horaceluke
Member
Reading through it says either party can terminate the contract so with enough money disney can do what they want surely
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
New MARVEL attractions to Disney Parks
- Thread starter yipikyer
- Start date
Enchantâmes
Active Member
Here is an example of like half of the threads on WDWmagic lately:
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
This Marvel sharing situation between TWDC & Uni is a double edged sword, make no mistake. A great deal of posts claim Uni is holding all of the cards. They have no incentive to make the deal, etc, etc.
I understand what you're saying, but I have to disagree with you on a few points.
Royalties
For every piece of Marvel merch sold at Uni, Disney gets the licensing royalty. Eventually, Uni is going to get fed up with watching their licensing fees go across town to their competition.
I do think that eventually, Uni will want to replace the marvel characters in their parks with properties that they can fully exploit, financially (and logistically - see oversight below).
Brand Confusion
Ever since Disney purchased Marvel, you could walk into the Contemporary shop or the shop at the Pop Century or World of Disney down in DTD or Disney's online website....and buy Marvel gear, including avenger gear. As already discussed in this thread, I do think there's some brand confusion. That's not a good thing for most businesses.
Oversight
This has been discussed here in the past...but Disney has the right, as per the licensing agreement, to audit Uni's books associated with licensing royalties. In most cases, it's not that big of a deal (plenty of competitors pay licensing fees to one another)...but as soon as Disney's relationship with Uni turns contentious or litigious, it could get uncomfortable. For an example of how a licensing partner/competitor relationship turned ugly fast, look no farther than Apple v Samsung.
In addition, last time I read the agreement, Disney has oversight over any new properties developed in the Marvel universe, at Uni. We all know Disney will never agree to a new marvel attraction at Uni....so uni is stuck with whatever they currently have. They can do a refurb, but that's about it. At some point, Uni's going to want to breathe life into the non-hp part of IOA.
RSoxNo1 had a very good point in highlighting that Uni has a price in mind for this. I agree 100%. You don't sell a property when it's worthless. You try to sell it when it's value is greatest. That might very well be right now - especially with the Avengers doing as well as it is. It really depends on whether Iger wants to pull out the money clip.
Personally, I think the very micro-second that Uni has a viable plan to replace Marvel in it's parks, it will open negotiations with Disney....and make a clean break from Marvel.
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
well, actually, the interesting point is that this contract stipulation we're discussing has a direct bearing on the possibility that Disney would, someday, buy Marvel. I'm sure most licensing agreements are designed with non-compete clauses....and perhaps the agreement was to protect Uni from any entity purchasing Marvel.
But whoever drew up the original contract had this exact scenario in mind....
Actually, whoever drew up the contract wanted to make sure Marvel couldn't open it's own park and couldn't license its characters to Disney, Six Flags, Busch, or anybody else. It wasn't a purchase they were worried about -- they just wanted to make clear that their license was exclusive for a geographic area. Pretty standard in any similar licensing agreement. Marvel did well not to give up the theme park rights west of the Mississippi.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
I posted this on another site, but thought it appropriate for here:
The problem is that almost everyone is over-estimating Disney's desire to open Marvel attractions at WDW.
Disney has 4 other resorts to worry about: Anaheim, Paris, Hong Kong and Shanghai (Tokyo doesn't really count)
Plus, let's all take a deep breath and realize....Disney DIDN'T buy Marvel for the theme park rights. They bought it for the movie ticket sales, DVD and Blu-Ray sales and merchandise.
Of course, they will have plans to develop attractions...because practically EVERY Disney franchise had been through WDI's thought processes on making an attraction. 90% of them don't ever happen.
I won't be surprised at all if we see a Marvel attraction open in Shanghai, and Disney Studios Paris, but beyond that, I think everyone has their spiderman underoos in a twist for something that isn't happening at WDW.
The problem is that almost everyone is over-estimating Disney's desire to open Marvel attractions at WDW.
Disney has 4 other resorts to worry about: Anaheim, Paris, Hong Kong and Shanghai (Tokyo doesn't really count)
Plus, let's all take a deep breath and realize....Disney DIDN'T buy Marvel for the theme park rights. They bought it for the movie ticket sales, DVD and Blu-Ray sales and merchandise.
Of course, they will have plans to develop attractions...because practically EVERY Disney franchise had been through WDI's thought processes on making an attraction. 90% of them don't ever happen.
I won't be surprised at all if we see a Marvel attraction open in Shanghai, and Disney Studios Paris, but beyond that, I think everyone has their spiderman underoos in a twist for something that isn't happening at WDW.
PirateFrank
Well-Known Member
Um that's pretty much what I alluded to...Theme park rights is implied with my use of the phrase purchase...there's language in the contract dealing with purchase/transferability of the rights ....but yes, the other concern is to make sure marvel didn't under cut universal's exclusivity...
Captain Neo
Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The money is going to Marvel Entertainment, not Walt Disney World. That makes for plenty of difference with the way The Walt Disney Company is structured. It's like suggesting that Comcast will stop paying to carry Disney channels because now Comcast and Disney compete in theme parks.
This was addressed back when the purchase was happening. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts is not allowed anywhere near Universal Orlando Resort's books
JEANYLASER
Well-Known Member
thanks for the update! very interesting!
jcs4evas1298
Member
This comparison is simply not true. Disney DOES own Marvel, and therefor DOES benefit from Marvel royalties. Comcast can stop carrying Disney all they want, at their own detriment, but seeing as how Verizon is whooping up on Comcast in many new markets, Comcast isnt dumb enough to stop carrying Disney owned channels just to save a little notoriety from their theme park competition.
The notion that Disney making royalties off Marvel merch doesn't matter, and being any anything like Comcast carrying Disney's channels, is nonsense.
|Q|
Active Member
This situation is awkward. I'd love to see a Savage land from the Marvel Universe instead DinoLand USA. You could have dinosaurs without the time trave gimmick.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Land
Q
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Land
Q
HenryMystic
Well-Known Member
Universal was and still is paying royalties to Marvel. Disney Co. just happens to own Marvel now. Nothing really changed.
Now, giving the rights and guests to a competing theme park is completely different. Unless the price is very very right.
1 hurts Uni, the other is status quo.
Yes, Disney does want the Marvel characters in their Florida parks. They are waiting for the contract to expire. The Transformers was designed as a replacement for Spider-Man, give it another 5 years. Oh here comes the SEC filing again - not the contract. Deadline Hollywood had to find Universal insiders who thought they knew something about the contract, but very few have actually seen it. According to the source, Universal is only allowed to use certain characters. They will not be allowed to add any more Marvel attractions, so no Avengers ride at Universal. If you don't believe me, take it up with Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood. She knows more about the industry than Disney boards. 
Skip
Well-Known Member
Yes, Disney does want the Marvel characters in their Florida parks. They are waiting for the contract to expire. The Transformers was designed as a replacement for Spider-Man, give it another 5 years. Oh here comes the SEC filing again - not the contract. Deadline Hollywood had to find Universal insiders who thought they knew something about the contract, but very few have actually seen it. According to the source, Universal is only allowed to use certain characters. They will not be allowed to add any more Marvel attractions, so no Avengers ride at Universal. If you don't believe me, take it up with Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood. She knows more about the industry than Disney boards.
Oh good, you're back. Ready for round II?
The contract is perpetual, it does not expire - it says so in the publicly filed contract. Guess what - the SEC filing IS the real contract whether you'd like to recognize it or not. It's legally required to be there, and if there was a "secret" contract like you suggest Universal and Marvel would have a lot of explaining to do.
Universal is allowed to use any character that they are currently using in the Island, PLUS any characters contained in that character's family (i.e. Captain America Diner/Hulk Coaster --> ALL AVENGERS). What DOES remain to be seen is whether or not Universal can build new attractions - i.e., to what degree does "reasonable approval" allow Disney to bar new marvel proposals for Universal parks?
I guess I will take it up with Nikke Finke, because she is wrong and clearly has not read the contract. (You have a link, by the way? I actually am interested. Wouldn't mind seeing that book you allegedly published, either.) Plenty of people who have been proven to be time and time again correct in these matters have already had their say - and they've admitted that Universal is the one holding the cards here. Not to mention, again - we've all seen the contract... and Iger has even admitted VERY RECENTLY they can't bring Marvel attractions to WDW, only the other resorts.
Move along, troll.
EDIT: Forgot to add, while Transformers does have some similarities in Spider-Man in both ride system and special effects (they both have a water spray effect and fire effect) does not mean Transformers is designed for Spider-Man's space - the current Transformers take advantage of actual functioning elevators that are not possible in the Spider-Man building. I'm not saying it'd be impossible to Transformers into that space... it could probably be done with some significant tweaking, but it isn't a sign Spider-Man's leaving. They literally just completely upgraded it to great acclaim. It's one of the centerpieces of their 2012 marketing campaign.
Disneyfan_76
Well-Known Member
In the magic kingdom, yes, I think most would be very upset. At hollywood studios, not so much. I think in the right setting it could be a very good fit in the parks. Just as long as they don't "pixar" it into every park and ride.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
I have seen this come up a few times and it seems to be a confusion regarding the Singapore version of the attraction. Transformers was designed for Universal Studios Hollywood but built first at Universal Studios Singapore. To save on costs, the Singapore version of the attraction maintained the track layout which was created to fit into the space constraints of Hollywood.
Somehow this seems to have been twisted into the notion that, fearing Disney taking back the Marvel characters, Transformers was designed to conform with the existing Spider-Man attractions.
Cosmic Commando
Well-Known Member
Right. The lawyers must love it. The problem is that it was a contract between a comic book company and a theme park company that turned into a contract between a theme park company and a theme park company. All of the language in the contract used to basically mean, "Don't make any deals with anyone else". Now, all of a sudden, there's room for interpretation.
I'm doing this from memory, but one of the interesting things that I haven't heard mentioned from the contract is that the Marvel characters used at IoA cannot be "more than an incidental part" of attractions at other theme parks. Holy cow is that ripe for interpretation! I believe that Disney could, for example, digitally insert Spider-Man as the caddy during the golf scene in Soarin' with no penalty.