Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[Rodan75]

The question isn't whether I know marvel (and I do). The question is do you know Disney and its history and stance on gambling?

If you do, then this is very simple and we stop dancing.

I agree with your central point, however, gambling/adult gaming has become more mainstream and is very important internationally. I can understand dipping into the waters, regardless of their long held beliefs.

I'm torn on whether this should be a big deal or not...DCP seems to have done more to reduce brand value than gaming would. I do cringe whenever I see the Wizard of Oz slot machines and looking at how WB has eliminated any value of their core classic properties I can see reason for concern.

 

[OFTeric]

The question isn't whether I know marvel (and I do). The question is do you know Disney and its history and stance on gambling?

If you do, then this is very simple and we stop dancing.

I think people really need to listen to WDW1974 on this. TWDC have spent a massive amount of cash lobbying here in Florida to keep Casinos away from WDW, and it is something to note. Disney has done massive consumer research about associating their brand with gambling. Disney walked on pins and needles when they opened The Lion King at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas (which only ran for 2 years)

This is important.

If Disney is shifting it's stance on it's association with gambling this is VERY important to take note of.

We have seen Disney spend MASSIVE amounts of cash to buy Marvel out of contracts it wasn't a fan of. So is this a new era? Could we see Marvel casinos? Could we see the edgier Disney properties in more adult venues?

If so where is the line with the management at the WDC?

 

[Longhairbear]

Not to derail the gambling discussion, but BOM has their summer report up and its discussion of the decline in 3D ticket sales and the failure rate of tentpole titles should be of interest to Disney Studios:

This Summer also appears to be the one in which audiences finally rejected 3D in a meaningful way. 3D shares for early Summer releases were consistently below 40 percent, with some even dipping below 30 percent. By late July, most studios were no longer reporting 3D shares at all, which is a trend that will likely continue indefinitely (except, of course, in the case of the occasional major 3D title like Gravity).

With record overall grosses, what explains the general negativity surrounding the box office this Summer? It's likely a combination of ballooning budget figures and slower-than-expected foreign growth. This Summer, a whopping 18 movies cost over $100 million to produce. In comparison, last Summer only had 13. Unfortunately, just because studios are spending big bucks doesn't necessarily mean audiences are going to rush out to theaters—of those 18 movies, only 11 will earn over $100 million at the domestic box office.

The inflated budgets would be okay if the foreign box office was still growing at a relentless pace. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. Last Summer, the Top 10 earned $4.85 billion overseas; in comparison, the Top 10 has only grossed $3.98 billion so far, and probably won't wind up much higher than $4.2 billion when all is said and done. Obviously, this data isn't perfect—outside of the Top 10, there could be enough growth to make up for this—but it's still indicative of a foreign box office that isn't quite as explosive as many expected.

Next Summer, it does look like the studios are reigning in their spending a bit: while official figures aren't yet available, it's unlikely that more than 15 titles cost over $100 million.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=&yr=2013&wknd=35a&p=

Entertainment Weekly broached the same subject a few weeks ago, coming to the same conclusions. It was hinted that,from what I recall, Avatar in hindsight might have been a huge hit because of 3D, had it not been in 3D it might have not done quite as well.

 

[tirian]

Entertainment Weekly broached the same subject a few weeks ago, coming to the same conclusions. It was hinted that,from what I recall, Avatar in hindsight might have been a huge hit because of 3D, had it not been in 3D it might have not done quite as well.

This is becoming the standard opinion. I frequent a lot of entertainment web sites and I've never heard anyone, critic or common user, defend Avatar as a great movie. Most people attribute its success to the 3-D.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Marvel had a deal to build a theme park in Dubai. That came to an end very quickly when Disney took over.

Disney did not kill that project. It's limping along in a scaled down form without Disney.

Comics are aimed largely at boys. Boys who can not by law use slot machines or buy lotto tickets.

Not Marvel's comics. This is the company that was publishing Kick- while being acquired by The Walt Disney Company.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Marvel staying involved in gambling is not surprising. We've discussed how marvel like AVATAR, was more of an impulse buy than a truly calculated and researched decision. We've discussed how Marvel has not caved to Disney's pressure the way PIXAR did following acquisition. We've discussed how Marvel has been willing to tell Disney to " off" when it comes to their affairs. We've discussed how Disney has not been an active player in Marvel Studios. The gaming would be a shock if we had not for a few years now not already know the previous. All this shows is that Mr. Calculations Iger has an impulsive and egotistical side, but because he does not get into big, public ing matches it will take years to see the true implications of his rashness and spending sprees.

We are watching the narrative of a man with little patience play out. Where details and consequences are not fully considered until later when they arise as an issue.

 

[Ignohippo]

I think people really need to listen to WDW1974 on this. TWDC have spent a massive amount of cash lobbying here in Florida to keep Casinos away from WDW, and it is something to note. Disney has done massive consumer research about associating their brand with gambling. Disney walked on pins and needles when they opened The Lion King at Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas (which only ran for 2 years)

This is important.

If Disney is shifting it's stance on it's association with gambling this is VERY important to take note of.

We have seen Disney spend MASSIVE amounts of cash to buy Marvel out of contracts it wasn't a fan of. So is this a new era? Could we see Marvel casinos? Could we see the edgier Disney properties in more adult venues?

If so where is the line with the management at the WDC?

Disney has spent millions lobbying against gambling here in Florida for one reason - competition. Gambling equals another way for people to spend their discretionary income and new resorts opening all over the state. Disney doesn't want that.

While the target audience may be different, Disney doesn't want mom and dad running to the casino and spending vacation money or choosing to spend an adult weekend at a gambling resort instead of taking Little Johnny to WDW.

And just think about how many international travelers might take time away from WDW to spend time somewhere else gambling.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Disney trying to look out for the wholesome morals of the public and everything to do with them protecting their stake in the Florida tourism industry.

 

[The Visionary Soul]

Or, perhaps Disney has realized that gaming will eventually come to Orlando, and when it does, it will undoubtedly want a slice of the pie... perhaps gaming isn't being looked at as negatively as it used to be looked at.

 

[JT3000]

Nope.

Ultimately, Disney has control over all the characters in terms of how they are used. It is the same with the theme park deal with UNI.

Sony could decide that Spidey was going to moonlight as a gay prostitute and get hooked on meth and that film would never get made.

That's a shame.

 

[WDWDad13]

At the end of the day (today), all I can really say is you are missing the point. I don't think it's deliberate on your part, you just don't get it.

And I am not going to make you get it. I can tell you as someone who has followed Disney and gambling for decades that this really is a huge deal and if you don't see it, then you don't.

These are Disney characters marketed largely to children that are being used in gambling activities. You either get why that is potentially devastating to the company or you don't.

But I can practically guarantee you of one thing: and that is if a major media outlet exposed this hypocrisy on Disney's part those machines and lotto deals would end very quickly.

It's not that big of a deal man. You seem to always make something sound much bigger or worse than it really is. Truth is kids can't get into gambling spots so I doubt little billy and Cindy Lou will have a gambling addiction at age 10 and Disney would be to blame....
Though it'd probably be said it was the Disney execs fault or that of nexgen I'm sure

 

[alissafalco]

No, I don't see a Spirited V.

And nothing, to my knowledge has changed, for both Disney and UNI.

There will be a Disney announcement (definitely Anaheim, but likely Florida as well) in the next six weeks or so.

Star Wars?

 

[WDWDad13]

No, I don't see a Spirited V.

And nothing, to my knowledge has changed, for both Disney and UNI.

There will be a Disney announcement (definitely Anaheim, but likely Florida as well) in the next six weeks or so.

Nextgen park bench with an avengers wrap? lol

 

[The Visionary Soul]

Maybe they'll actually announce that they have found a way to fix the Yeti, and if the data provided by NextGen supports that it would increase Guest Spending and Satisfaction by fixing the yeti, they will think about fixing it.

 

[asianway]

Or, perhaps Disney has realized that gaming will eventually come to Orlando, and when it does, it will undoubtedly want a slice of the pie... perhaps gaming isn't being looked at as negatively as it used to be looked at.

Oh goody. Hopefully we can finally get that Disney Princess Showgirl Revue I keep writing letters about!

 

[WDWDad13]

Oh goody. Hopefully we can finally get that Disney Princess Showgirl Revue I keep writing letters about!

....on Ice!

 

[alphac2005]

The free dining deal is almost year round for visitors from the UK and frequently from August on for USA residents. I am not talking about a two-day period where it isn't ... let's focus on the big points.

Uhhh, what are you thinking? We're in America and didn't you learn long ago that people in this country generally don't think about any other place on the planet existing, but our own?

 

[crispy]

Oh goody. Hopefully we can finally get that Disney Princess Showgirl Revue I keep writing letters about!

Did you contact Valerie Novak? I hear she's the go-to person for things like this.

 

[alphac2005]

Entertainment Weekly broached the same subject a few weeks ago, coming to the same conclusions. It was hinted that,from what I recall, Avatar in hindsight might have been a huge hit because of 3D, had it not been in 3D it might have not done quite as well.

I've spoken with some former colleagues in the media and there has been a LOT of talk about what's going to happen with the Avatar sequels because more data (and the studios love data, polling, surveying, it's patently absurd) is showing that the massive earnings of the film go hand in hand with the modern 3D craze that occurred when Avatar was being released. As you mentioned in the Entertainment Weekly piece and there are many others out there lately, the 3D gimmick is falling as fast as the proverbial lead balloon.

It's very much expected that as 3D continues to cool, Avatar will lose the largest factor that drove a grand scale of audiences to the theaters for the film. The belief is that the 3D (I have not seen the film) was so ground breaking that many who watched the first film would be willing to fork over the extra two to five bucks to see it in 3D, but the question is the larger audience as a whole and whether a film like Avatar is more of a one and done film vs. a studio franchise film.

Dissecting the film business and what can or might happen can go on all day and is pretty entertaining by itself. 2015 is going to be fascinating year for movies because it's the year that will either allow the studios to continue with the absurd "tent-pole" model and oddly loading too many films into too short of a period actually adversely hitting box office results or will yield a completely different business model, make that the classic business model of the film business because the gamble on $400 million dollar films with marketing and associated worldwide costs simply don't pan out.

To me, personally, latching onto Avatar for Animal Kingdom reminds of American Idol at the Studios, getting a property after it has peaked, but the Mouse has always been quite good at misreading trends and then keeping properties way beyond their popularity shelf life.

 

[alphac2005]

It's not that big of a deal man. You seem to always make something sound much bigger or worse than it really is. Truth is kids can't get into gambling spots so I doubt little billy and Cindy Lou will have a gambling addiction at age 10 and Disney would be to blame....
Though it'd probably be said it was the Disney execs fault or that of nexgen I'm sure

I can make the argument that Disney licensed characters have been used and marketed in countless unhealthy, Frankensteinesque, pure children's junk food that is far more harmful than Marvel characters being used on a casino gaming floor.

My biggest takeaway of @WDW1974 post about Disney and gambling is the hypocrisy in lobbying so hard against casino interests, but that's all in protecting their business interests. Hypocrisy and business and politicians all go together, so there is no surprise there. Maybe in Walt's era take it to the Card Walker days, Disney was at its core against gambling, but the corporate interests of the modern era? Please. Their anti-gambling tirades were to keep casinos out so that less money was siphoned away from WDW to other destinations in Florida such as potential casino sites.

 

[Lee]

This has absolutely nothing to do with Disney trying to look out for the wholesome morals of the public and everything to do with them protecting their stake in the Florida tourism industry.

You are somewhat right with that statement.

Disney doesn't care about the morals of the public, it only cares about itself and its finances.

But....Disney has been fighting very hard for years to keep casinos out of the central Florida area. They have been doing so by adopting an "It's wrong to gamble" stance. Both publicly, and via the politicians they have on the payroll, they have taken a moral stance that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Just like they say they don't put casinos on the ships because there are kids there, and hey want a "family" atmosphere.

Nonsense.

They would love to have casinos onboard because of the huge profit to be made from them. (Ask RCL or Carnival. See if they ever considered removing their casinos. They'd laugh in your face.)
No, they don't have them on the ships because that would openly harm their interests on the mainland.

It's all hypocrisy, all of it, and I expect better. Silly me.