Marvel at WDW

["El Gran Magnifico"]

It's way outside the realm of possibility where the rest of us have been giving you realistic scenarios as to why Disney is not getting those rights back.

So you're sayin' "never". As in "never-ever" So there will never be a time where Disney is allowed to use the word "Marvel" in their Orlando and California parks and resorts. Not in 5 years, Not in 10 years, not in 20 or 30 or 50, or 100? That's your position?

My position is the same as it was in my first post. Eventually, they will come to a deal.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Amazing how many on this board are in lock step with Disney's operating philosophy.

And you've jumped the shark. You went from not accepting how Disney's internal structure works to demonizing those who aren't on your side for changing it.

Resorting to ad hominem is a sign you're in over your head and calling people names is not how you gracefully exit.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

And you've jumped the shark. You went from not accepting how Disney's internal structure works to demonizing those who aren't on your side for changing it.

Resorting to ad hominem is a sign you're in over your head and calling people names is not how you gracefully exit.

So calling someone's opinion on something "delusional" is not ad hominem? Pot meet Kettle.

I've never gone from "not accepting Disney's Internal structure.....". I just question the validity of some (not all) of those that espouse that they do. Disagreeing is not demonizing. Sorry you feel if it is. But it's not. You can chose to agree with someone's opinion...or you can choose to disagree. This is an open forum - is it not?

Took less than 24 hours from my first post on this thread...for my view on this to be labeled as "delusional".
It was my view. It is currently my view. Will be my view tomorrow.

If you don't agree with it - Then don't respond - or reply and say you disagree. Don't mount a full scale offensive trying to change my opinion of something. If you don't want to get into arguments then don't continue to attack threads because they don't fit your narrative.

I'll exit when I want to exit. Thank You.

 

[MisterPenguin]

So calling someone's opinion on something "delusional" is not ad hominem? Pot meet Kettle.

I've never gone from "not accepting Disney's Internal structure.....". I just question the validity of some (not all) of those that espouse that they do. Disagreeing is not demonizing. Sorry you feel if it is. But it's not. You can chose to agree with someone's opinion...or you can choose to disagree. This is an open forum - is it not?

Took less than 24 hours from my first post on this thread...for my view on this to be labeled as "delusional".
It was my view. It is currently my view. Will be my view tomorrow.

If you don't agree with it - Then don't respond - or reply and say you disagree. Don't mount a full scale offensive trying to change my opinion of something. If you don't want to get into arguments then don't continue to attack threads because they don't fit your narrative.

I'll exit when I want to exit. Thank You.

If you're deluded, you have a false belief. Your belief about how the divisions within Disney Inc interact with one another is false, therefore, delusional. Saying you're deluded about this belief is not the same things as saying you're a person who is delusional implying that nothing you say can be trusted. Now, that would be ad hominem.

It is a belief because you refused to learn. The so-called 'full scale offensive' was just someone not letting such a false belief go unanswered. But, good job playing the persecuted card!

Which fallacy is next?

 

[lazyboy97o]

So you're sayin' "never". As in "never-ever" So there will never be a time where Disney is allowed to use the word "Marvel" in their Orlando and California parks and resorts. Not in 5 years, Not in 10 years, not in 20 or 30 or 50, or 100? That's your position?

My position is the same as it was in my first post. Eventually, they will come to a deal.

This sort of open ended “What if?” is pointless as it justifies nearly any position. You can’t say for certain that Disney won’t sell off Marvel within 100 years.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

If you're deluded, you have a false belief. Your belief about how the divisions within Disney Inc interact with one another is false, therefore, delusional.

So let's address these in order. First. Your reference of the use of the word "delusional" as pertains to this thread was in response to my view of an eventual agreement between Uni and TDC. So you got the first one wrong.

saying you're a person who is delusional implying that nothing you say can be trusted. Now, that would be ad hominem.

That's pretty much how it used. So I interpreted it as ad hominem. - You Got that one wrong too.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

It is a belief because you refused to learn.

Learn from who? Considering Disney had a complete re-org 4 months ago - To specifically address how their respective divisions would operate both internally and externally. Please enlighten me as to how TDC operates today or will operate in fiscal '19. You guys are really good if you got all that nailed down already.

If you're deluded, you have a false belief. Your belief about how the divisions within Disney Inc interact with one another is false, therefore, delusional.

So let's go back to the beginning. Can you succinctly define for me how the TDC operates in coordination with the recently announced re-org changes ? Maybe...just maybe you might be a bit deluded with your understanding of the impact of said changes. I don't claim to know. But apparently you do claim to know.

Which fallacy is next?

I don't know? You seem to be doing pretty good.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

This sort of open ended “What if?” is pointless as it justifies nearly any position. You can’t say for certain that Disney won’t sell off Marvel within 100 years.

My view has been clear from the onset. I feel that it will come to an agreement. It could be selling outright or obtaining permission to use.
Is there a chance it won't happen? Sure. That's a possibility. I happen to believe that eventually it will.

I get it - you disagree. Great. Let's move on.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

$4 Billion (with a "B") for Lucasfilms. 7/8 years later they're going to finally open a couple of lands and a hotel after spending another Billion (with a "B") at each park (plus the cost of the hotel). $4 Billion - ironically the same amount Disney paid for Marvel. But as in the case of Lucasfilm they laid out an additional $2 Billion+ over and above to get it into the parks.

If Disney is spending at least additional 2 Billion + on Star Wars inclusion into the parks (probably more over time) - Spending another big chunk of change re-theming rides to Marvel in DLP and CA, looking to add lands (or space or whatever you want to call it) in every other park outside of Orlando. I think the business case is there.

It's not just park revenue that justifies it. Consider that inclusion into the parks is also a marketing vehicle for the franchise - which correlates to visibility, movie B.O., streaming, subscription services, DVD sales, merchandising etc.

You forgot the part where they have to break a contract and give up free money for marvel...which is not the case with Star Wars.

And the Star Wars land hasn’t been done before...superhero land has been...both at IOA and about 20 six flags for decades.

The one thing going for your plan is marvel is a more popular franchise with more upside moving forward than Star Wars...but I don’t think it’s enough to tip the scales.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

You forgot the part where they have to break a contract and give up free money for marvel...which is not the case with Star Wars.

And the Star Wars land hasn’t been done before...superhero land has been...both at IOA and about 20 six flags for decades.

The one thing going for your plan is marvel is a more popular franchise with more upside moving forward than Star Wars...but I don’t think it’s enough to tip the scales.

And I get that. It may be more an amendment where Uni may just simply give Disney the permission to use certain elements and keep licensing rights (which I think more likely). Ultimately though it comes down to business for both of them. Ultimately, no one knows how this all plays out or what type of terms are agreed to. And there is the chance that no deal is ever consummated.

Wasn't my intention to get into a 12 page debate on this......because I expressed the view that I thought they'd eventually strike a deal.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

And I get that. It may be more an amendment where Uni may just simply give Disney the permission to use certain elements and keep licensing rights (which I think more likely). Ultimately though it comes down to business for both of them. Ultimately, no one knows how this all plays out or what type of terms are agreed to. And there is the chance that no deal is ever consummated.

Wasn't my intention to get into a 12 page debate on this......because I expressed the view that I thought they'd eventually strike a deal.

You do understand that Comcast/Universal HATE Disney, right?

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Nonsense. There's another good 10 pages of life in this thread. It is a "fan forum" where speculation is king. Nobody is forcing you to read it. Plus....I want to hear more about the contract and all the things Disney can't do.......while they are constructing the GoG ride in EPCOT, and looking at some type of BP presence at WoL.

I've been trying to read the thread, but it's been bogged down by your repeated, unfounded assertion that we should consider how a deal *could* happen even when there's yet no reality to the sentiment.

Baseless speculation is NOT king, genuine discussion is. There's room for speculation, but you lose the meat of the conversation when you get lost in it and reject the premise of every other post that doesn't serve your wishes. Your conjecture is not as good as insider knowledge just because neither has a visible source.

The contents of the contract are interesting. The constant jabbing at the larger conversation is not. But between this and your last 10 posts I see you have no interest in having a meaningful discussion about this subject, just doubling and tripling down on your groundless point. Thankfully, the ignore feature is super handy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Learn from who? Considering Disney had a complete re-org 4 months ago - To specifically address how their respective divisions would operate both internally and externally. Please enlighten me as to how TDC operates today or will operate in fiscal '19. You guys are really good if you got all that nailed down already.

So let's go back to the beginning. Can you succinctly define for me how the TDC operates in coordination with the recently announced re-org changes ? Maybe...just maybe you might be a bit deluded with your understanding of the impact of said changes. I don't claim to know. But apparently you do claim to know.

It’s irrelevant. It regrouped various silos, it didn’t change how those silos do business with each other. Walt Disney World did not become part of Marvel or Marvel Studios, nor did either of those become part of Walt Disney World.

Just because you do not know does not mean others do not know or that it even requires special knowledge. The whole problem with your position is that you want all positions to be considered equally regardless of evidence, which is exactly why it was described as a “strong conviction held despite stronger evidence to the contrary.” With every bit of information that you don’t know you just resort to adding on even more baseless speculation. So yes, there could be some wild, radical change to the present situation for which there is currently no evidence; Marvel could decide to just give Walt Disney World $1 billion, just as Universal Orlando Resort could be destroyed by a hurricane and never reopened, or Comcast could be cooking their books and will fall apart like Enron.

 

[marni1971]

and looking at some type of BP presence at WoL.

No, they are not.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

It’s irrelevant. It regrouped various silos, it didn’t change how those silos do business with each other.

What do you think a re-org is? So now that Consumer Products has merged with Theme Parks under Chapek - that's not going to change the dynamic of how those two divisions interact? Okay.

No, they are not.

I appreciate succinct answers. But it leaves a lot open to interpretation. Several media outlets were speculating back in March about a Wakanda or BP type presence in WoL. Other Disney insiders (not related to this board) were also chiming in. If you want to elaborate and say -"They decided against it" or "realized it was in violation of the contract" or simply say "the media reports were wrong and it was never under consideration" - feel free.

So yes, there could be some wild, radical change to the present situation for which there is currently no evidence;

Look let's table the discussion. I'm sure we'll revisit it.

 

[marni1971]

I appreciate succinct answers. But it leaves a lot open to interpretation. Several media outlets were speculating back in March about a Wakanda or BP type presence in WoL. Other Disney insiders (not related to this board) were also chiming in. If you want to elaborate and say -"They decided against it" or "realized it was in violation of the contract" or simply say "the media reports were wrong and it was never under consideration" - feel free.

More recent than March, several IPs were being discussed for a project inside WoL. BP was not one of them.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What do you think a re-org is? So now that Consumer Products has merged with Theme Parks under Chapek - that's not going to change the dynamic of how those two divisions interact? Okay.

You already said you don’t know but, no, it does not change that different groups still have their own accounting. People would have commented about their paychecks changing. Even then, it would not fix your scenario because Walt Disney World already sells Marvel merchandise.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And I get that. It may be more an amendment where Uni may just simply give Disney the permission to use certain elements and keep licensing rights (which I think more likely). Ultimately though it comes down to business for both of them. Ultimately, no one knows how this all plays out or what type of terms are agreed to. And there is the chance that no deal is ever consummated.

Wasn't my intention to get into a 12 page debate on this......because I expressed the view that I thought they'd eventually strike a deal.

Granted...
I can sum up my feelings on this...since it started In 2012

Neither Comcast nor disney wanted to get into “dueling” marvel lands with shared characters...what’s the point? It confuses the narrative and they are getting close already. That’s why Comcast blocks.

Disney doesn’t want to spend billions on rides...they want to spend zero. They have had their hand forced in Orlando based on several more recent developments...the big one have nothing to do with themeparks.

 

[bhg469]

Lol, I thought it might be after listening to how excited Lou and his sidekick were about the whole thing!

What doesn't Lou get excited about?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

You do understand that Comcast/Universal HATE Disney, right?

I think that’s a very gray/grey reality....

On some levels...yes. On others, not as much. They share a lot of common trends/philosophies.

Comcast would but disney in a second if they had the shot.