Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
You mean the same maneouver they pulled on the Star Wars expanded universe?
lol
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Marvel coming to WDW?!?!
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
lol
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
ohh man.. nostalgia!
"Save the Tower! 80 years ago, lightning struck that tower..."
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
not to mention.. the constant flood of marvel offers and products, keeps the characters and brand relevant. Disney wouldnt need to do much apart from racking the profits.
Its a win win for disney.
I would imagine Disney increasing the % per sold product in exchange of Uni using MCU looks.
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
Hey Mike, where are you putting your report?Since this thread is partly about ToT l'd like to give a shoutout to Jaclyn (I think that's how she spelled it). One of the best, most energetic, and in character bell hops I've seen at the Tower
Mike S
Well-Known Member
Not really doing a report. Just little tidbits here and there.
Disneyhead'71
Well-Known Member
The main focus for UOR has been expanding their resort offerings with 2 new hotels and an on campus water park.
Since 2010, in the parks, they have opened 2 Potter lands, Springfield upgrades, Transformers, upgraded both Marvel E Tickets, built Kong (E Ticket), started Fallon (D Ticket), and started Fast and Furious (E Ticket).
And let's not forget that the average production timeline for a major E Ticket expansion is anywhere from 5-7 years and given the complex legal gymnastics necessary for Universal to do anything with Marvel, I would bet closer to the latter. So, even if they started right after the first movie hit, we're still possibly 3 years or so out from a new Avengers E Ticket.
Since 2010, in the parks, they have opened 2 Potter lands, Springfield upgrades, Transformers, upgraded both Marvel E Tickets, built Kong (E Ticket), started Fallon (D Ticket), and started Fast and Furious (E Ticket).
And let's not forget that the average production timeline for a major E Ticket expansion is anywhere from 5-7 years and given the complex legal gymnastics necessary for Universal to do anything with Marvel, I would bet closer to the latter. So, even if they started right after the first movie hit, we're still possibly 3 years or so out from a new Avengers E Ticket.
Cesar R M
Well-Known Member
yes, but where are you going to be posting these tidbits? I know you participate in a looong row of threads.
Mike S
Well-Known Member
I'll be doing it in appropriate threads for each topic. I won't be posting much until I'm at the hotel or in the car (not driving, don't worry). I'm only here now because I'm relaxing on a bench in the shade at Dinoland. They do exist
AEfx
Well-Known Member
No, it wouldn't. Because it would COST THEM money as huge INVESTMENT first.
Let's see: they can make millions on merchandise, free promotion of their film, plus licensing fees, for a ZERO investment.
Or they can spend a few HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS, and could very well take in a bit more money - but they aren't going to see it in the black for a very long time. Yes, eventually, one could say it would pay for itself - many years later - but when Disney is already taking in so much money from Universal doing nothing, the incentive to take that financial risk seems a lot less attractive while they have a stable of other properties they are investing in at the moment.
Think of it this way - let's say you have a job that pays you $50K/year. You find someone willing to do subcontract the job from you for $30K a year. You get to collect the $20K extra for doing nothing. Sure, you could make that $50K yourself, but you would have to work full time at the job. It's pretty easy to see why someone would pick the $20K for doing nothing, because then you are completely free to invest your time in other activities that are profitable.
For Disney, that means - they have the extra capital to go into Star Wars, Avaturd, etc. - while still raking in a nice amount of cash from someone else doing all the work for Marvel.
Besides, the mic was already dropped in this conversation:
Given that Martin is easily the person on these boards I have found with the most trustworthy, regular, reliable insider information - that's enough for me.
Donaldfan1934
Well-Known Member
You completely missed my point. My point was what do you think is Disney's more crucial money maker, a land that's only 1/7 of a theme park or 4 completely owned theme, 2 completely owned water parks, 28 completey owned hotels, and a recently revitalized shopping center with its own Marvel shop. obviously Disney is content with Universal using Marvel and doing nothing with it because it's all profit for them. But if Universal does in fact create a modern Marvel land, which Disney in reality has no real say in, it would most certainly raise alarms in house. Not only could this take away more precious vacation days away from Disney property, but the people going to see the redone Marvel land probably won't just be paying for merchandise in that one area, but the rest of IoA, USF, and God forbid City Walk instead of Disney Springs and one of Universal's. So while Disney is fine profiting off of Marvel however they can, the execs wouldn't prefer to see it at the expense Universal's market share seeing significant growth and encroaching closer to their own. Again, they don't have much say in this, but don't act like Disney execs would prefer this over Marvel just not signing that deal back in 1994.No, it wouldn't. Because it would COST THEM money as huge INVESTMENT first.
Let's see: they can make millions on merchandise, free promotion of their film, plus licensing fees, for a ZERO investment.
Or they can spend a few HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS, and could very well take in a bit more money - but they aren't going to see it in the black for a very long time. Yes, eventually, one could say it would pay for itself - many years later - but when Disney is already taking in so much money from Universal doing nothing, the incentive to take that financial risk seems a lot less attractive while they have a stable of other properties they are investing in at the moment.
Think of it this way - let's say you have a job that pays you $50K/year. You find someone willing to do subcontract the job from you for $30K a year. You get to collect the $20K extra for doing nothing. Sure, you could make that $50K yourself, but you would have to work full time at the job. It's pretty easy to see why someone would pick the $20K for doing nothing, because then you are completely free to invest your time in other activities that are profitable.
For Disney, that means - they have the extra capital to go into Star Wars, Avaturd, etc. - while still raking in a nice amount of cash from someone else doing all the work for Marvel.
Besides, the mic was already dropped in this conversation:
Given that Martin is easily the person on these boards I have found with the most trustworthy, regular, reliable insider information - that's enough for me.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
If they could turn back time? Sure. But they can't. And they knew it when they purchased the company.
In any case, your conclusion is flawed. Disney hasn't been hurt by the massive uptick at Universal - Disney is still having record attendance. Universal brings an entirely new audience to Orlando. WDW is already bursting at the seams - and is heavily occupied with it's own expansions for the next five years at least.
In any case, as I've said before - I understand what you are saying, in fact I used to think similarly - and eventually, ten years from now, fifteen years - things may change - but for right now, Disney is sitting rather pretty with the Marvel situation in Orlando, in spite of what a few Marvel fans here seem to think.
In the end, it's best for the fans as well - because you'll get better Marvel attractions out of Universal than WDW would get in the current environment.
Since you think Disney is so desperate to build Marvel attractions - why haven't they built big impressive attractions at the other half-dozen theme parks it can do anything they want with the property? They have owned Marvel for the better part of the decade.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Where is the alarm over a second Marvel land opening soon at a non-Disney park?
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
I think Disney is probably more upset at Dubai Marvel land and the theme parks growing there more so than anything as those rich Middle eastern folk won't have to come to Florida period as they can just go a country over.
Donaldfan1934
Well-Known Member
Right, although there would definitely be concern over Universal combined with Dibai being a one-two punch of sorts.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
Disney cares not about Dubai, and frankly, no one else should either. Those projects were DOA for a reason and I find it incredible that any are moving forward.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
Not really. Dubai cuts out people going to Universal for Marvel if they were huge fans and didn't like anything else which hurts Disney as they don't make money off of merchandising and at the same time cut people from coming to Orlando which if people aren't coming to Orlando less people are going to Disney.
Donaldfan1934
Well-Known Member
To be honest, I they bought it for the whole of Marvel and were willing to accept the obstacles of Fox, Universal, and at the time, Sony. I also agree that its good for Disney to take advantage of the Universal situation for the short term since both sides have remained stagnant up until this point. But just because it came with the Marvel deal doesn't mean it sits well with them. Remember, Marvel canceled the Fantastic 4 comic series, prevented the comics division from creating new X-Men characters, and took removed them from t-shirts based on comic book covers that they were originally on all because Fox owns their film rights. Obviously, I know Disney has yet to do anything significant with Marvel anywhere and I think that on their part is stupid. Since they're rumored to do a land at DCA, however, I do think that would also be in the cards for DHS 2.0 as well if it wasn't for the obvious. This is just a personal opinion, but I think most screen based rides are mediocre by today's standards. And while I do think that a Disney Marvel land would have some screens, it wouldn't be every ride as it would most likely be for Universal. Again, I know that corporations have complex relationships on the whole that aren't black and white. I just feel that modern Marvel additions at Universal could significantly change the tides between Disney and Universal faster than most are predicting and that Disney would logically have at least some concerns about that. I'm happy you understand where I'm coming from and can agree to disagree on a few of our insights.
Donaldfan1934
Well-Known Member
True, it affects the area as whole so that would be a bigger concern for both parties. I'm just making a point that Disney wouldn't be pro any change that could ultimately alter the perception of their product in a negative way no matter regardless of whether or not one has a bigger affect than the other.
rioriz
Well-Known Member
Given that Martin is easily the person on these boards I have found with the most trustworthy, regular, reliable insider information - that's enough for me.
Which is why i find it strange that the insiders on this board all agree WDW had seriously looked into the Tower or RNRC, GoTG re do...
I respect Briman but trust our guys here more. In that respect, i think that either the loophole is there or there have been advanced talks between Disney and Universal and everything we thought we knew about the former contract is bunk.
I pick the latter...