them.

Would Disney be willing to spend a few hundred million dollars on an attraction and not advertise locally for it? No Billboards, No tourist magazines, No hotel lobby ads, No local television buys etc.

It seems like this this would be a part of the contract that could be easily renegotiated or amended between the two parties if Universal was willing, but if they aren't I don't know how Disney could justify spending E-Ticket money and not be allowed to fully market it.

Its not the GotG, its all based on characters. I think Collector and Drax are too tainted by Avengers and FF if you go back into comics history. Gamora has strong ties to Hulk.

 

[Lucky Rabbit]

Disney has more to gain by pushing out multiple Avengers rides outside of Orlando, the more Disney uses Marvel the more pressure Uni has to update the land, otherwise it becomes Uni's brand that diminishes by association.

If Uni keeps investing heavily in all these IP's couldn't Disney eventually argue the ability to cancel it over Uni's negligence of the IP? Universal is kind of establishing "this is how you do an IP right" and Marvel clearly isn't getting the same treatment.

 

[Kman101]

Its not the GotG, its all based on characters. I think Collector and Drax are too tainted by Avengers and FF if you go back into comics history. Gamora has strong ties to Hulk.

Then why are we supposedly getting a Guardians ride in Epcot?

 

[marni1971]

If Uni keeps investing heavily in all these IP's couldn't Disney eventually argue the ability to cancel it over Uni's negligence of the IP? Universal is kind of establishing "this is how you do an IP right" and Marvel clearly isn't getting the same treatment.

Err.... Hulk was rebuilt. Spiderman was completely overhauled. Hardly negligence. Quite the opposite, they've gone above and beyond the contract requirements.

 

[marni1971]

Then why are we supposedly getting a Guardians ride in Epcot?

From what I gather the legalities are one thing that's delayed this project. Assuming they worked them out.

 

[danlb_2000]

If Uni keeps investing heavily in all these IP's couldn't Disney eventually argue the ability to cancel it over Uni's negligence of the IP? Universal is kind of establishing "this is how you do an IP right" and Marvel clearly isn't getting the same treatment.

Uni only has to properly maintain the attractions, nothing in the contract requires them to match what they are doing with other IPs.

 

[Kman101]

From what I gather the legalities are one thing that's delayed this project. Assuming they worked them out.

Thanks Martin. Let's hope for a different IP I suppose LOL. Do they have a backup plan if they decide not to go with Guardians, though it seems to be up in the air weekly. If they don't have a backup will Energy sit closed for the foreseeable future? Or just keep running on fumes?

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

Thanks Martin. Let's hope for a different IP I suppose LOL. Do they have a backup plan if they decide not to go with Guardians, though it seems to be up in the air weekly. If they don't have a backup will Energy sit closed for the foreseeable future? Or just keep running on fumes?

Selfishly, I hope they run into more contract issues and scrap Guardians altogether for a proper non-coaster update to the attraction.

 

[Kman101]

Selfishly, I hope they run into more contract issues and scrap Guardians altogether for a proper non-coaster update to the attraction.

As do I.

Keep Marvel in DCA and Paris (and probably China)

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

As do I.

Keep Marvel in DCA and Paris (and probably China)

HK already has Iron Man so yeah they can keep it.

 

[Phineas]

I'm Team Why The Hell Don't They Just Put It In Rock n' Roller Coaster

Same here. Can we get some t-shirts or something made? Make it all official and whatnot?

Seriously, Awesome Mix Volume (insert variable here) is such an easy solution here, without sacrificing the integrity of either park.

 

[the.dreamfinder]

Uni only has to properly maintain the attractions, nothing in the contract requires them to match what they are doing with other IPs.

That contract is so antiquated. Compared to what they now pay JK/WB and will soon pay Nintendo to use their IPs, UNI has made out very well with the Marvel deal.

 

[Kman101]

HK already has Iron Man so yeah they can keep it.

HK already has Iron Man so yeah they can keep it.

LOL I forgot about HK.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

LOL I forgot about HK.

Easy to do. Its just a Star-Tours overlay. Nothing worth remembering.

 

[lazyboy97o]

If Uni keeps investing heavily in all these IP's couldn't Disney eventually argue the ability to cancel it over Uni's negligence of the IP? Universal is kind of establishing "this is how you do an IP right" and Marvel clearly isn't getting the same treatment.

The land follows a specific design intent. Marvel can't just decide it alone is no longer a proper representation.