Marvel coming to WDW?!?!

LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
Phil12 said:
Nothing if it helps to improve and save the company. I recall when Kmart and Sears were the top dogs in the retail world but a little company called Walmart pulled the rug out from them.

I also recall when Eastern Air Lines and TWA were healthy air carries. I also remember when RCA was the top maker of radios and television sets.

Failure to change with the times killed all of those companies. Thank goodness that Disney is willing to change as needed to grow and improve their media empire and theme parks. Disney is still very healthy, but they won't continue to be if they don't change.

Disney has more than enough visitors to their parks. They need to push their own IP with their captive audience. It just makes sense. There is going to be more profit for Disney selling a Groot plush rather than selling a Rod Serling ashtray from the ToT gift shop.

But let's say the GotG re-theme fails and the Groot plush doesn't sell. They can always go back to the Twilight Zone theme and sell autographed Rod Serling Zippo lighters in the gift shop.
Click to expand...

While I agree with many of your comments, change solely for the sake of change, especially if not thought carefully but rashly is counter productive and can be harmful to the bottom line. As I've stated several times before, where is New Coke? What did the decision of the Coca Cola Company to update it's core product do to that company? How much did Coke loose on that decision? Good will is a very valuable asset for a company as branded as Coke....or Disney.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Phil12 said:
Nothing if it helps to improve and save the company. I recall when Kmart and Sears were the top dogs in the retail world but a little company called Walmart pulled the rug out from them.

I also recall when Eastern Air Lines and TWA were healthy air carries. I also remember when RCA was the top maker of radios and television sets.

Failure to change with the times killed all of those companies. Thank goodness that Disney is willing to change as needed to grow and improve their media empire and theme parks. Disney is still very healthy, but they won't continue to be if they don't change.

Disney has more than enough visitors to their parks. They need to push their own IP with their captive audience. It just makes sense. There is going to be more profit for Disney selling a Groot plush rather than selling a Rod Serling ashtray from the ToT gift shop.

But let's say the GotG re-theme fails and the Groot plush doesn't sell. They can always go back to the Twilight Zone theme and sell autographed Rod Serling Zippo lighters in the gift shop.
Click to expand...
Change for the sake of change is sometimes more destructive than failing to change. If it isn't broke don't try to fix it. They can sell GoTG plush in hundreds of locations. With your logic they should replace every ride or attraction not based on specific Disney IP with cheap overlays to sell a few more pieces of merchandise. It just seems like you are really stretching for a way to justify this. Not sure if that's because you are just trolling or if you are serious (and possibly slightly insane)
 
Phil12

Phil12

Well-Known Member
LAKid53 said:
While I agree with many of your comments, change solely for the sake of change, especially if not thought carefully but rashly is counter productive and can be harmful to the bottom line. As I've stated several times before, where is New Coke? What did the decision of the Coca Cola Company to update it's core product do to that company? How much did Coke loose on that decision? Good will is a very valuable asset for a company as branded as Coke....or Disney.
Click to expand...
I said nothing about change for the sake of change, you did. I said change for the sake of profits and growing the company!
 
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
Phil12 said:
I said nothing about change for the sake of change, you did. I said change for the sake of profits and growing the company!
Click to expand...

Except that's not what this appears to be. Disney has an IP they purchased that due to an existing contract limits what they can do with that IP, especially in the Florida park. And it's obvious that Iger wants to capitalize on that IP in the parks. But the way to do it is NOT by up an attraction that many agree is perfectly themed and needs no improvement. The idea is nothing more than a cheap and dirty way to get Marvel in the parks...beyond a M&G or merchandise.
 
V

V_L_Raptor

Well-Known Member
Wikkler said:
The rough timeline seems to be:
  • Close ToT
  • Learn iMovie
  • Overlay the GotG over the ghosts in iMovie
  • Open GoT
Seems about right.

When ToT is closed, all DHS will have is Star Tours, Great Movie Ride, Muppets, and Toy Story. RnRC should stay open but Disney doesn't give a flying Groot about capacity.

Does it really not make sense for Hollywood Studios to have more than five rides? A fifth park is unnecessary, but at least make sure you can keep your guests in your parks for the better part of a day.
Click to expand...

Alongside which, as I understand it, DHS will not have a reduced admission price. Better live it up in line, because those are some :arghh: :eek: :depressed: :banghead: expensive rides.
 
BubbaQuest

BubbaQuest

Well-Known Member
ParentsOf4 said:
Because theming matters...
tot-jpg.134929
Click to expand...

And that's my whole point. Nothing in that picture says Twilight Zone. Instead of an abandoned hotel getting hit by lightening, it could be an abandoned hotel that gets hit by space aliens. If I remember correctly the Flash Gordon serials started in the 40s, so Sci-Fi is totally appropriate for the era and the current theming. Instead of being an elevator that drops you into the basement, it could be an elevator that rockets you into the galaxies, or time travel, or whatever and still have a great theme inside and out.

I'm not trying to defend Disney for being cheap here. I too would much rather have a new attraction. I'm just not sure why people are so attached to a non-Disney IP that only exists in a Disney park because it was probably the cheapest one Eisner could find at the time.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Phil12 said:
I said nothing about change for the sake of change, you did. I said change for the sake of profits and growing the company!
Click to expand...
I have no problem with Disney growing the company and making record profits (both of which are happening right now). WDW and the parks in general are doing really well. You seem to be hung up big time on paying for the rights to the Twilight Zone name for the ride. How much are they actually paying? More than they paid for Avatar? Are you against that project too since it's not a Disney IP? I guess Universal parks are doomed to failure too since their parks use licensed IP instead of movies and characters owned in house. You want to talk about merchandise sales, OK. How much does Disney make for selling Twilight Zone merchandise? Nothing? Nope, they are still making money. How much does Universal make selling Harry Potter stuff? They should really consider converting Potterland into an IP they own so they can get 100% of the profit from merchandise sales:confused:
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
I have no problem with Disney growing the company and making record profits (both of which are happening right now). WDW and the parks in general are doing really well. You seem to be hung up big time on paying for the rights to the Twilight Zone name for the ride. How much are they actually paying? More than they paid for Avatar? Are you against that project too since it's not a Disney IP? I guess Universal parks are doomed to failure too since their parks use licensed IP instead of movies and characters owned in house. You want to talk about merchandise sales, OK. How much does Disney make for selling Twilight Zone merchandise? Nothing? Nope, they are still making money. How much does Universal make selling Harry Potter stuff? They should really consider converting Potterland into an IP they own so they can get 100% of the profit from merchandise sales:confused:
Click to expand...
Anyone going on a trip soon and willing to hang around the Tower of Terror gift shop to see what sells? Because if stuff there already sells why shove an IP in there when you can make a new ride and have even more sales at a new shop?
 
Last edited:
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
BubbaQuest said:
And that's my whole point. Nothing in that picture says Twilight Zone. Instead of an abandoned hotel getting hit by lightening, it could be an abandoned hotel that gets hit by space aliens. If I remember correctly the Flash Gordon serials started in the 40s, so Sci-Fi is totally appropriate for the era and the current theming. Instead of being an elevator that drops you into the basement, it could be an elevator that rockets you into the galaxies, or time travel, or whatever and still have a great theme inside and out.

I'm not trying to defend Disney for being cheap here. I too would much rather have a new attraction. I'm just not sure why people are so attached to a non-Disney IP that only exists in a Disney park because it was probably the cheapest one Eisner could find at the time.
Click to expand...

I'm sure paying CBS for the use of Twilight Zone didn't come cheap. Especially such an iconic show like it is and one very popular in syndication.
 
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
GoofGoof said:
I have no problem with Disney growing the company and making record profits (both of which are happening right now). WDW and the parks in general are doing really well. You seem to be hung up big time on paying for the rights to the Twilight Zone name for the ride. How much are they actually paying? More than they paid for Avatar? Are you against that project too since it's not a Disney IP? I guess Universal parks are doomed to failure too since their parks use licensed IP instead of movies and characters owned in house. You want to talk about merchandise sales, OK. How much does Disney make for selling Twilight Zone merchandise? Nothing? Nope, they are still making money. How much does Universal make selling Harry Potter stuff? They should really consider converting Potterland into an IP they own so they can get 100% of the profit from merchandise sales:confused:
Click to expand...

I would love to see what JK would take to part with such a valuable IP that has made her, next to the Queen, the 2nd richest woman in the UK. And someone highly protective of said IP.
 
Wilt Dasney

Wilt Dasney

Well-Known Member
Word from inside the Anaheim Tower is that Imagineering has been visible on-site lately conducting "tests." Existing costumes are also said to have been relocated and replaced with a row of covered costumes. I haven't witnessed any of this, so take it FWIW.
 
LAKid53

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
Mike S said:
Anyone going on a trip soon and willing to hang around the Tower of Terror gift shop to see what sells? All the stuff there is great even though I never bought anything. I just don't buy a lot of merch in general, even at Harry Potter.
Click to expand...

Mostly what I've witnessed are groups of Brazilian teenagers ringing the bell hop bells as they exit the ride. They need to get rid of those damn things or move them behind the counters.
 
Y

YodaMan

Well-Known Member
Wilt Dasney said:
Word from inside the Anaheim Tower is that Imagineering has been visible on-site lately conducting "tests." Existing costumes are also said to have been relocated and replaced with a row of covered costumes. I haven't witnessed any of this, so take it FWIW.
Click to expand...

What costumes? Costumes that the cast members at the attraction wear?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom