News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

["El Gran Magnifico"]

I beg you to tell me you're not an American citizen. Please.

Born and Raised

 

[tissandtully]

Yep. I take it as a bit of a swipe. A lot of the basis for the State's action was speculated/discussed to be because of the fact Disney entered into the political realm and had no business in telling the State what it should or should not do by way of governing. I'm not making a case either for or against. Simply stating the rationale and prevailing thought.

Now DeSantis wants to express his thoughts by entering the Theme Park realm and giving Disney pointers on how to combat Uni's expansion.

I've seen some bad takes and this is one of them.

 

[tissandtully]

CFTOD exists.

So do Hannah Montana and Miley Cyrus

 

[JKick95]

Maybe you should move to China where this stuff is more encouraged, there's Disney there too.

And Universal

 

[James Alucobond]

Also, a huge part of the inciting incident was that they stopped being so involved by pulling political donations.

 

[Willmark]

Disney isn't going to pay someone because they didn't renew a contract and declined to put her in a TV series.

I don’t think this is the only issue here thought. Sure at the surface levels that’s the reason but there is much more to it than simply that.

That would set a ludicrous precedent.

Of course, the same concern happened with Reedy Creek so never say never I guess.

Agreed, lawsuits can be anything.

 

[Cliff]

It's my hope that Florida's Investigator General continues diving deeper into RCID's and Disney's financials, email databases, tax records, and issued bond dealings.

It's time that the state get to the bottom of everything under the "sunshine" law and FINALLY prove that Disney never did anything wrong over this last decade.

If the state ends this investigation and turns it back on it, then they will deny Disney that beautiful confirmation.

Keep digging Florida! Do it for Disney's best interest! ;-)

 

[UNCgolf]

Shareholders care about revenue, not the Constitution. So even if Disney was on the right side of the issue and the law, a large-enough government can delay longer than management can stay elected.

I'm well aware, but it's just another example of how shortsighted most companies (i.e. management) are. They often make decisions that could torpedo revenue/value down the line solely to pump it up in the short term, because that's what the major shareholders are after.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Remind me again what the First Amendment says?

Try keeping things in context please. Certain people have a habit of taking a snippet of something and twisting it to fit an agenda. Looks like you're one of those people. I do hope you don't make managerial decisions in the same way.

So why don't we try this exercise together and include what you so conveniently excluded.

A lot of the basis for the State's action was speculated/discussed to be because of the fact Disney entered into the political realm and had no business in telling the State what it should or should not do by way of governing.

In case it doesn't pop out to you "was speculated, was discussed" does in no way convey a personal opinion. It's stating a fact. That people interpreted the State's action due to Disney's activism against a position the State held.

But you go ahead and continue showing where reading comprehension is not necessarily a strong point for you.

 

[Willmark]

Where everyone is a victim of cancel culture, but also where you don't own your job and employers can fire you at-will and according to your contract, the hypocrite bubble. "It's not bad until it happens to me."

That’s a bubble that “who” is in through?

You were specific in that it’s “their Super Bowl.”

Who is they?

 

[tissandtully]

It's my hope that Florida's Investigator General continues diving deeper into RCID's and Disney's financials, email databases, tax records, and issued bond dealings.

It's time that the state get to the bottom of everything under the "sunshine" law and FINALLY prove that Disney never did anything wrong over this last decade.

If the state ends this investigation and turns it back on it, then they will deny Disney that beautiful confirmation.

Keep digging Florida! Do it for Disney's best interest! ;-)

still waiting on those public records from the state as requested ya know by the public

 

[tissandtully]

Try keeping things in context please. Certain people have a habit of taking a snippet of something and twisting it to fit an agenda. Looks like you're one of those people. I do hope you don't make managerial decisions in the same way.

So why don't we try this exercise together and include what you so conveniently excluded.



In case it doesn't pop out to you "was speculated, was discussed" does in no way convey an opinion. It's stating a fact. That people interpreted the State's action due to Disney's activism against a position the State held.

But you go ahead and continue showing where reading comprehension is not necessarily a strong point for you.

Discussed/speculated as in the governor wrote a whole book about why he did it, then yes.

 

[tissandtully]

That’s a bubble that “who” is in through?

You were specific in that it’s “their Super Bowl.”

Who is they?

 

[Willmark]

I do?

Your strange reluctance to say what you mean is interesting.

 

[tissandtully]

I do?

Your strange reluctance to say what you mean is interesting.

Curious.

 

[lazyboy97o]

He's lame duck gov, he'll be lucky if he gets to open up a Buc-ee's

He is not alone. A boost in the primary would have been icing on the cake but it was not the underlying motivation, especially for all of the others involved. It’s about being able to unilaterally exert state control as desired in line with a radically expanded view of state and executive power. Listen to what others are saying and look at how it aligns.

 

[tissandtully]

He is not alone. A boost in the primary would have been icing on the cake but it was not the underlying motivation, especially for all of the others involved. It’s about being able to unilaterally exert state control as desired in line with a radically expanded view of state and executive power. Listen to what others are saying and look at how it aligns.

Don't disagree there. They will keep trying.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Don't disagree there. They will keep trying.

Which is exactly what makes this a win. There were no consequences. Sure it wasn’t everything but the lesson is still to keep going.

 

[lentesta]

Try keeping things in context please. Certain people have a habit of taking a snippet of something and twisting it to fit an agenda. Looks like you're one of those people. I do hope you don't make managerial decisions in the same way.

So why don't we try this exercise together and include what you so conveniently excluded.



In case it doesn't pop out to you "was speculated, was discussed" does in no way convey a personal opinion. It's stating a fact. That people interpreted the State's action due to Disney's activism against a position the State held.

But you go ahead and continue showing where reading comprehension is not necessarily a strong point for you.

Humor me here. Are you saying that when you wrote "because of the fact", that the words you wrote immediately after that are not facts but opinion?

 

[Splash4eva]

Looks like the political ploy failed miserably, leaving the government no reason to fight.

Interesting response