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

[celluloid]

I don’t think you have an agenda. That wasn’t directed at you and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with us disagreeing on this topic. There are many things we agree on, doesn’t have to 100%. We can agree to disagree on how much of a conclusion can be drawn by a few films over a very limited period. You are assuming the only reason Disney animated features under performed was this conflict with DeSantis but I think it’s hard to place all of the blame on that. I don’t disagree they didn‘t have their best year, but other Disney movies did fine. If it’s a boycott that’s causing the decline are people really splitting hairs and only boycotting animated films? That to me seems like a stretch. We will see as time goes on.

Oh don't get.me wrong. I don't think it was the conflict with Desantis that caused the animated films to severely underperform. I think it is reasons of similar political ideologies to the one that happens to be with Desantis too.

I appreciate and enjoy the respectful conversation.

 

[GoofGoof]

Oh don't get.me wrong. I don't think it was the conflict with Desantis that caused the animated films to severely underperform. I think it is reasons of similar political ideologies to the one that happens to be with Desantis too.

I appreciate and enjoy the respectful conversation.

I go with the simpler explanation that they were just average films, but it’s too soon to know either way.

 

[celluloid]

I go with the simpler explanation that they were just average films, but it’s too soon to know either way.

I have never seen such an average Disney film do so poorly. Like Mars Needs Moms poorly with Strange World. Them being meh films did not help.


And as good as Minions: Rise of Gru was, it was not exactly Citizen Kane. So there are direct comparisons.

 

[UNCgolf]

I have never seen such an average Disney film do so poorly. Like Mars Needs Moms poorly with Strange World. Them being meh films did not help.


And as good as Minions: Rise of Gru was, it was not exactly Citizen Kane. So there are direct comparisons.

I haven't seen Strange World, but I think part of the problem with it was that it had almost no marketing. I'd never even heard of it until a week before it was released when I finally saw one ad somewhere, and I never saw another.

Lightyear seemed to have more marketing.

 

[celluloid]

I haven't seen Strange World, but I think part of the problem with it was that it had almost no marketing. I'd never even heard of it until a week before it was released when I finally saw one ad somewhere, and I never saw another.

Lightyear seemed to have more marketing.

It was teased and marketed early on. After political concerns and the character traits and content within the movie came.to.limeligjt it suddenly ceased completely.

Same issue though, why would a company suddenly stop marketing a movie that was their big Thanksgiving and Christmas time release?

The marketing argument never makes sense. It's an apologist take. People take kids to movies Thanksgiving and Christmas time and look to what they can go see.

"M3GAN", a PG13 AI slasher flick was not marketed with a budget like Strange World and more than doubled it's domestic performance alone so far.

 

[mikejs78]

Going off memory here, but it is community development districts that require unanimous approval. Without checking, the state run districts may be able to happen without that level of approval. I’m doubtful even something like the North Broward Health District would have ever achieved that high bar.

The difference between Reedy Creek though and something like Broward Health District is the ability to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes. I believe it was @GoofGoof who did the research and found that there are no state controlled districts with the power to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes, which is where landowner or voter approval might be required.

So - the question is, does the state have that power?

 

[mikejs78]

why would a company suddenly stop marketing a movie that was their big Thanksgiving and Christmas time release?

Because Chapek was an idiot.

 

[mikejs78]

People take kids to movies Thanksgiving and Christmas time and look to what they can go see.

That hasn't been the case since 2019.

 

[celluloid]

That hasn't been the case since 2019.

So Puss' n' Boots magically changed the holiday game when it cameout a few weeks later? Again, direct evidence to the contrary. Your post is not true.

 

[GoofGoof]

The difference between Reedy Creek though and something like Broward Health District is the ability to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes. I believe it was @GoofGoof who did the research and found that there are no state controlled districts with the power to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes, which is where landowner or voter approval might be required.

So - the question is, does the state have that power?

Yeah. Out of all of the special districts in FL currently where the Governor appoints the board and they also have taxing authority all that I checked have clauses which require the board to be selected from land owners of the district. In those cases landowners can apply to be board members and then the best qualified is appointed. Probably done to avoid the costs and time needed to run elections. If the Governor‘s talking points become the “actual plan” it will be the first time a special district with taxing authority also has Government appointed board members from outside the district.

 

[flynnibus]

The marketing argument never makes sense. It's an apologist take. People take kids to movies Thanksgiving and Christmas time and look to what they can go see.

Strange worlds was abnormally bad… like no one knew what this even was. Calling it out in this example is not apologist. It legitimately was abnormal

 

[drnilescrane]

Strange worlds was abnormally bad… like no one knew what this even was. Calling it out in this example is not apologist. It legitimately was abnormal

Because the movie tested poorly. (I also thought it was bad, but that’s beside the point)

Do you spend another $100m throwing good after bad, or do you throw in the towel and take the write down?

Especially when this is peak Chapek/McCarthy and they’ll let the Studios segment take the loss to give cheap content to D+

 

[drnilescrane]

I’ll point out as well they actually did market Treasure Planet up through the first weekend, complete with walk around characters in the parks, and that didn’t save that movie.

I hate the marketing argument, it’s such a cop out. Audiences aren’t dumb, they’ll find a good movie.

 

[GoofGoof]

Strange worlds was abnormally bad… like no one knew what this even was. Calling it out in this example is not apologist. It legitimately was abnormal

Because the movie tested poorly. (I also thought it was bad, but that’s beside the point)

Do you spend another $100m throwing good after bad, or do you throw in the towel and take the write down?

Especially when this is peak Chapek/McCarthy and they’ll let the Studios segment take the loss to give cheap content to D+

Yeah, this is my take on it too. They were not great movies and they didn’t market them very heavily. Lightyear did get some more marketing but not a full court press. So if someone wants to make the argument that the reason they tested poorly and ultimately received little marketing help was because of a political boycott then maybe that’s more plausible but impossible to quantify too.

 

[drnilescrane]

Yeah, this is my take on it too. They were not great movies and they didn’t market them very heavily. Lightyear did get some more marketing but not a full court press. So if someone wants to make the argument that the reason they tested poorly and ultimately received little marketing help was because of a political boycott then maybe that’s more plausible but impossible to quantify too.

I know it’s easy to make everything politics these days, but it’s not like Disney’s never been boycotted in the past by some fringe group upset at them.

I think the truth is a bit more nuanced - that Disney’s brand has been damaged severely over the last three years and people generally are less willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. The company is seen as self serving and untrustworthy by a broad cross section of the population.

 

[celluloid]

I think people need to seperate the idea of a true Boycott zero tolerance situation to brand distaste and apathy/losing loyalty. As drnilescrane pointed out, its more akin to the lack of trust in the brand, which is not subjective, it is fact, as the reports and metrics of business has showed and why Iger stated he returned. The films and other projects' lack of success have had a part played by that.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The difference between Reedy Creek though and something like Broward Health District is the ability to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes. I believe it was @GoofGoof who did the research and found that there are no state controlled districts with the power to raise revenue via ad valorem taxes, which is where landowner or voter approval might be required.

So - the question is, does the state have that power?

I’m a bit under the weather right now so I may be missing it, but I don’t see that limitation in the state constitution. There is a prohibition on the state assessing ad valorem taxes. Ignorantly summing it has not been answered in the constitution or prior cases, I think the questions are whether or not a special district, which is considered a form of local government, can also be considered the state and if so at what threshold does that duality occur?

I imagine the argument would be that supervisors are appointed but otherwise independent. Throw in provisions that they cannot be fired at will by the governor and you help solidify that independence. Staggering terms to exceed and overlap the governor’s would help that argument, saying they’re not all appointed by one person (except that first time that really matters in this case). Then, if necessary, you could throw in a minority of elected seats to provide representation along with those “independent“ appointees who could be persuaded by the elected supervisors.

 

[mikejs78]

I’m a bit under the weather right now so I may be missing it, but I don’t see that limitation in the state constitution. There is a prohibition on the state assessing ad valorem taxes. Ignorantly summing it has not been answered in the constitution or prior cases, I think the questions are whether or not a special district, which is considered a form of local government, can also be considered the state and if so at what threshold does that duality occur?

I imagine the argument would be that supervisors are appointed but otherwise independent. Throw in provisions that they cannot be fired at will by the governor and you help solidify that independence. Staggering terms to exceed and overlap the governor’s would help that argument, saying they’re not all appointed by one person (except that first time that really matters in this case). Then, if necessary, you could throw in a minority of elected seats to provide representation along with those “independent“ appointees who could be persuaded by the elected supervisors.

Hope you feel better soon.

Doesn't the FL constitution give the Governor pretty broad powers to remove anyone who holds an office in the state? If so a provision that they cannot be fired would possibly be unconstitutional, because as we've seen, DeSantis can pretty much make up a reason to fire anyone. If that's the case, then this might be considered the state implementing ad valorem taxes?

Also, Article V, Section 9 of the FL constitution lays out the limits for ad valorem taxes, and this clause caught my eye:

and for all other special districts a millage authorized by law approved by vote of the electors who are owners of freeholds therein not wholly exempt from taxation.

If this is a new district, then I think that they would have to have a vote to tax Disney at all. If they are amending the existing district's charter, then maybe they can keep the current tax structure there, but I think that's even more of a tangled process given how the Reedy Creek act was written.

 

[GoofGoof]

I know it’s easy to make everything politics these days, but it’s not like Disney’s never been boycotted in the past by some fringe group upset at them.

I think the truth is a bit more nuanced - that Disney’s brand has been damaged severely over the last three years and people generally are less willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. The company is seen as self serving and untrustworthy by a broad cross section of the population.

It’s possible that has happened. It’s possible the brand has been permanently damaged. It’s possible Disney will never have the past success it had with Disney animation and Star Wars and Marvel and Pixar movies. Maybe people will stop going to the theme parks too. We need to wait and see if that actually happens. There’s no way to look at a handful of less successful films last year and draw the definitive conclusion that this is the reason. Even if it was the reason it’s also too soon to determine this is a permanent situation. As I stated earlier many people were upset with the knee during national anthem thing with the NFL and maybe some even stopped watching some games at first, but we now know it has had very little negative long term impact to the league or ratings.

 

[drnilescrane]

It’s possible that has happened. It’s possible the brand has been permanently damaged. It’s possible Disney will never have the past success it had with Disney animation and Star Wars and Marvel and Pixar movies. Maybe people will stop going to the theme parks too. We need to wait and see if that actually happens. There’s no way to look at a handful of less successful films last year and draw the definitive conclusion that this is the reason. Even if it was the reason it’s also too soon to determine this is a permanent situation. As I stated earlier many people were upset with the knee during national anthem thing with the NFL and maybe some even stopped watching some games at first, but we now know it has had very little negative long term impact to the league or ratings.

Oh, I don't think it's permanent. We've been here before in the early 2000s.

It's just going to be hard to turn around, and it's going to be painful. And Bob himself - once he works through this proxy fight - has to take some responsibility for some bad hires. And biting off too much merger that fundamentally transformed the company into one he doesn't know how to manage. Much like Michael had to roughly 15-20 years in.