No more MGM by end of 2005?

[Disneyfan1981]

If Disney does phase out the MGM name at this park, the amount of work that will have to go into changing all the memorbilia, signage, street/highway signs and other misc things by June 28th will take some Disney Magic....

 

[HauntedPirate]

The impression I'm getting, based on the discussions/things brought up here, plus what I heard from CM's last week, is that "MGM" is history.

I imagine that Disney has been planning for this for a while, and it won't be a problem to change over signage, displays, maps, etc.

 

[CaptainMichael]

MGM did not fund any of the construction of the studios. It was simply a deal so that Disney could use the MGM name and film library in the park. The only money that was transferred in the deal went from Disney to MGM. You are probably thinking of the Tishman corporation which helped alot to fund the construction of Epcot. Thus the reason the Swan and Dolphin hotels were built on Disney property.

That was what I thought. It seems that MGM benefited greatly from the deal, and Disney pretty much got played!

 

[Disneyfan1981]

The impression I'm getting, based on the discussions/things brought up here, plus what I heard from CM's last week, is that "MGM" is history.

I imagine that Disney has been planning for this for a while, and it won't be a problem to change over signage, displays, maps, etc.

If this is true then Disney would have the things in place to change things out but think of the man hours needed to have things changed between closing time at MGM and then opening time at the "New" Disney Studios. Not to mention the money lost by replacing all the merchandising, what happens to the outdated stuff? Destroyed? Its gonna be costly....

 

[CaptainMichael]

Not to mention the money lost by replacing all the merchandising, what happens to the outdated stuff? Destroyed? Its gonna be costly....

Disney puts it on Ebay as rare collector's items and makes tons of cash.

 

[ssidiouss@mac.c]

They should just drop the whole "studio" theme when the MGM deal dies later this year.

They could keep most of the attractions still.. but change the theme of the park totally around.

Lets see.. we have a big magical hat in the center.. that can still be used at the icon of the park since its so cool lookn (especially at night.) But... I would turn that hat upside down and make this park the adult theme park with like an altered universe theme. I would have micky runn'n around with his head on backwards.. i'd have rides that would start out like magic kingdom rides (small world) but then all of a sudden in the middle of the rides the puppets would turn evil then you would shoot down a logfloom etc.

I'd embrace the Twilight Zone tower of Terror theme and make it like one big twilight zone episode where nothing is as it seemed. Id build the Hollywood Tower Resort there too which would look just like the tower of terror but have rooms in it and fake "haunting effects" as you walked around and tried to use the elevators/sleep.

Umm.. :sohappy:

 

[DisneyFreak529]

If the contract is not extended, the Great Movie Ride would need an extensive rehab

Didn't "The Great Movie Ride" jus have a rehab? When we went in Feb 2003 it was closed for rehab.

 

[TheOneVader]

I think the only "MGM" parts that are in the park are on TGMR. Star Tours and Indy are owned by Lucasfilm, Disney owns the Muppets, not sure on the owner of "The Twilight Zone". TGMR is in need of a rehab anyway so there is not much to worry about there. The biggest problem for Disney would b changing all the signage inside and outside of the park which according to another site could run into the millions.

Actually, pretty much everythign MGM (to my understanding, anyway) are on seperate contracts or somthing, so they can stay .That means no rehab to GMR is needed. Also, "The Twilight Zone", believe it or not, is owned by CBS.

 

[peter11435]

That was what I thought. It seems that MGM benefited greatly from the deal, and Disney pretty much got played!

Not really, Disney got access to many great films such as the Wizard of Oz, and a recognizable studio name for very little money. And don't forget look where Disney is today compared to where MGM is.

 

[peter11435]

If this is true then Disney would have the things in place to change things out but think of the man hours needed to have things changed between closing time at MGM and then opening time at the "New" Disney Studios. Not to mention the money lost by replacing all the merchandising, what happens to the outdated stuff? Destroyed? Its gonna be costly....

Well not everything has to happen over night. They could start releasing the new merchandise now as the old sells out, that way there would be very little old left come June 27th. Similarly, the signs and such could start to be changed in the weeks before. Look at when they changed Dixie Landings to Port Orleans Riverside. The change was not official till April 1 but during my trip at the end of Feb they were already repainting signs.

 

[slappy magoo]

That was what I thought. It seems that MGM benefited greatly from the deal, and Disney pretty much got played!

Yeah, they benefitted so greatly, they went belly-up and was bought by a rival studio!

Seriously, I was under the impression that MGM had a higher profile when the park first opened, or at least, it was SUPPOSED to have a higher profile. More props & artifacts for the backstage tour, and perhaps more actual production going on, in exchange for the name usage. But with MGM hanging on by a hair's breadth for almost 20 years, there wasn't much else they could do there. What I always wondered was why no James Bond attraction? Bond was a UA franchise when MGM acquired UA, which means it's now a Sony franchise (Sony, who made the Bond knockoff Never Say Never Again...hakuna mutata, my friends). Maybe the Broccoli estate has too much say in the Bond franchise to make an attraction happen, but you'd think at the very least they might've tried to give LMA a Bond theme.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure "The Twilight Zone" is part of CBS/Viacom.

 

[TheOneVader]

Oh, and I'm pretty sure "The Twilight Zone" is part of CBS/Viacom.

Yea, I already said that.

 

[askmike1]

MGM was basically used for name purposes. How many classic MGM live action films can you remember? Probably a lot. Now think how many Disney classic live action films can you remember? Maybe a few at most. Recently though, MGM hasn't produced any big movies (the last biggest movie last year was Barbershop 2, the year before Legally Blonde 2).

 

[CaptainMichael]

Yeah, they benefitted so greatly, they went belly-up and was bought by a rival studio!

Well, that is their own fault.

 

[General Grizz]

Now think how many Disney classic live action films can you remember? Maybe a few at most.

Hmm.... thinking...

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Treasure Island
Swiss Family Robinson
The gy Dog
Old Yeller
Pollyanna
The Rocketeer
Tron
The Absent-Minded Professor
Follow Me, Boys!
The One and Only, Genuine, Original Family Band
The Ugly Dachshund
The Parent Trap
The Reluctant Dragon
Mary Poppins
Newsies
Song of the South
The Happiest Millionaire
Darby O'Gill and the Little People
Davy Crockett
Bedknobs and Broomsticks
So Dear to My Heart
The Mighty Ducks
The Three Lives of Thomasina
The Apple Dumpling Gang
Escape from Witch Mountain
Homeward Bound
Honey, I Shrunk the Kids
Freaky Friday
In Search of the Castaways
The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes
Babes in Toyland
Pete's Dragon
Summer Magic
That Darn Cat!
The Monkey's Uncle
The Love Bug

.. sorry, I had to.

 

[GymLeaderPhil]

Someone mentioned merchandise and if MGM has to be removed the products will most likely be placed on sale before the deadline. Any remaining will be destroyed. Disney could of course release all the merchandise for free, but that would flood their own market and decrease the value of their goods significantly.

 

[drjny]

I think a lot would have do with Sony. Sony recently bought MGM. If both sides can work it out, it could be the beginning of a great relationship--more than the Studio.

"This could be the beginning of a beautiful relationship"

I just had to add that in.

 

[Captain Chaos]

I am thinking something else about the merchandise... Didn't someone say majority of the merchandise already says Disney Studios and has dropped the MGM? I know some of the merchandise still has MGM on it, but from what I remember in 2004, not as wide spread as once was.

 

[PuertoRekinSam]

Someone mentioned merchandise and if MGM has to be removed the products will most likely be placed on sale before the deadline. Any remaining will be destroyed. Disney could of course release all the merchandise for free, but that would flood their own market and decrease the value of their goods significantly.

2 words- property control.

 

[Moonjoe]

One of the reasons you see less and less of the MGM name and logo on Disney merchandise is purely financial. Every time it is used, they have to pay a royalty to MGM. In order to avoid paying the royalty, the merchandise simply says "Disney Studios". Guests will still get it, and Disney does not have to share the revenue.

So, while the contract may indeed be running out with MGM, the fact that the merchandise has been changing does not necessarily mean Disney wants to drop its affiliation with MGM altogether.