• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Rumor Siemens is going to end their sponsorship with the parks - Spaceship Earth and IllumiNations

WDWFigment

Well-Known Member
I would say Pandora was both ambitious and risky...they still have it in them.
To me, there's a difference between the ambitions. Pandora and Star Wars Land are both ambitious in the sense that they are significant capex investments; EPCOT was ambitious in the sense that it pursued lofty goals.

Even Tokyo DisneySea did not/does not have that type of ambition. They broke the mold when they made EPCOT Center.
 

WDWFigment

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
It's so funny that they don't see EPCOT as a brand. If you consider it as a brand, it's in the same position Marvel was in back in the 90's; it may have gone through dire straights, but people still know what it is and have some fondness for it.

Folks through out a billion dollar+ figure for rejuvenation, and there is some truth in that number given WDI's spending habits, but they can pivot Epcot back to EPCOT with projects that utilize existing facilities for attractions that entertain, inform and inspire.
No argument from me on any of this.

I see the most likely scenario as the big investments for EPCOT being made in the IP-driven 'sure things' with much more financially-modest refreshments made to attractions and exhibits that entertain, inform, and inspire.

I suspect TWDC wants it both ways: say they are taking EPCOT back to its core mission by paying face to that notion with little things, while still building the crowd-pleasing stuff.
 

ChrisFL

Well-Known Member
To me, there's a difference between the ambitions. Pandora and Star Wars Land are both ambitious in the sense that they are significant capex investments; EPCOT was ambitious in the sense that it pursued lofty goals.

Even Tokyo DisneySea did not/does not have that type of ambition. They broke the mold when they made EPCOT Center.
Exactly....I still think about the kind of audacity as a major company to try to at least TRY to fulfill part of the vision of Walt Disney a full 16 years after his passing. I can't imagine ANY other company that would consider that kind of undertaking, even 5 years after the passing of someone.
 

EvilChameleon

Well-Known Member
If I remember correctly the launching pads behind the pavilions are not permanent structures, they're just put up for NYE and it disrupts a lot of traffic backstage. But if they could make them permanent and safe that would be a pretty beautiful show!! Good thought!
Ah, so they're like the perimeter effects at the Magic Kingdom?
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
To me, there's a difference between the ambitions. Pandora and Star Wars Land are both ambitious in the sense that they are significant capex investments; EPCOT was ambitious in the sense that it pursued lofty goals.

Even Tokyo DisneySea did not/does not have that type of ambition. They broke the mold when they made EPCOT Center.
A big problem with Disney's IP lands seems to be that you can pose the question, "could this belong in a UNI park?", and you can say yes. With the Wizarding Worlds and SNW, Disney's lost a very crucial differentiating factor.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Why do they have to do anything to Spaceship Earth except remove the Siemans Logo? Horizons operated unti it's closing without a sponsor...all they did was remove a couple GE logos... No reason this sponsorship loss should really change any of the ride...
Cuz Brand Synergy
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
My guess is they were going to give Disney a fleet of Siemens monorail vehicles as opposed to the Bombardier fleet used today. Maybe Disney had a long standing contract with Bombardier upon the sale of their monorail patents way back.

EDIT: Bombardier and Siemens are probably going to merge so that throws a wrench in the above. I wonder why Disney didn't take this offer.
Because monorails are not long for the World...
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Remember what happened when Wonders of Life lost MetLife as the sponsor...
Remember what happened when Dinosaur lost McDonald's as a sponsor. Or when the ameican adeventure lost both of its sponsors. Or when Star tours lost energizer. Or when the land pavilion lost nestle.

Point is while loosing a sponsor could mean the end as we know it, it certainly is no guarantee. There are plenty of examples on both sides here that indicate things could go one of several ways. Without a sponsor the attraction could remain but become neglected (energy) or continue operating as is (AA), it could close altogether and sit empty (WoL), or be completely disneyfied (seas), it could receive a new sponsor that funds updates (SSE 2007), or a new sponsor that results in no changes at all (LwtL), or a new sponsor that leads to an entirely new attraction (M:S). It's really too early to tell where this will go.
 

Movielover

Well-Known Member
People have every right to be a bit concerned. Epcot has a long history of not updating things or taking care of something properly that doesn't have a sponsor. I see no reason some can't be concerned what this means for the fireworks and SSE.
Of course everyone has the right to be concerned... Just like I have the right to mock and laugh at them!

That's how the world works folks!
 

monothingie

Giver of Money to Disney
Premium Member
The I-Drive train?
TDO uses Siemens for the majority of their building control systems at WDW. In the majority of buildings at wdw Everything from fire alarms to circuit breakers are Siemens. Wdw is probably one if their largest single customers in Florida if not a larger area. If the email wording is accurate it seems like a very abrupt and unfriendly breaking of the relationship.
 
Last edited:

Kman101

Well-Known Member
I think people have the right to be concerned due to a lack of sponsorship. I don't think they have to take it so far as thinking SSE will be shuttered ... I'm sorry but Epcot doesn't have the best track record. I know @peter11435 posted some examples of losing sponsors but Epcot's history speaks for itself at this point.

The Land gained a new sponsor, no?

When was the last time American Adventure went down for a full refurb? It's in good shape but still ...

Look how long Dinosaur sort of languished before they finally gave it a quality refurb.

Again, this speaks for itself, it's not me trying to be doom and gloom here.
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
I think people have the right to be concerned due to a lack of sponsorship. I don't think they have to take it so far as thinking SSE will be shuttered ... I'm sorry but Epcot doesn't have the best track record. I know @peter11435 posted some examples of losing sponsors but Epcot's history speaks for itself at this point.

The Land gained a new sponsor, no?

When was the last time American Adventure went down for a full refurb? It's in good shape but still ...

Look how long Dinosaur sort of languished before they finally gave it a quality refurb.

Again, this speaks for itself, it's not me trying to be doom and gloom here.
People should definitely be concerned. My point was just that we really don't know where it may go from here as there are numerous scenarios, most of them not positive.

Living with the land itself recieved a new sponsor eventually, the pavilion as a whole has not.

It's been a while for the AA. Last one was when they made edits to the finale montage. But overall the show is still well maintained and in great condition. Upcoming updates should enhance the most glaring issue.

I would argue that dinosaur languised even before McDonald's pulled out. Many of the attractions issues began while they were still involved.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
People should definitely be concerned. My point was just that we really don't know where it may go from here as there are numerous scenarios, most of them not positive.

Living with the land itself recieved a new sponsor eventually, the pavilion as a whole has not.

It's been a while for the AA. Last one was when they made edits to the finale montage. But overall the show is still well maintained and in great condition. Upcoming updates should enhance the most glaring issue.

I would argue that dinosaur languised even before McDonald's pulled out. Many of the attractions issues began while they were still involved.
Agreed with you.

I also agree Dinosaur languished even with a sponsor, that's true.

I agree AA is well maintained despite no sponsor. It's a true highlight for me at Epcot so I'm glad it's still in good shape and they haven't let it fall apart.
 

atighe42

Well-Known Member
People should definitely be concerned. My point was just that we really don't know where it may go from here as there are numerous scenarios, most of them not positive.

Living with the land itself recieved a new sponsor eventually, the pavilion as a whole has not.

It's been a while for the AA. Last one was when they made edits to the finale montage. But overall the show is still well maintained and in great condition. Upcoming updates should enhance the most glaring issue.

I would argue that dinosaur languised even before McDonald's pulled out. Many of the attractions issues began while they were still involved.
Do you know of specific plans? You think they would really get rid of the one attraction that is left from the golden age? That would be the final straw for many. From what I've read from the occasional insider is that the refurbishments down the line seem to be nothing drastic or worrying. They would go a completely different route?
 
Top Bottom