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

[hopemax]

WDW can't move out of Florida, BUT....

Disney can open a new Disneyland elsewhere in the U.S. and announce that they will no longer invest in expanding or upgrading WDW while they pour money in a new DL.

That $17.1 Billion dollars going into WDW?... Not any more.

That should send shivers down the back of at least some of the legislature.

Exactly. Companies have moved away from their traditional stomping grounds. I grew up in the PacNW and while Boeing still has a massive presence in Washington, they have moved not-insignificant parts of their operations. Within Disney's history, moving to FL in the first place represented huge operational change. I've been online in Disney fandom long enough to see Disney essentially writing off Disneyland as a top-shelf parks business operation during the Pressler / Harris years, and Matt & Greg flipping the script and demonstrating the folly of such a decision. Even though WDW would remain operational, it doesn't mean it will retain the same spot in the theme park resort darling pecking order as it has enjoyed. That's why I asked how much of the $17 billion is inertia. WDW doesn't need to keep a monorail system, or as many resorts, or secondary experiences. A company like Disney can't pivot quickly, and whatever pivot they had was from CA ops to FL after Covid. There has got to be an extremely low appetite to pivot to a third location... right now...

But like Len said in the article, they have to have 30 year plans somewhere. So I'm curious what happens in 10 years. Or 2042 when those DVC expiration dates hit. What will WDW FL ops look like? Mother Nature, this demonstration by the government in leaving citizens twisting in the wind over the insurance situation, in addition to how they are personally being treated... I don't have any expectation that the representation in FL, or the citizenry will change enough that in 10 years, that this populist streak will have abated. But the specific individuals driving this train... they will be eventually term limited out, so they don't even have to think in such terms.

But I really wish they'd just pull the plug on Lake Nona, instead of hoping to outlast DeSantis.

 

[MandaM]

The remainder of your post makes me sad. It is true - and has always been true - that judges have ideological leanings. They are human beings with beliefs, values and experiences that come to bear on their rulings. But federal judges in particular are highly qualified lawyers who take pride in their ability to analyze the law and apply legal precedents to their rulings. Implying that any judge on that level will make a decision based on politics without considering the issues is not fair.

There’s plenty of examples of federal judges basing their decisions purely on politics. Powerful organizations are dedicated to putting ideologues, many of them unqualified, on the bench. It’s naive to pretend like that’s not happening. Just look at the judge shopping that goes on in TX, where you can file in places like Amarillo, which gives you 100% chance of getting a highly partisan, activist conservative judge. And then those appeals go to the deeply reactionary 5th circuit. There’s a reason why so many important cases are filed in TX, and it’s not because the judges there are operating free from politics. It’s the opposite.

As the past 7-8 years have repeatedly shown us, norms have been eroded. Judicial norms are no exception.

 

[Notypeo]

I've never found driving in and around DC too bad at all.

If you google “What city has a similar climate to Tokyo?” you get Washington, D.C.

 

[GoofGoof]

The fact that the Pledge of Allegiance to our country makes any


Damn. It was sarcasm…?!?!?!
My balls were tingling, and now they’re numb, you killjoy.
Sorry, I won’t lose any sleep over any of this stupid .
Again, you guys are so easy to tweak…take some time to “untweak” your pantries, and spend some time with your families, instead of 24 hours a day here, because you think you’re sooooo cool…!!!!!

Thanks for the advice. I took some time and untweaked my pantry and it only took 45 mins so I have 23.25 hours left to spend with the cool people

I also found a bag of flamin hot Cheetos that fell behind a shelf in my pantry. I think they may have been past their expiration date so I fed some to the dog to test and see if they were ok for me to eat. She’s licking her lips a lot and rolling around on the floor but I can’t tell if that’s because they were past their prime or just because dogs shouldn‘t really eat flamin hot Cheetos.

 

[RamblinWreck]

What should Disney do next?

Iger should contact Rupert Murdoch (Disney’s largest individual shareholder) and ask him to send out some messages to his news organization

Oh they should make some ads juxtaposing DeSantis’s takeover with Fidel Castro. Plaster those all over Florida but especially South Florida. Meanwhile, highlight all of Disney’s community service and the donations they make to children’s hospitals.

An ad campaign would be legendary, but their lawyers would probably advise against it

 

[larryz]

​

Kevin Barbee, a “parkitect” who leads teams in creating theme parks and entertainment venues globally, said in an email that the cost to re-create Walt Disney World elsewhere could top $50 billion — if the company could get enough land at a “seriously low” price.

How much did Iger pay for 20th Century Fox?

 

[Heath]

Disney’s lawsuit wording seems convoluted. “As punishment for ..free speech.” Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech. One could put a sign in their yard saying something offensive, but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout. If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?” If the threat was taking away an amenity that all businesses and competitors were given, that might be deemed a punishment. But taking away a privilege is a reciprocal renegotiation of the relationship. It seems more like a case of ‘don’t look a gif horse in the mouth’?

My personal opinion at this point is that it’s silly retaliation, and a political stunt. Why not just sit down and work it out? I am generally anti-government and it looks like zealous over reach. However Disney’s “punishment” counter seems flimsy to me.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The End

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney’s lawsuit wording seems convoluted. “As punishment for ..free speech.” Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech. One could put a sign in their yard saying something offensive, but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout. If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?” If the threat was taking away an amenity that all businesses and competitors were given, that might be deemed a punishment. But taking away a privilege is a reciprocal renegotiation of the relationship. It seems more like a case of ‘don’t look a gif horse in the mouth’?

My personal opinion at this point is that it’s silly retaliation, and a political stunt. Why not just sit down and work it out? I am generally anti-government and it looks like zealous over reach. However Disney’s “punishment” counter seems flimsy to me.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The End

Yeah…you’re close to 100% off here

 

[Figgy1]

Disney’s lawsuit wording seems convoluted. “As punishment for ..free speech.” Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech. One could put a sign in their yard saying something offensive, but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout. If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?” If the threat was taking away an amenity that all businesses and competitors were given, that might be deemed a punishment. But taking away a privilege is a reciprocal renegotiation of the relationship. It seems more like a case of ‘don’t look a gif horse in the mouth’?

My personal opinion at this point is that it’s silly retaliation, and a political stunt. Why not just sit down and work it out? I am generally anti-government and it looks like zealous over reach. However Disney’s “punishment” counter seems flimsy to me.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The End

Consequences cannot and should not ever come from the government. Please read the first amendment

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Consequences cannot and should not ever come from the government. Please read the first amendment

Yeah…since we all worship of the alter of the “free market”…this is silly to debate.

If the public decides not to go to wdw…nothing should interfere with that…

State government throwing up operating blocks and/or tax penalties “just cause”?…not cool here

 

[Touchdown]

Disney’s lawsuit wording seems convoluted. “As punishment for ..free speech.” Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech. One could put a sign in their yard saying something offensive, but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout. If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?” If the threat was taking away an amenity that all businesses and competitors were given, that might be deemed a punishment. But taking away a privilege is a reciprocal renegotiation of the relationship. It seems more like a case of ‘don’t look a gif horse in the mouth’?

My personal opinion at this point is that it’s silly retaliation, and a political stunt. Why not just sit down and work it out? I am generally anti-government and it looks like zealous over reach. However Disney’s “punishment” counter seems flimsy to me.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The End

Having public opinion “punish” free speech is fine, legal, and 100% what did not happen here. The government can’t punish free speech.

 

[mikejs78]

but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout.

No one is talking about public opinion. Fallout from public opinion is fine. Fallout from the government for speech is exactly what the first amendment prohibits.

If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?”

Disney is not the only entity gifted with self-government. There are 1800+ special districts in Florida. The Daytona speedway is part of a special district. Part of Universal is in a special district and they are in the process of getting another special district. The Villages is a self-governing special district. The list goes on.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The innkeeper is free to do what they want. They are a private business, not the government. Private individuals and businesses are free to do what they want and apply whatever consequences they want for speech. Government is not because the first amendment prohibits it. "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech". The 14th amendment extended that to the individual states. The courts have ruled that retaliation for speech by the government is a violation of the first amendment. So, your analogy does not hold up and your understanding of the first amendment is flawed.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney is not the only entity gifted with self-government. There are 1800+ special districts in Florida. The Daytona speedway is part of a special district. Part of Universal is in a special district and they are in the process of getting another special district. The Villages is a self-governing special district. The list goes on.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech.

No, that’s literally what that means! The government cannot impose consequences for your speech. Otherwise it’s not, you know, “free.” My god this country’s educational system is failing.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

How much did Iger pay for 20th Century Fox?

I think like $63 billion? Plus assumed debt

 

[seascape]

I think like $63 billion? Plus assumed debt

How come no one ever deducts what they received from Comcast for the Sky shares they sold. Or better yet, the RSN'S the Feds made them sell that are now worthless.

 

[castlecake2.0]

If you were the last public speaker, you did a great job

Thank you, was definitely intimidating, I also toned down my speech

Disney’s lawsuit wording seems convoluted. “As punishment for ..free speech.” Just because one has right to free speech, doesn’t mean there isn’t consequences for free speech. One could put a sign in their yard saying something offensive, but that doesn’t protect him from the consequences of public opinion or fallout. If Disney is the only entity gifted the special privilege of self-government, how is taking away a privilege that no other entity has been granted a “punishment?” If the threat was taking away an amenity that all businesses and competitors were given, that might be deemed a punishment. But taking away a privilege is a reciprocal renegotiation of the relationship. It seems more like a case of ‘don’t look a gif horse in the mouth’?

My personal opinion at this point is that it’s silly retaliation, and a political stunt. Why not just sit down and work it out? I am generally anti-government and it looks like zealous over reach. However Disney’s “punishment” counter seems flimsy to me.

Once upon a time there was an inn keeper. The inn keeper has honorary guests, and he put cookies out on a silver platter for them every day. They were the only guests of the inn to get free VIP cookies. The guests would eat all the delicious cookies, however they felt morally compelled to spread word to the neighborhood that the inn was not sanitary. They guests even funded the local DeSanitary Club against unkept inns. So the inn keeper decided not to bake any more free cookies. The guests sued the inn keeper for retaliation for taking away their free cookies, and for punishing them for their First Amendment right to tell the public they have a dirty inn.

The End

Yah that’s not how any of this works

 

[Tha Realest]

How many "experts" did WaPo need to figure this one out, exactly?

Could they move out of Florida? No.

But they could do other things instead, like not build any new parks, stop building capacity, or just build clones or replacements of existing attractions…

(Looks at last two decades) Wait…

 

[Patcheslee]

No, that’s literally what that means! The government cannot impose consequences for your speech. Otherwise it’s not, you know, “free.” My god this country’s educational system is failing.

In words my daughter could understand at 7 when she was "protesting" cleaning her room: protest all you want, I can ground you because I'm not the government

 

[GoofGoof]

It's actually south of the Mississippi, since it isn't on the North American continent, as steamed up as the Disney Co is right now, I don't think Comcast would even try to enforce that contract to PR if they thought it applied. But if we're speculating on new parks to retaliate against Tallahassee (and I like the PR idea); Australia has said that they would like to have a Disney resort, they said it especially loud after Shanghai gave China three, and if Disney wound up with the 20th Century Fox Australia Studio in the Sidney area; they already have a huge chunk of land in the country's #1 tourist destination area that they can build on. Personally, I would like them to go on a major spree in California. They potentially have room for two parks on land they own in Anaheim and what would probably be a moderately complected real estate deal could might finally get them Knott's Berry Farm; which has room for a major Disney expansion, another park and a resort hotel and shops. Just mud in the eye for DeSantis to see money and energy diverted from Florida, because of him, back to where it was diverted to Florida from in the first place; because karma can be a royal !

With the success of the theme parks (they are cash machines) and the potential issues with streaming and legacy networks it probably makes sense for Disney to continue to expand their parks business aggressively. Australia could make a lot of sense as well as South America and maybe Canada (something mostly indoors) if they went International. Domestically I don’t see Disney adding a 3rd location But I agree there should/will be further expansion on both coasts. This dispute with DeSantis will blow over. Disney is playing the long game. If the anti-business trend continues in FL after DeSantis goes away then it may be a time to consider pulling back. I don’t see Disney pulling back right now on future plans. Disney builds nothing quickly (except maybe timeshares) so it’s not like they will be building a major park expansion that opens in the next few years. They have time to see how all this plays out.