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

[mikejs78]

In terms of that 16 second ad, I think you are GREATLY underestimating the power of online advertising. Not only are they able to target with in some cases, creepy precision, they can also continue to target you around the web with repeat exposure across multiple devices and then they can tell when you specifically respond to that targeting, sometimes even when the result doesn’t involve doing something online.

Trust me - as someone who works in the space, I can tell you that you would probably be shocked with what’s possible. I know I was when I first learned about some of it and it is only getting better - or worse, depending on your perspective - as time goes by.

Trust me, as someone who lives and breaths tech and works in it on a daily basis, I am well aware of the capabilities and benefits of targeted marketing. I'm not underestimating them at all, or discounting them by any means. I'm just saying that sponsorships provide a different type of engagement, in a way that can't be achieved in a 15 second ad, no matter how targeted and personalized. With sponsorships you have the potential of something that engages all the senses, and that can provide a different benefit from targeted marketing. Now, to your point, that's hard to impirically prove, so that's where the challenge.

 

[*Q*]

Can we maybe have one thread where we actually discuss news regarding the topic at hand instead of devolving into endless hot air uselessly arguing? This thread would be a great candidate considering the simplicity of the topic. Here, it's really easy, let me show you:

Here's a picture of the single sign they've removed from the ride!

Why thank you, Diligent WDW Photographer, that's a great picture! I wonder why they're going so slow lolweird

I heard the new sponsor is Weyland-Yutani.

Holy smokes that's crAYcRaY

Here's how not to do it:

Here’s a twenty page incendiary dissertation on why sponsorships SUCK

Here’s a fifty page even more incendiary dissertation on why YOU SUCK

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

Spaceship Earth is like Epcots Caroucel of Progress, Small World or even People mover. Whether you like it or not it's going to be there just for the novelty of it. That's at least how I view it. I think they should use the hosts from carocel of progress or at least portray them than either get a horizons based ending or keep it timeless and go with tomorrow's child. Speaking of Caroucel of progress I'd love it if they added that twisted jazz version of its a great big beautiful tomorrow back to the ride.

 

[marni1971]

Needs more screens

It already has 158 screens.

Edit - actually 309 as pointed out by @ABQ !

 

[JoeCamel]

It already has 158 screens.

 

[trainplane3]

It already has 158 screens.

I'm sure we can get that up to a solid 200. Think of the savings of just having to maintain screens vs AA's! And maybe even get the record for most screens on an attraction.

 

[rle4lunch]

I get why they took out all the future stuff from the end, it all came to fruition. Disney should be hitting up futurists like elon musk to give us a 50+year vision of possible new technologies. Disney's stopgap crap on the descent is worse than awful. The worst part is that it's been that way for so many years and they're perfectly fine with it.

 

[ABQ]

It already has 158 screens.

Wouldn't that be twice that count? Front and back seat?

 

[marni1971]

Wouldn't that be twice that count? Front and back seat?

Damn it. Good catch!

It’s 309.

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

I'm sure we can get that up to a solid 200. Think of the savings of just having to maintain screens vs AA's! And maybe even get the record for most screens on an attraction.

They could update the quality of the screens. Makes for a better experience

 

[GhostHost1000]

They could update the quality of the screens. Makes for a better experience

or they could remove them and actually have an entertaining / complete ride from start to finish

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

or they could remove them and actually have an entertaining / complete ride from start to finish

What would they change??,

 

[larryz]

Can we maybe have one thread where we actually discuss news regarding the topic at hand instead of devolving into endless hot air uselessly arguing? This thread would be a great candidate considering the simplicity of the topic.

Quixote party, your table is ready...

 

[Bender123]

Damn it. Good catch!

It’s 309.

...but there's always room for 1000...Any volunteers?

 

[gustaftp]

There is a big difference in click ads, 16 second bytes on YouTube, and the experiential sponsorship that could be possible at Epcot. The latter has the potential for a whole different kind of exposure than internet ads.

Bingo. Target spent a lot of money to have a "Bulleye Lodge" set up during the Super Bowl. The entire thing had giveaways, fun activities, etc. to promote the Target brand. The Twin Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis saw a lot of people come because of the Super Bowl, and Target saw anywhere from 2000-5000 people going through their display on any given day during that 2-week stretch.

They aren't capturing millions of people that way, but every person that went through was gushing about Target afterwards -- the giveaways were quite generous and the set-up was elaborately themed. While it didn't hit the quantity of people that a YouTube ad does, it definitely had deeper touch points for every person that went through than an advertisement would. Stuff like that drives brand loyalty, and thus experiential marketing should absolutely not be discounted.

(And I say that as someone who was a marketing engineer and worked on technology that would cater offers to customers based on their shopping habits for a few major retailers)

 

[MrPromey]

Can we maybe have one thread where we actually discuss news regarding the topic at hand instead of devolving into endless hot air uselessly arguing? This thread would be a great candidate considering the simplicity of the topic. Here, it's really easy, let me show you:


Here's how not to do it:

The only thing I'm seeing that's "incendiary" is your post.

The rest of us seem to be having a discussion without saying anyone or anything "sucks" and as far as I can tell, without anyone getting upset (besides you).

Maybe instead of telling me, mikejs78, and others how we should post based on what you would like to see, you should learn how to use the "ignore" feature?

That way everyone wins.

Just a thought.

 

[GoofGoof]

For how many people, was their one-time ride on Test Track what pushed them over the edge in deciding to buy a Chevy?

I don’t know, you don’t know and my guess is, neither Disney nor Chevy know, either.

I have no clue. I’m guessing somewhere around the same number of people who were pushed over the edge in deciding to buy a car by a 10 second add on YouTube.

 

[MrPromey]

I have no clue. I’m guessing somewhere around the same number of people who were pushed over the edge in deciding to buy a car by a 10 second add on YouTube.

Exactly!

... Which is why that YouTube ad can and often is, a small part of a very sophisticated marketing effort.

You might be seeing that ad because the day prior, you were googling “signs your transmission is going” or maybe you were reading car reviews.

Have you ever noticed how sometimes you see the same YouTube ads over and over again? Like they only have one or two companies paying to run ads or something?

You know that’s not the case, right?

In our Chevy example, that little ad on YouTube could be followed by two weeks of Chevy ads popping up next to Chase credit card offers and ads for the Flower and Garden Festival at Epcot on your local news websites.

Speaking of which, have you ever noticed how many online ads you see for Disney? Do you think that’s because they are just advertising everywhere to everyone?

Of course they’re not.

Compared to something like that, a 10 year contract (that’s what it is, right?) to sponsor a pavilion could look like an anchor around the neck of a lot of companies who can see their fortunes change in the span of that time.

Just ask Kodak.

Again, not saying all sponsorships under all circumstances are bad for the sponsor but for the point of high profile tech companies in particular that were being discussed when I stepped into this conversation, I can see why they wouldn’t be interested.

Would most of us like to see an Apple or Google in the parks? Absolutely. That’s one of the many reasons they don’t need to be, though.

I think someone involved in some way in a consumer facing tech-related industry with a bad public image would be a good candidate for sponsorship of Spaceship Earth, personally.

We know it won’t be Comcast but maybe another broadband provider like Time Warner?... Maybe AT&T will decide to come back?

 

[MrPromey]

Bingo. Target spent a lot of money to have a "Bulleye Lodge" set up during the Super Bowl. The entire thing had giveaways, fun activities, etc. to promote the Target brand. The Twin Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis saw a lot of people come because of the Super Bowl, and Target saw anywhere from 2000-5000 people going through their display on any given day during that 2-week stretch.

They aren't capturing millions of people that way, but every person that went through was gushing about Target afterwards -- the giveaways were quite generous and the set-up was elaborately themed. While it didn't hit the quantity of people that a YouTube ad does, it definitely had deeper touch points for every person that went through than an advertisement would. Stuff like that drives brand loyalty, and thus experiential marketing should absolutely not be discounted.

(And I say that as someone who was a marketing engineer and worked on technology that would cater offers to customers based on their shopping habits for a few major retailers)

A one-off thing at a high profile event like that seems a little apples-to-oranges when talking about multi-year (decade long?) sponsorships at Epcot but I definitely get what you’re saying.

 

[GoofGoof]

Exactly!

... Which is why that YouTube ad can and often is, a small part of a very sophisticated marketing effort.

You might be seeing that ad because the day prior, you were googling “signs your transmission is going” or maybe you were reading car reviews.

Have you ever noticed how sometimes you see the same YouTube ads over and over again? Like they only have one or two companies paying to run ads or something?

You know that’s not the case, right?

In our Chevy example, that little ad on YouTube could be followed by two weeks of Chevy ads popping up next to Chase credit card offers and ads for the Flower and Garden Festival at Epcot on your local news websites.

Speaking of which, have you ever noticed how many online ads you see for Disney? Do you think that’s because they are just advertising everywhere to everyone?

Of course they’re not.

Compared to something like that, a 10 year contract (that’s what it is, right?) to sponsor a pavilion could look like an anchor around the neck of a lot of companies who can see their fortunes change in the span of that time.

Just ask Kodak.

Again, not saying all sponsorships under all circumstances are bad for the sponsor but for the point of high profile tech companies in particular that were being discussed when I stepped into this conversation, I can see why they wouldn’t be interested.

Would most of us like to see an Apple or Google in the parks? Absolutely. That’s one of the many reasons they don’t need to be, though.

I think someone involved in some way in a consumer facing tech-related industry with a bad public image would be a good candidate for sponsorship of Spaceship Earth, personally.

We know it won’t be Comcast but maybe another broadband provider like Time Warner?... Maybe AT&T will decide to come back?

I don’t disagree with what you are saying. My only point was that a 10 year sponsorship doesn’t serve the same purpose as a YouTube add. Sponsorships are not used to directly sell products (at least not very successfully). They are used as part of a branding effort for the company. They are more of a long term play. Siemens wasn’t trying to get people to exit Spaceship Earth and go buy one of their products. They wanted people to see Siemens as a company that is innovative and forward thinking. They also wanted to build name recognition. That’s why a lot of companies sponsor things like sporting events or individual teams or theme park rides.

To your point, a company like Google or Apple doesn’t really need the name recognition. They do pretty well on their own with brand image. The only way I see one of those companies getting on board would be with a larger partnership. Similar to how TCM renewed their Great Movie Ride sponsorship and also added a Disney movie vault slot to their programming. The one thing Disney has that people want is content. Maybe an exclusive streaming option for ESPN or an exclusive app for iPhone or Android could interest them. The theme park sponsorip would be more of a throw in then the main event in that case.

They could maybe swing a company like Verizon or AT&T or even a cell phone maker (not named Apple) who wants to gain a better brand image and wants to get in bed in some way with TWDC.