Marvel's Next Step

[lebeau]

There wouldn't be a lawsuit, just the threat of one. I doubt that people would really side with uni in a battle against disney.

Really, I would see it as a pretty open and shut case against Disney unless they had a really good reason for blocking the proposal. And the terms of the agreement really favor Universal.

It's hard for me to imagine something Uni would want to build that Disney could reasonably object to. So unless Uni did something crazy with the characters, I'm fairly certain Uni would take them to court and win. And Disney would be portrayed very badly in the press to boot.

Meanwhile, Universal grabs free headlines for their parks and gets portrayed as the underdogs against the big bully mouse.

 

[roadtripper]

Disney has stated that they will not fight Uni on issues that are within the contract bounds. Since they are now receiving money from Uni's use of Marvel it is in their interests to allow Uni to have continued success using existing Marvel charactersalready in use at the park. Disney will focus on other Marvel characters, and they are able to use almost any character they want globally in any way. While Uni may rob some business from Disney they are still getting paid for that business, so it's a win-win.

 

[roadtripper]

Just remembered reading a few weeks ago that Blackstone Group, who bought Uni and Sea World a couple of years back, were looking to find a buyer for Universal Orlando. They helped finance Harry Potter World and now the numbers for Uni are better than ever. Their investment has matured and they want out while the gettin' is good. Perhaps they will somehow work a backdoor deal with Disney to sell the Marvel rights that Uni has and Uni will have 10 more years or so? They are known for selling parts of companies they have acquired to make money. They also brokerage deals between companies that makes them millions of dollars at a time. Maybe this is what someone else was referring to when they mentioned Disney buying out Marvel rights completely?

 

[lebeau]

Just remembered reading a few weeks ago that Blackstone Group, who bought Uni and Sea World a couple of years back, were looking to find a buyer for Universal Orlando. They helped finance Harry Potter World and now the numbers for Uni are better than ever. Their investment has matured and they want out while the gettin' is good. Perhaps they will somehow work a backdoor deal with Disney to sell the Marvel rights that Uni has and Uni will have 10 more years or so? They are known for selling parts of companies they have acquired to make money. They also brokerage deals between companies that makes them millions of dollars at a time. Maybe this is what someone else was referring to when they mentioned Disney buying out Marvel rights completely?

Blackstone can't just secretly sell Disney the rights out from under Universal's noses.

Realistically, Disney's purchase of Marvel will have little to no impact on the state of Marvel properties at Orlando theme parks for the foreseeable future. Neither Universal nor Disney has much incentive to seek out a change. They both have bigger fish to fry right now.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I actually find that hard to believe. It would have had to have been a very recent development given that Disney purchased Marvel in Aug of 2009.

Actually, the purchase was announced then. Disney did not legally acquired Marvel until the end of the year.

Uni is not owned or part of merlin

I am not really sure what this comment has to do with anything I said.

Disney will focus on other Marvel characters, and they are able to use almost any character they want globally in any way.

The global use may well be limited, at least in some respects, to just Disneyland Resort, Hong Kong Disneyland and Shanghai Disneyland. Why would Universal not want some sort of exclusivity for Spider-Man in Japan? And I doubt Merlin would want anybody else opening Marvel attractions near theirs in London.

 

[roadtripper]

That's why I threw in the "almost any character" on the global uses.

Blackstone wouldn't secretly sell out the rights. As far as I know they own Universal and are looking for buyers. They could choose to sell off the rights with the understanding that Uni retains them for a period of ten years... who knows? Money always talks nowadays.

Here's an article from the beloved Orlando Sentinel describing some of the repercussions from Blackstone selling their stake.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...roup-universal-orlando-resort-wizarding-world

 

[Captain Neo]

I actually find that hard to believe. It would have had to have been a very recent development given that Disney purchased Marvel in Aug of 2009.

I just don't see Uni putting together an Iron Man ride while they were rolling out HP and planning the upcoming HP expansion.

Any other details on this? Can anyone corroborate?

The Iron Man ride was being planned for a later date but they were in the early development phase for it. This supposedly happened in early 2010 after Iron Man proved to be a hit and the sequel was on the way.

 

[Krack]

The Iron Man ride was being planned for a later date but they were in the early development phase for it. This supposedly happened in early 2010 after Iron Man proved to be a hit and the sequel was on the way.

There is nothing reflected in the contract that says Disney/Marvel can flat out prevent Universal from putting an Iron Man attraction on that island. They can prevent Universal from using the likeness of Robert Downey Jr (and other actors). They can probably prevent Universal from using aspects of the character created first in the film (such as rebooting the character's origin to the current Middle East wars). But they can't just say "You can't make an Iron Man attraction." I'm actually kind of surprised Universal hasn't already done so, but my guess is they poured all available money into the Harry Potter land.

 

[flavious27]

Really, I would see it as a pretty open and shut case against Disney unless they had a really good reason for blocking the proposal. And the terms of the agreement really favor Universal.

It's hard for me to imagine something Uni would want to build that Disney could reasonably object to. So unless Uni did something crazy with the characters, I'm fairly certain Uni would take them to court and win. And Disney would be portrayed very badly in the press to boot.

Meanwhile, Universal grabs free headlines for their parks and gets portrayed as the underdogs against the big bully mouse.

I don't see disney blocking it outright, they will just drag their feet. Uni can try to sue them for delaying their development, but the case won't come to a conclusion. Just the threat of a lawsuit will grease the gears.

The media will play everyone off as an underdog to mickey, just waiting for an editorial of mickey beating up lady liberty after orlando's tourism bureau claims that orlando is more visited then nyc. Now that is a couple of threads worth of comments.

 

[AEfx]

Universal would be stupid to add any more Marvel to their parks, which is why they won't (they were already clearing the shelves of Marvel merch at USH back last spring).

It makes absolutely no sense at this point for them to add anything Marvel because they would be promotion Disney characters. They may not be bailing on the Marvel concepts yet, but they certainly won't be looking to get deeper in.

 

[flavious27]

Blackstone can't just secretly sell Disney the rights out from under Universal's noses.

Realistically, Disney's purchase of Marvel will have little to no impact on the state of Marvel properties at Orlando theme parks for the foreseeable future. Neither Universal nor Disney has much incentive to seek out a change. They both have bigger fish to fry right now.

Agreed, blackstone owns half of uni, but uni orl's management would need to approve of this.

I am not really sure what this comment has to do with anything I said.

This is what you posted:

We need to dig up the contract between Marvel and Merlin Entertainments. Marvel Super Heros 4D at Madame Tussauds London has not even been open for a year. I'm curious as to when the deal was actually made and how much it gives Merlin in terms of length and exclusivity.

As I said, Uni Orl is not owned or a part of merlin. Beyond that, uni orl was owned by universal studios and rank at the time the contract was signed.

 

[Krack]

Universal would be stupid to add any more Marvel to their parks, which is why they won't (they were already clearing the shelves of Marvel merch at USH back last spring).

It makes absolutely no sense at this point for them to add anything Marvel because they would be promotion Disney characters. They may not be bailing on the Marvel concepts yet, but they certainly won't be looking to get deeper in.

It works the other way around. Every film Disney puts out makes kids want to see the Marvel characters more ... and they have to go to Universal to do it (at least on the east coast). Every film (or comic book, or game, or tv show, or cartoon) makes Universal's Marvel Superhero Island more valuable.

 

[Krack]

As I said, Uni Orl is not owned or a part of merlin. Beyond that, uni orl was owned by universal studios and rank at the time the contract was signed.

He wants to know what the Merlin contract says to see if they have any exclusivity in the European market. It has nothing to do with Universal. Why do you keep bringing it up?

 

[AEfx]

It works the other way around. Every film Disney puts out makes kids want to see the Marvel characters more ... and they have to go to Universal to do it (at least on the east coast). Every film (or comic book, or game, or tv show, or cartoon) makes Universal's Marvel Superhero Island more valuable.

Yeah, I just don't see that playing out that way.

It's like Spiderman. It's an amazing ride. But I don't think people come to IOA because it's a Spiderman ride, it's because it's an amazing attraction that happens to be themed on Spiderman.

And, really, that's the true extent of Marvel at Uni. The rest of the rides could essentially be rethemed overnight with different signage.

It just doesn't make sense for UO to build some 100M Iron Man attraction when one way or another, it's not going to last forever. At some point Universal will get rid of that section - retheme Spidey to Transformers, and as I said, the other attractions would follow suit pretty easily in that area.

It's just not smart to make a long-term investment in a property that they don't own.

It will be interesting to see what this summer does to comic book films in general. It's such an off year - we have Thor and Green Lantern, which are based on C-level characters, and at least one of them is already giving off the "Catwoman" vibe. If either one of them bombs (i.e. doesn't make 100M in the first few breaths), we are going to see a downturn of comic book films in general. Next year we have the final Nolan Batman installment, but I'll be surprised to see what ends up being penciled in for 2013 after this summer's tallies are done.

 

[flavious27]

He wants to know what the Merlin contract says to see if they have any exclusivity in the European market. It has nothing to do with Universal. Why do you keep bringing it up?

Sorry, misread what he was asking. Wouldn't the contract for Marvel Super Heroes 4D been signed between disney and merlin anyway because the announcement of super hero 4d was announced after marvel was purchased.

Along with that DLP's CEO mentioned last year of having DLP's 3rd gate being a marvel/superhero park. Disney would not have signed away the rights to marvel in europe in march of 2010 and have dlp's ceo talking about using that IP in September of 2010.

 

[flavious27]

It works the other way around. Every film Disney puts out makes kids want to see the Marvel characters more ... and they have to go to Universal to do it (at least on the east coast). Every film (or comic book, or game, or tv show, or cartoon) makes Universal's Marvel Superhero Island more valuable.

Rebooting spiderman 10 years after the original, with two other movies in the middle, is going to cheapen the brand. X Men first class is a joke for how it messes with the canon of the last films, along with storm not being in the newest film so that ride won't get any extra pr. the hulk ride hasn't been rebuilt 3 times in the last decade. I don't think the F4 will have a new movie made by Fox, nor would Disney buyout the rights and not be able to use that IP in the parks.

Marvel Entertainment was able to help with the PR for IOA in the past decade, but I don't see it happened in the future with the current lineup of attractions.

 

[misterID]

Yeah, I just don't see that playing out that way.

It's like Spiderman. It's an amazing ride. But I don't think people come to IOA because it's a Spiderman ride, it's because it's an amazing attraction that happens to be themed on Spiderman.

And, really, that's the true extent of Marvel at Uni. The rest of the rides could essentially be rethemed overnight with different signage.

It just doesn't make sense for UO to build some 100M Iron Man attraction when one way or another, it's not going to last forever. At some point Universal will get rid of that section - retheme Spidey to Transformers, and as I said, the other attractions would follow suit pretty easily in that area.

It's just not smart to make a long-term investment in a property that they don't own.

It will be interesting to see what this summer does to comic book films in general. It's such an off year - we have Thor and Green Lantern, which are based on C-level characters, and at least one of them is already giving off the "Catwoman" vibe. If either one of them bombs (i.e. doesn't make 100M in the first few breaths), we are going to see a downturn of comic book films in general. Next year we have the final Nolan Batman installment, but I'll be surprised to see what ends up being penciled in for 2013 after this summer's tallies are done.

Uni never owned Marvel anyway, so they're not losing anything. A new Iron Man ride would bring people in. Marvel Universe will basically be around forever, there's no shelf life to it. The rides are based more on the comics than the movies, anyway. Anything that brings people into UNI is a good thing for them.

And Thor is a hit. There's no chance of it being a bomb. And, I'm sorry, but one bad comic film isn't going to cripple the Comic book-movie landscape. There have already been plenty of bombs, and comic book films are still surviving pretty darn well. Also, Marvel and DC comics don't just revolve around Superheros.

 

[DVCOwner]

Here is the point that I would like to make. Disney is sometimes lacking boy appeal. For my young granddaughter there is always something Disney I can buy for her. For my grandson this the choices are usually limited to “Cars”. Disney could make the Marvel Brand into the thing that little boys want to do at the parks, see the movies and buy the toys (action figures would be the big one). If Disney is going to get the most out of Marvel they have to get it into the parks some way. If that requires buying out the contract with Universal, then so be it. I can remember back years ago when I took my 5 year old son to Walt Disney World; all he wanted to see was the “Ninja Turtles” and they were not a Disney brand.

 

[Captain Chaos]

Yeah, I just don't see that playing out that way.

It's like Spiderman. It's an amazing ride. But I don't think people come to IOA because it's a Spiderman ride, it's because it's an amazing attraction that happens to be themed on Spiderman.

And, really, that's the true extent of Marvel at Uni. The rest of the rides could essentially be rethemed overnight with different signage.

It just doesn't make sense for UO to build some 100M Iron Man attraction when one way or another, it's not going to last forever. At some point Universal will get rid of that section - retheme Spidey to Transformers, and as I said, the other attractions would follow suit pretty easily in that area.

It's just not smart to make a long-term investment in a property that they don't own.

It will be interesting to see what this summer does to comic book films in general. It's such an off year - we have Thor and Green Lantern, which are based on C-level characters, and at least one of them is already giving off the "Catwoman" vibe. If either one of them bombs (i.e. doesn't make 100M in the first few breaths), we are going to see a downturn of comic book films in general. Next year we have the final Nolan Batman installment, but I'll be surprised to see what ends up being penciled in for 2013 after this summer's tallies are done.

AE, Thor has made 145 million so far... I suspect Green Lantern will make over 100 million, so will Captain America.... And Six Flags Great Adventure The Green Lantern stand up coaster is pretty sweet!!!!!

 

[ChrisM]

AE, Thor has made 145 million so far... I suspect Green Lantern will make over 100 million, so will Captain America....

"Thor" has made almost $400 million worldwide so far.