New MARVEL attractions to Disney Parks

[imagineer boy]

Really? Why? I was actually someone really against the Marvel acquisition at first (I think DC would've been a better fit) but I've really changed that stance since the most recent movies have come out.

For me, while Marvel in Tomorrowland would be a complete travesty, Marvel would fit perfectly at DHS. Streets of America (and an expansion of them) would be a perfect fit for Marvel and much better than what's there now – which is nothing.

Basically what ChrisFL said:

This. People say that WDW is the most attended in the world, ...and they NEED Marvel...:hammer:

Its called rampant fanboy-ism, and its alive and well here and on other boards. In this case its Marvel fanboys whose biggest dream apparently is for Disney to build Marvel attractions at WDW, despite the fact they they have yet to even match the quality of Spiderman at IOA, and their recent efforts at attractions haven't been their best.

And don't get me wrong, I like the Marvel characters. I really just don't feel they belong at disney. Its like Mayonnaise on an Oreo, it just doesn't work.

 

[WDWmazprty]

Oh yeah!

Who knew this thread would go on like it has?!
If only it was in 3D, it's sooo good! :lol:

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Even if the suits don't want to do anything with the current contractual situation, unfortunately, no matter what anyone thinks, the performance of The Avengers, if it continues will force them to change that line of thinking rather quickly.

How so? Money talks.

If The Avengers proves to be a true billion dollar franchise, producing billion dollar sequel, and billions of dollars in merchandising revenue, Disney suits, and no matter what anyone wants to think, the Disney board will take notice, I assure you, that is just good business.

If millions of people demand to have Marvel at Disney World, guess what, Disney will cave. This isn't the Adventurers Club where a couple hundred people are upset the place closed, this is a potential huge revenue stream Disney more than likely wants to capitalize on for the next 10 years. If the people want it bad enough, Disney will give it to them.

Pirates became a billion dollar franchise, first thing Disney did, after counting the money was put those characters in the parks.

Uni has the Marvel characters for now, but who is to say Disney can't raise the licensing fee because of the recent success of the Marvel characters, which Disney could say is causing increased traffic to IoA? Realistically, thats a good argument.


There is a lot to this subject, more than meets the eye.



Jimmy Thick-Was that a Transformers plug?

 

[Ignohippo]

Just out of curiosity, why DC? Bar batman and superman, the characters are nt as well known worldwide. It's also significantly darker(batman)

That's funny. You must be YOUNG!

DC hasn't had the recent success that Marvel has but there was a time when it was the exact opposite as it is now. The Superfriends were all that mattered in my world when I was a kid. It's a shame DC has allowed other characters to languish (like Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Green Arrow, Hawkman, etc.). At least Green Lantern finally got a movie. Too bad it was crap!

Batman was much more kid-friendly due to the 60s tv show, the cartoons of the 70s and early 80s and the Burton movies of the 90s. Besides people who actually read the comics, Batman was seen as a very kid-friendly property before Nolan came along.

It's funny you say DC is darker based only on the most recent Batman movies. Marvel (and especially X-Men) were always known as being the darker version. DC was always very kid-friendly.

 

[GLaDOS]

but who is to say Disney can't raise the licensing fee because of the recent success of the Marvel characters, which Disney could say is causing increased traffic to IoA?

A little thing called a contract.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

This. People say that WDW is the most attended in the world, ...and they NEED Marvel...:hammer:

Its called rampant fanboy-ism, and its alive and well here and on other boards. In this case its Marvel fanboys whose biggest dream apparently is for Disney to build Marvel attractions at WDW, despite the fact they they have yet to even match the quality of Spiderman at IOA, and their recent efforts at attractions haven't been their best.

The success of the Avengers changed everything, and while I will be the first to stick up for Disney in every situation, they were not prepared for this success.

Joe Public who is not aware of these boards, millions of them will, rightfully so, will expect Marvel at Disney parks. As a shareholder, I expect Disney to bring Marvel to the parks. You can't put them in other parks and not Disney World and not expect a backlash.

I hate to admit it, Disney dropped the ball.


Jimmy Thick-It happens.

 

[Ignohippo]

Basically what ChrisFL said:



And don't get me wrong, I like the Marvel characters. I really just don't feel they belong at disney. Its like Mayonnaise on an Oreo, it just doesn't work.

Well, like I said, I used to feel the EXACT same way and you put it absolutely perfectly. I was never a Marvel fan. To me, though, the last few movies have softened my view.

I just think it's a good fit to appeal to the boy segment. Marvel would really round out Disney's offerings at WDW IMO. I'd still like to see Star Wars first though!!!

I'd certainly rather see them sink $500 mil into Marvel than Avatar!

 

[Jimmy Thick]

A little thing called a contract.

And this contract says Disney can't raise licensing fee's on any kind of timetable? I find that extremely hard to believe. Dollars when the contract was originally signed are different from dollars now.



Jimmy Thick-Common sense or cents?

 

[Ignohippo]

A little thing called a contract.

^This.

 

[Jimmy Thick]

Marvel gets a cut of the money Universal makes from the use of the characters in the parks. There is no "licensing fee", and, even if there was, it is not up for renegotiation just because one party decides it wants more money. No way Universal would have agreed to that when IOA was being planned...

A "cut" of the money is usually termed a "licensing fee", but whatever.

So basically, Disney is getting cash from people walking into IoA, be it the visitors going to Potter or Superhero Island regardless?


Jimmy Thick-Now that is interesting?

 

[Ignohippo]

And this contract says Disney can't raise licensing fee's on any kind of timetable? I find that extremely hard to believe. Dollars when the contract was originally signed are different from dollars now.



Jimmy Thick-Common sense or cents?

I need to go back and re-read the contract, but it sounds to me like there was a flat purchase for the rights – not an ongoing "licensing fee" (which is also why there's no wording of expansion in there). Given the state of Marvel at the time, I'm sure they jumped at the possibility for an infusion of cash.

There's also the ongoing purchase of merchandise, which I believe was what Marvel was seeing as their "licensing fee" at the time.

 

[Ignohippo]

A "cut" of the money is usually termed a "licensing fee", but whatever.

So basically, Disney is getting cash from people walking into IoA, be it the visitors going to Potter or Superhero Island regardless?


Jimmy Thick-Now that is interesting?

No. This is a fable. Disney doesn't get any gate money from what I understand. They only get money from merchandise sales.

It was a good deal for Marvel at the time because they were on their last legs, but a horrible deal for the long term (especially now that Marvel is so successful).

 

[Jimmy Thick]

I need to go back and re-read the contract, but it sounds to me like there was a flat purchase for the rights –

If that is really the case, Marvel got hosed.



Jimmy Thick-I just won't go there...

 

[danlb_2000]

Marvel gets a cut of the money Universal makes from the use of the characters in the parks. There is no "licensing fee", and, even if there was, it is not up for renegotiation just because one party decides it wants more money. No way Universal would have agreed to that when IOA was being planned...

Actually there is an annual fee...

"Upon the opening of THE SECOND GATE, and on an annual basis thereafter, MCA will pay a fee of $***. "

and there is a royalty fee on merchandise:

"MCA will pay an annual guaranteed merchandise advance of $*** which will be applied against merchandise royalties from any of its retail outlets calculated at a rate of ***% of wholesale cost. After the annual guaranteed advance is fully earned, the royalty on additional sales will decrease to ***% and will be paid quarterly."

There is nothing in the contract that says these number can be re-negotiated.

All of this is from the contract at the SEC. Might be different in DisDay's "mystery contract".

 

[GLaDOS]

No. This is a fable. Disney doesn't get any gate money from what I understand. They only get money from merchandise sales.

EDIT: Ah, there is an annual fee. Didn't remember that. Can't be all that high though.

Marvel was desperate at the time of the deal, and its very lopsided in Universal's direction.

 

[Lee]

If millions of people demand to have Marvel at Disney World, guess what, Disney will cave.

Demand? You mean millions of people marching on Orlando? Calling and writing? Won't matter.

Disney is making a mint selling Marvel merch around the world. They are satisfied. Not having it it at WDW is meaningless, a drop in the bucket.

The other stuff, rides and characters...also not worth it. The slight, if any, attendance increase wouldn't translate into enough revenue to offset the cost. If anything they would just enjoy guests heading to the other resorts for their Marvel fix.

Disney doesn't do anything just to make guests happy. There has to be profit, and a buyout of the Uni deal just for WDW's sake doesn't offer it.

Also, Disney doesn't have the power to arbitrarily raise any fees on Uni. There are set limits and parameters.

 

[ADP2]

Just for point of clarification for this thread (sorry if it was already mentioned) I wanted to make sure this was true. The contract between Disney and Universal says the characters at IOA cannot be used inside Disney World (or parks east of the Mississippi) other than Universal parks. So, only the characters currently licensed to be used inside IOA are off limits to Disney World. This would include Spiderman, Hulk, Dr. Doom, and Storm Force. Maybe a few others I'm missing. The other Marvel characters are available for Disney to use at WDW. True?

 

[GLaDOS]

Just for point of clarification for this thread (sorry if it was already mentioned) I wanted to make sure this was true. The contract between Disney and Universal says the characters at IOA cannot be used inside Disney World (or parks east of the Mississippi) other than Universal parks. So, only the characters currently licensed to be used inside IOA are off limits to Disney World. This would include Spiderman, Hulk, Dr. Doom, and Storm Force. Maybe a few others I'm missing. The other Marvel characters are available for Disney to use at WDW. True?

Characters in use and their "families" are off limit. Captain America nad Hulk have a restaurant and ride respectively. They're both in "The Avengers" family. Therefore Iron Man, Thor, and SHIELD are off limits. Same with the Fantastic Four family, Spider-man family, and X-Men family. After that, you really don't have anything worthwhile to build an attraction on.

 

[lebeau]

People seem shocked by the terms of the agreement. But you have to remember that Universal and Marvel were not on equal footing at the time of the negotiations. Marvel had nothing to lose.

Remember that at the time the deal was made, Marvel had filed for bankruptcy. They were on their last leg and desperate for cash. They had not yet received the cash infusion from movies that kept them afloat.

Marvel started selling the rights to everything. Every single character they could license to a movie studio, they sold. That's why Disney had to buy back the rights to the Avengers. Marvel didn't have much in the way of movie rights left after the sales.

In this environment, Universal could pretty much dictate terms. Marvel had theme park rights to sell and no one else was bidding for them. If they didn't sell them to Universal, they were leaving money on the table. And that was not something Marvel could afford to do.

This was a great deal for a cash-strapped comic book publisher. They got a shot in the arm and got their characters in a major theme park. But it would be a terrible deal for Disney. Disney would never have agreed to this. They just had to accept it as part of buying Marvel.

This is part of the reason people balked when the purchase was announced. Sure, Marvel has valuable assets. But they had sold the rights to just about everything at the time.

 

[Captain Neo]

Wow....kinda surprised this thread took off like it did.

Might as well toss in my 2 cents...

As for buying Uni out for the sole purpose of being able to use those characters in the Florida parks....not gonna happen. I've been told on numerous occasions that Disney has no intention of trying to change the contract with Uni (Which, as I've been told on more than one occasion by Disney people, does not have an end date.). Mainly because it doesn't make financial sense.

Why? Because at this point Universal has the upper hand in that particular situation. They don't need the money. Comcast is doing very well financially, and is already preparing to dump a substantial sum into the Florida resort in the next few years. They have no reason at all to sell those rights, and thus would set a very high price. (Like if someone wants to buy your favorite collectable. You love it, don't really want to sell it, so you slap an outrageous price on it just to end the process.)

Say Universal slaps a price tag of a billion on it. (That's probably a bit conservative, but just for example...) A billion for the rights, plus another two hundred million to pay for the re-theming of the land in IoA.

If Disney were insane enough to go for it, they would be in the hole by $1.2 billion before they even move one shovel of dirt to build their own attraction, which would likely run to another $200mil.

That's nearly a billion and a half just to build one ride in one park in WDW.

Can anyone make a reasonable case for why they would ever do that? Nope. That's because there is no way to make that work financially. Even if Iger was the type to try that sort of thing, which he isn't, the board would laugh at him and likely throw stuff in his direction. Not to mention what Wall Street would say. It's a laughable idea at best.

Would they like to be able to build a Marvel ride at WDW? Sure. The creative possibilities are endless and it would be a great selling/bragging point. But it simply isn't worth it. Not when they are already the most visited resort in the world. Might Uni get a few thousand more guests this summer because of Avengers? Yeah. Will it be enough to put Disney into a panic mode? Nope.

(Side note: Why is it that the same people that say Disney has nothing to fear from the Potter-effect, also feel that now that Avengers is a hit Disney HAS to get them in the Florida parks. If Potter didn't hurt Disney, why would Avengers? Just wondering...)

Anyhow, Disney doesn't need the Marvel characters in WDW and Universal doesn't need the money from a sale. The status quo is working for both parties. The only place the sort of debate in this thread is taking place is among fans, not in meeting rooms in Orlando and California.

Except for the fact that Harry Potter IS hurting Disney and the fact that Universal is the only place in town with Marvel Land. This will continue to hurt Disney in the future as the Marvel brand grows. Kids don't give a crap about mickey mouse and cinderella anymore its a different world now.