New MARVEL attractions to Disney Parks

[lebeau]

I'm simply saying that it seems Uni isn't spending the money they would be otherwise (or have in the past) to promote Marvel at Uni Orlando which seems odd given the fact that they own the theme park rights to what is currently the biggest franchise around.

I swear, I am not trying to pick on you or even to be argumentative. We all seem to agree on the basic premise that Marvel at WDW seems unlikely in the near future.

But, I think you have a few misconceptions.

1. Universal is promoting Marvel to the same degree they have in the past.
2.The fact that they didn't increase the presence of Marvel in their advertsing duringa time when Harry Potter is the most popular (and profitable) thing in their parks is not surprising and not an indication of their long-term thinking. It's just not a big deal.
3. While The Avengers is a big , hit movie, it is not the biggest franchise around. I don't know what kind of criteria you could use to come to that conclusion.

The reality is, Universal is doing well with the Marvel lisence and will continue business as usual until something upsets the apple cart. Like I said several pages ago, nothing to see here.

 

[lebeau]

Once again, you're minimizing the land to fit your argument. It's still a themed land dedicated to the characters that just happen to be in the biggest movie of the year AND the only place in the country where Little Johnny can meet those characters in person.

Yes, Spider-Man would be a better tie-in, except for the fact that Spider-Man won't be nearly the blockbuster The Avengers is.

I'm not minizing anything. There is barely anything Avengers-related on Super Hero Island. And the stuff that is there is based on the comics, not the movie. There is only one ride that is even remotely related to the movie - a barely themed roller coaster that has been there since 1999. Do you want to base an entire marketing campaign on that?

Or do you base it on the white-hot new land that has been driving your attendance up and selling massive merchandise since it opened?

I'm a Marvel fan too. But I think you are too biased to see this objectively.

 

[Ignohippo]

"I'm not going to spend millions promoting something that I know Disney will be bringing to their parks (Cali) in the near future – that will probably end up being head and shoulders above what I'm offering in my park"

That made me laugh, though. That's one thing UNI doesn't have to worry about. :lol:

Yeah that's why, if you'd post the whole sentence, I included "(if for no other reason it will be newer and will use newer technology)".

I hate to say it, but there's no doubt Disney simply isn't up to Universal Creative's level these days.

 

[Ignohippo]

I'm not minizing anything. There is barely anything Avengers-related on Super Hero Island. And the stuff that is there is based on the comics, not the movie. There is only one ride that is even remotely related to the movie - a barely themed roller coaster that has been there since 1999. Do you want to base an entire marketing campaign on that?

Or do you base it on the white-hot new land that has been driving your attendance up and selling massive merchandise since it opened?

I'm a Marvel fan too. But I think you are too biased to see this objectively.

Yes, if I were paying the licensing fees Uni is, I would absolutely be promoting it. You don't need a ride specifically based on The Avengers – having The Avengers as meet and greet characters and having a land dedicated to Marvel (which, last I looked, The Avengers are a part of) is enough.

And a Marvel campaign wouldn't have to take the place of Potter, it would just be used concurrently and for the summer. Besides, there will be another major push for Potter next year.

 

[lebeau]

Yes, if I were paying the licensing fees Uni is, I would absolutely be promoting it. You don't need a ride specifically based on The Avengers – having The Avengers as meet and greet characters and having a land dedicated to Marvel (which, last I looked, The Avengers are a part of) is enough.

And a Marvel campaign wouldn't have to take the place of Potter, it would just be used concurrently and for the summer. Besides, there will be another major push for Potter next year.

It's not like Universal dropped Marvel from their ads. It's also not like Universal knew Avengers would open as big as it did. The entire industry was taken by surprise by Avengers' record-breaking opening.

You're reading into things too much. It would be like saying that because MiB is not featured in Universal's ads when MiB3 is opening, they must be planning to replace it.

Sometimes, an ad is just an ad.

 

[Lee]

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.

 

[ScoutN]

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.

:sohappy: Finally some rational thought!

 

[lebeau]

Thanks, Lee. I wish that post would fit in my sig!

Final word on the subject? I hope so!

 

[FRC Team 180]

Thanks, Lee. I wish that post would fit in my sig!

Final word on the subject? I hope so!

Don't we all?
These Avengers threads are beginning to get :snore:.

 

[danlb_2000]

I guess I'll have to go elsewhere to find out about the actual contract. I'll put this out there as a "rumor" so feel free to flame it or be sarcastic about it. When the Marvel deal was announced, there was a wide spread rumor that the contract would end in 2012. This was quickly followed by the Universal campaign of "We have them forever and ever!" Anyway, I heard that the contract does in fact end by the end of the year. However, Disney is said to allow Universal to keep the island until they have a replacement (The Transformers). The timetable for this would be about 5 years, after the Harry Potter expansion into the studio park. I thought at first that this would end Universal's exclusivity, but Disney may still have to abide by the contract.

I won't flame or be sarcastic, I will just ask what evidence do you have of the truth of this rumor? Can you point to verifiable sources that support this?

As for the contract, there is no credible evidence that anything exists beyond what was filed with the SEC.

If the contract did run out at the end of the year, I would think that Iger would have brought this up in his latest interviews talking about Marvel in the parks. I also don't see why Universal would have spent the money to re-animate all of the Spiderman video if they were going to have to get rid of the ride in the near future. The HD projectors would make sense since they could be re-used, but no the cost of re-doing all the animation.

 

[menamechris]

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.

I think is statement hits the nail on the head on so many different topics that are discussed here. With reports that Disney's profits are up, there really is no reason for Disney to be doing anything other than what they are doing. Harry Potter didn't seem to affect them too terribly much. They also don't seem at all concerned about the new entertainment offerings Universal is debuting this summer. Times are good for Disney. I think it will be quite some time before Disney needs to be worried about reinvigorating the resort with new offerings given the trends we are seeing....unfortunately...

 

[lebeau]

I think is statement hits the nail on the head on so many different topics that are discussed here. With reports that Disney's profits are up, there really is no reason for Disney to be doing anything other than what they are doing. Harry Potter didn't seem to affect them too terribly much. They also don't seem at all concerned about the new entertainment offerings Universal is debuting this summer. Times are good for Disney. I think it will be quite some time before Disney needs to be worried about reinvigorating the resort with new offerings given the trends we are seeing....unfortunately...

You have just eliminated the need for about 2/3 of the boards. :drevil:

 

[Ignohippo]

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.

Everything Lee says is right on (except that I doubt the price would be anywhere near a billion for just rights east of the Mississippi) ESPECIALLY the part about Disney's Board laughing about making such a deal. I really don't think the Board would authorize any expediter like this unless it was going to be an insanely great deal (which it won't be).

Another thing I would add is that this deal allows Disney to look at Uni's books (while I'm sure quite a bit is protected, it still gives them insights they would not get otherwise) and Disney gets the satisfaction knowing that Uni is making money for them.

In the end, I know from my "insider" at Uni (at least as of six months ago) that Marvel isn't going anywhere. I'm hoping to get an update on that sometime this week but I'm sure nothing has changed.

 

[njDizFan]

Great points Lee. I was in the process of writing a very similar post but thankfully you said it much more succinctly.

The question that has to be asked is WHY. Why would they sink billions into buyiong out this contract? So they can get an attraction 5 years down the road. That just makes no fiscal sense. Like you said the status quo is working fine...for both parties.

 

[Ignohippo]

Great points Lee. I was in the process of writing a very similar post but thankfully you said it much more succinctly.

The question that has to be asked is WHY. Why would they sink billions into buyiong out this contract? So they can get an attraction 5 years down the road. That just makes no fiscal sense. Like you said the status quo is working fine...for both parties.

Hell, they're too damned cheap to even build a MI coaster after all!

 

[MichWolv]

I guess I'll have to go elsewhere to find out about the actual contract. I'll put this out there as a "rumor" so feel free to flame it or be sarcastic about it. When the Marvel deal was announced, there was a wide spread rumor that the contract would end in 2012. This was quickly followed by the Universal campaign of "We have them forever and ever!" Anyway, I heard that the contract does in fact end by the end of the year. However, Disney is said to allow Universal to keep the island until they have a replacement (The Transformers). The timetable for this would be about 5 years, after the Harry Potter expansion into the studio park. I thought at first that this would end Universal's exclusivity, but Disney may still have to abide by the contract.

If you believe the contract filed with the SEC is not the "actual" contract, you are saying that you believe the relevant parties violated securities laws by filing a "fake" contract or only part of the contract. That seems awfully unlikely.

 

[imagineer boy]

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.

Thank you Lee!!! And I hope you're right beacuse I'm with the crowd who REALLY does not want to see a Marvel attraction in the Disney parks.

 

[ChrisFL]

(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...)

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.

 

[Ignohippo]

Thank you Lee!!! And I hope you're right beacuse I'm with the crowd who REALLY does not want to see a Marvel attraction in the Disney parks.

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.

 

[coolbeans14]

Really? Why? I was actually someone really against the Marvel acquisition at first (I think DC would've been a better fit)

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