Hello new hotel tax for all lodging properties in the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista?'will pay for' doesn't necessarily mean transferred.
/s
Hello new hotel tax for all lodging properties in the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista?'will pay for' doesn't necessarily mean transferred.
Joking aside, this starts to enter the area the state just can't unilaterally wave their hand over... the revenue bonds have a committed funding source that can't just be scratched out and replaced by the Gov's pen alone. Ergo the mess...Hello new hotel tax for all lodging properties in the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista?
/s
Like it or not, DeSantis won with a crushing 59% of the vote. Meanwhile, Disney’s popularity with Florida residents has plummeted due to much higher prices, limits on annual pass sales, and hardball tactics with local unions & businesses.
Many are not going to like this, but Disney’s best long-term play might be to keep a low profile. Once the governor moves on, Disney almost certainly will be able to get what it wants.
And Disney could perhaps look at ways it contributes money to the local economy beyond taxes. Maybe they don't "buy local" for supplies and such. If they're treated like a California-based company, then send as much money that way as possible or at least out-of-state.'will pay for' doesn't necessarily mean transferred.
He's probably using the same dictionary as Trump for his wall and Mexico paying for it. Suggesting the burden will flow from them in some way.
It's all still grandstanding at this point. He doesn't have unilateral power to makeup what he wants and it will be years in the courts to fight it.
I'm sure all of that will come up in debate as the bills go through committees during the Florida Session. I would expect amendments from both parties on it. I certainly agree their best long-term play is low profile. Every CM in Disney is entitled to their own point of view on parental rights bill. That doesn't necessarily mean Disney had to weigh in on it when their interests are the theme parks, cruises, and Vero Beach resort.The law that was passed to dissolve RCID appears to fit within the legal limits of the Florida state constitution. I don’t think Disney has much they can fight there.
However, it’s difficult to imagine how the state will pass a new law to create a new district without the approval of landowners or residents. Months ago, this was discussed in great detail on this thread.
In addition, Disney would seem to have an ironclad First Amendment case, if they want to go that route.
But Iger has said he wants the company to have a less politicized profile. Fighting this might only play into DeSantis’ hands, giving him something to run on for the next 22 months. (Most legal challenges probably will take longer than this to resolve.)
Like it or not, DeSantis won with a crushing 59% of the vote. Meanwhile, Disney’s popularity with Florida residents has plummeted due to much higher prices, limits on annual pass sales, and hardball tactics with local unions & businesses.
Many are not going to like this, but Disney’s best long-term play might be to keep a low profile. Once the governor moves on, Disney almost certainly will be able to get what it wants.
Long-term, Disney is going to win this, one way or another.
With so many parties involved, including immediate financial impacts, public services, etc.. There is no way such things happen without court stays to hold the status quo until the courts decide all the matters.I'm reasonably sure there's a contingent within the company who favors going along with RCID dissolution in the hopes it'll appease the governor. And I'm reasonably sure there's an opposing contingent within the company whose retort is "Neville Chamberlain had an agreement too."
Until recently, I thought there was zero chance of Disney just accepting dissolution. I'm much less certain of that now.
Even if a bill is passed during session and signed by the Governor, I agree that a court stay is possible. You see that with multiple legislation passed around the country.With so many parties involved, including immediate financial impacts, public services, etc.. There is no way such things happen without court stays to hold the status quo until the courts decide all the matters.
Disney doesn't have to settle for dissolution to appease the govenor. Unlike Disney, DeSantis is on a clock... Disney can wait him out with the courts holding the pause button.
Unlike Disney, DeSantis is on a clock... Disney can wait him out with the courts holding the pause button.
The thing is, if Disney goes along with it, what's to stop the newly governor-controlled board from raising taxes in the district? What would stop them from doubling taxes and cutting services to Disney next time they do something the governor deems as being too "woke"? Or denying building permits?A good point. Let's assume that Disney could win, eventually, through the courts.
The question they might be asking themselves is around the size of the financial impact of being the governor's punching bag for however many years that takes. What would it do to revenue to be villified in speeches now, and PAC-funded ads in the '24 and '26 election cycles?
I'm reasonably sure there's a contingent within the company who favors going along with RCID dissolution in the hopes it'll appease the governor. And I'm reasonably sure there's an opposing contingent within the company whose retort is "Neville Chamberlain had an agreement too."
Until recently, I thought there was zero chance of Disney just accepting dissolution. I'm much less certain of that now.
I think this is a potentially viable solution -- the issue goes to court and isn't resolved while DeSantis is governor, and the successor pulls back and stops defending it in court which would essentially revert everything back to the status quo.
That would be heavily dependent on who the next governor is, though. It could easily be someone who wants to keep the same DeSantis strategy going.
Only a very few number of court cases get big, ongoing press coverage and they’re typically criminal cases. A headline at the beginning and a headline at rulings is not that big of an issue, especially since the people it will turn off are already turned off by “wokeness” that Disney is not abandoning. This isn’t changing in the short term.Disney is battling a more immediate clock than DeSantis, the collapse of its reputation rating among consumers:
View attachment 692838
In a deeply divided United States, does a drawn-out legal battle help Disney repair its repulation?
Iger already stated:
To the extent that I can work to quiet things down, I’m going to do that. But I think it’s important to put in perspective what some of these subjects are and not just simply brand them political.
Iger doesn't get to decide what gets branded as political; that's beyond his control. If Disney fights this, it will be framed as political. So then how does a drawn-out political battle align with Iger's desire to "quiet things down?"
DeSantis is going away in few years. A legal battle will take longer than that.
Disney's long-term interests might be best served by "quieting things down" for a year or two and instead focussing on improving their perception among consumers. Take this strategy and I predict that Disney will have control over the new RCID in 3 to 5 years. Fight it, and Disney risks damaging their reputation further in the short-term and, long-term, losing important legal battles in the conservative Florida Supreme Court, 11th Circuit, and U.S. Supreme Court. It's risky going down this path, even if we feel Disney is in the right.
Spiteful is not a strategy for building grass roots loyalty.
It's a card in Disney's deck however. I'm not saying they should play it, but they should have some numbers at the ready.Spiteful is not a strategy for building grass roots loyalty.
The state created RCID and could at any time dissolve RCID. They didn't until now because both Florida and and TWDC valued their partnership. DeSantis and TWDC got into an argument over the law passed in Florida and DeSantis simply did what the state always had the power to do.The legislature didn't seem to think so about two decades ago. They produced a full report saying that the district couldn't be dissolved in the face of a possibility of Disney being acquired and no longer owning WDW.
DeSantis has also said that the legislation will transfer the district's debt to Disney. Even if Disney were going to not fight the state-controlled district, I have a hard time thinking that they will quietly allow a ton of debt to be transferred to their balance sheet.
Disney is battling a more immediate clock than DeSantis, the collapse of its reputation rating among consumers:
In a deeply divided United States, does a drawn-out legal battle help Disney repair their reputation?
It's a card in Disney's deck however. I'm not saying they should play it, but they should have some numbers at the ready.
The state created RCID and could at any time dissolve RCID. They didn't until now because both Florida and and TWDC valued their partnership. DeSantis and TWDC got into an argument over the law passed in Florida and DeSantis simply did what the state always had the power to do.
Whatever report the state produced two decades ago saying "district couldn't be dissolved in the face of a possibility of Disney being acquired and no longer owning WDW" show just how much the state and TWDC were indeed partners.
TWDC could always be acquired, and the state could not stop it.
If TWDC stays on its current path, I would not be surprised if it does get acquired.
I agree.
I also think it’s a bit presumptive to view this as a uniquely “DeSantis” issue. Disney’s brand appeal has cratered amongst Republicans in general. Given the GOP supermajorities that voted in favor of this, can anyone say with any confidence that the GOP nominees post-DeSantis will be more favorably disposed towards Disney?
In terms of timing, the RCID unravelling begins soon.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.