Is disney parks and resorts for sale?

puntagordabob

Well-Known Member
Of this, I disagree...

Here's the thing....unless my powers of observation suck...and are even worse when I'm in the world....Disney's P&R majority customer is apple-pie america. Being from New York, I love going to WDW, if not for one reason, that I feel like a male super model. At home, I constantly look in the mirror and go "crap, I need to lose 30 or 40 pounds"....down in disney, I feel skinny.

To me, it seems like the majority customer of WDW is middle, apple pie, fly-over-state, gun-carrying america. Sure, there are the hordes of NYers and Ma$$holes that descend on WDW in late august...but so long as I'm not in the world during those times, it seems to me that the heartland is WDW's biggest customer (and if not, second only to Brazilian vacation tours).....

Im not sure Middle America is ready to accept a saudi-owned WDW ... Hell, I'm from NY, and *I* wouldn't accept it....regardless, I really think the previous poster that envisioned the headlines of "Saudi America buys Main Street" isn't even remotely close to how much this would create a shock wave of brand rejection....

The worst thing that Disney could do to both the measurable goodwill on TWDC's balance sheet and the resulting hit to the P&L directly related to Parks and Resorts....would be to sell a majority stake to not only an international interest, but one based in a culture so counter to american values that we as a country are involved in an undeclared war with.

Such a sale would be disastrous for this company. I for one, can not believe that Bob Iger (whom I thought was doing an 'ok' job, especially following the ing on Walt's grave that Eisner had done after Frank Wells died) or Steve Jobs would *ever* do such a thing to this company.

And to that point, I sincerely hope that because it's just so outlandish, it either never actually materializes or is pure bull#@$% to begin with.....

....because to consider the reality of such a thing, is frankly, horrifying....

Hope so also!

They don't. But, would you want to deal with 150+ million (potential) customers that are severely ticked off, and every non-Disney owned press outlet pilling on and driving the frenzy as much as possible? I think 50% of the population might even be a bit conservative considering the age range of the various people who grew up with Disney being a major part of their childhood/parenthood and basically thought of as a part of their "American heritage."

Of course, this isn't to say that I really believe this is happening, but I think those underplaying the public relations disaster angle are missing it completely. If it were ever to happen, it would be huge, and the backlash would be unprecedented.

It would likely be more like a cancer to the image of Walt Disney which over time would make the company be "just another company".....and when that happens then who knows where THAT will lead to. Today Walt Disney has a large bottle of "love" and "goodwill" in the USA.....

Personally, I don't think anything will change. No one is buying anything, at least of any great significance. But I seriously doubt that "if" it did happen, people would stop going because a middle eastern Prince bought P&R in protest, or whatever reason. But the number of people who would stop going would be very, very small. There would be an outcry at first, but people would get over it. We have short attention spans, anyway.

But if OLC took over P&R, I'd be there the first day with a big welcome sign.

Like I said above...it would be the change in the mindset of the average person about the image of the Walt Disney Company....which today most of us hold the company as almost a "friend" or extended family.... yeah I know that sounds weird but try to DENY this is almost like denying you are human!!! Like it or not, the USA is the heart of what Walt Disney is.....its the American Pie of the media world! It showcases what is good about this country.....and as a result many of us feel a connection that in turn "allows" us to spend a lot of money for everything Disney.... sometimes we spend more even "because its Disney"... many people do not even realize they are doing it..... If they were to somehow disrupt this image it would be like a cancer that would eat away at their core and that would equal earnings....

Will a mass % of people "Boycott the parks"? Not likely!!!! The reality would likely be something more akin of less water in a garden....demand would drop over time as people put less emphasis on the Love of All Things Disney. It would just be another company....like best Buy, Wal-Mart, Bank of America, etc......something you would do business in if the opportunity arises...but would you ever approach the same level with them as you do Disney today??

My Personal opinion on this is that this visit is not an impending marker of doom for the Disney Company selling controlling interests in the domestic parks to a foreign party, but rather something else.... hopefully someone will discover the reasons so this "wildfire" of a rumor can be laid to rest!
 

Dznycrzy

Member
Disney sponsorship

Food for thought...Many companies sponsor Disney both abroad and in the US. Here are a few examples: General Motors- Test Track, Kodak- official Disney imaging, Visa- official Credit card of Disney, etc.. It seems logical that when sponsors are "wooed"to sponsorship, they would be "wined and dined", as was illuded to in the original thread. So could this be matter of wooing a sponsor? Could be.

I truly don't believe the company is selling out in any way. Disney has bought out many companies (ABC corporation, Henson muppets, Lucas films, etc.) . Would Disney be in the business of buying out or selling out?
 

stitch2008

Member
This is all good debate. But we all need to relax. Has the board considered something like this? I'm sure they have. I'm also sure they considered buying Cedar Fair when they put themselves on the market a few years back. I remember the talk up here in Ohio was that Disney executives were spotted at Cedar Fair HQ. I'm sure they've considered buying the Marvel theme park rights from Universal. I'm sure they've considered so many other things too. Why? Because it is the boards job to explore every possible direction the company could take. For all we know, this could just be a little retreat for the board and/or they could be reviewing future projects for WDW. We shouldnt immediatly jump to "OH GOSH THE PARKS ARE GETTING SOLD". Like I said before, just a few days ago we thought it was a good thing Iger was at WDW.

And something else to think about. Lee says this has been discussed with "Wall Street types". If this was seriously being considered, why would this information be leaked on the internet and not in the Wall Street Journal or New York Times?
 

RSoxNo1

Well-Known Member
While I don't think Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal will be buying into the Walt Disney World Resort, I don't expect it to be the catastrophic disaster that's being outlined.

The reality is that there are Middle Eastern investors in so many "American" businesses. For example, Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal owns a significant stake in News Corp (Fox). If an investment is made into WDW of 10%, I would guess that there would be a few news articles condemning Disney for talking to Muslim, and then a month later nobody would care.

My knowledge of the Prince is limited, but I know much of the opposition surrounding him were comments he made around 9/11 while trying to make a $10 million donation. By all accounts, he has made strides to improve relationships between the United States and the Middle East.
 

PalisadesPkteer

Active Member
Is there still problems with the Golden Oaks / Four Seasons project?

The Prince has investment in that. But really, could be so many things.

If he wants to have better relations with Disney etc. then maybe he is looking into the Flamingo Crossings and Hyperion Wharf projects as investments.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
By "liability," I assume you mean "risk." "Liability" refers to future obligations, such as employee compensation, debts outstanding, etc. "Risk" is the potential for loss. Either way, saying that The Walt Disney Company carries "almost none of the [liability or risk]" of Euro Disney SCA is incorrect. As a 40% shareholder, DIS is essentially responsible for 40% of EDL's liabilities and will see 40% of their future losses trickle through to their Income Statement (in various forms). The ownership interest is equivalent to the amount of risk assumed. I'd hardly consider 40% "almost none."
Such is the beauty of SCAs and the ridiculous structure of Euro Disney SCA.
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
The board of directors along with Iger, Staggs, and a Saudi prince have been at the boardwalk resort most of this past week. This has been confirmed by another poster on another site. Doesn't seem like Iger walking though AK was all that great after all.

There are thousands of saudi princes, if anything he is buying a million or more of disney stock or scheduling something that uses a large amount of rooms.

Disney isn't going to be selling the parks anytime soon or ever, they are a very large part of the company.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Disney isn't going to be selling the parks anytime soon or ever, they are a very large part of the company.
They are not nearly what they used to be, but the division's size plays into why selling would look attractive. The failure of the parks would not affect The Walt Disney Company if they were owned by another entity or a separate company. The Company would also get all of the cash generated from a sale. The company would also have a long term licensing deal that would essentially guarantee income for years.
 

gljvd

Active Member
Headquarters being in Burbank is exacly why they would do this sort of thing in WDW. It's an "offsite" meeting for them. I would guarantee a tour of the FLE has been on the agenda. Heck, I bet they have visited WWOHP as well. After the attendance numbers from last year, they have to be paying attention to what's going on at Uni. Hopefully they are mulling over large scale improvements at the other WDW parks. All the recent examples show that park improvements = better attendance numbers.

The problem with WWOHP and its attendance numbers is that it will be a flash in the pan. HOw long will the numbers keep up 2 , 3 , 4 mabye 5 years. During that time we get FLE and i'm sure a few more upgrades to disney parks as potter maina fades away after the last movie people will move on. I don't know anyone interested in Pottermore
 

Zummi Gummi

Pioneering the Universe Within!
The problem with WWOHP and its attendance numbers is that it will be a flash in the pan. HOw long will the numbers keep up 2 , 3 , 4 mabye 5 years. During that time we get FLE and i'm sure a few more upgrades to disney parks as potter maina fades away after the last movie people will move on. I don't know anyone interested in Pottermore

This is waaaaay o/t for this thread, but you're vastly under-estimating the longevity of the Harry Potter franchise.
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
They are not nearly what they used to be, but the division's size plays into why selling would look attractive. The failure of the parks would not affect The Walt Disney Company if they were owned by another entity or a separate company. The Company would also get all of the cash generated from a sale. The company would also have a long term licensing deal that would essentially guarantee income for years.

The parks division is larger than ever, don't know what you mean about how they are not what they use to be unless you mean as the top earning division. There isn't any other company larger enough that has the experience to run the parks nor one that has the amount of cash to buy them. In addition to that, the licensing agreements would kill the profit margin without tickets costing even more than they do already. Disney licensing the parks to make more profits is about as smart as the decision to do the same thing with PI.
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
This is waaaaay o/t for this thread, but you're vastly under-estimating the longevity of the Harry Potter franchise.

There is underestimating but there is also overestimating the longevity of a young franchise, one that isn't even 15 years old. The thing with IOA and wwop is that uni needs to keep attendance in ioa above 5 million each year so that they aren't losing money.
 

bgraham34

Well-Known Member
There is underestimating but there is also overestimating the longevity of a young franchise, one that isn't even 15 years old. The thing with IOA and wwop is that uni needs to keep attendance in ioa above 5 million each year so that they aren't losing money.

Its not just the attendance but the food and souvenirs that go with it.
 

PalisadesPkteer

Active Member
They said the same things about Star Wars when it came out.

It is a flash in the pan, it wont last etc. It has lasted 34 years and counting. The last movie was in 2005 so it has been 6 years.

There were 16 years between Jedi and Revenge of the Sith. So they may do this with Potter. Wait awhile and do movies were he is the new head master etc.

Add: By the Way. The Butter Beer is FANTASTIC!
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
The parks division is larger than ever, don't know what you mean about how they are not what they use to be unless you mean as the top earning division. There isn't any other company larger enough that has the experience to run the parks nor one that has the amount of cash to buy them. In addition to that, the licensing agreements would kill the profit margin without tickets costing even more than they do already. Disney licensing the parks to make more profits is about as smart as the decision to do the same thing with PI.
It is not the top earning component. Other areas makes more money for the company.

Licensing deals already exist for Tokyo Disney Resort, Disneyland Paris, Hong Kong Disneyland Resort and Shanghai Disney Resort.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom