Spirited News, Observations & Thoughts IV

[misterID]

@flynnibus @lazyboy97o

Firstly, I'm not upset by it, I'm disappointed by it. So you don't have to keep asking if I'm upset by this that or the other. I understand why Disney license their stuff to whatever product. I'm fully aware they are in the business of making money. It's just that once upon a time, they wouldn't have done this specific bit of licensing. They put Spiderman on a Pinball machine because they know it attracts people who know and like that IP. That's why any product uses an IP. I don't expect to see Sponge Bob on a slot machine because... Well, I think they know better than to associate something that's aimed at kids on a gambling machine.

Again, that's their decision.

I think the point that's being missed is that they have actively marketed Spiderman to kids. It's just like why they don't put Mickey on a bottle of beer or a pack cigarettes. Again, to me, in my opinion, it's really bad show. But again, they are a business. One that will do this sort of thing now. My expectations are now lower. Thank you.

I mentioned AVATAR because people associate Disney with families and were pointing out all the mature aspects of that film not fitting in a Disney themepark, with all sorts of their "family friendly" IP's being used in merch and what have you, including MARVEL. Now I'm just hearing the opposite, like, get over it, Disney is a money making machine, so what of it? That wasn't pointed at Disney. But people on this board.

 

[ford91exploder]

Not trying to be argumentative, but that is not true. It may have been in 2009 or 2010 when all of the points were not sold, but as of June 30, 2011 DVD declared 100% of their available rooms at BLT tower for DVC inventory. This included the equivalent of 267 2 bedroom villas and 14 3 bedroom villas. What's left for Disney cash reservations is less than 5% of inventory. In any given year as owners trade in points for cruises or non-DVC hotel rooms Disney will assume additional cash rooms in replacement.

Here's some simple math. The average 2 bedroom villa goes for 370 points a week. If there are the equivalent of 267 2 bedroom units declared that works out to 5.1 million points. The 14 3 bedroom villas average about 870 points a week or the equivalent of 600K additional points. That adds to 5.7M points. The total points available for sale is 5,733,350. If your number is correct and there are only 150 rooms for DVC but 5.5M points sold the average weekly rental would be about 705 points per room (5.5M divided by 150 divided by 52 weeks). Check out the point charts. It's high, but not that high

BLT has 428 rooms all told, So based on your numbers 35% belongs to CRO not 5%, Based on 281 rooms or equivalents average points per week is 258.6

 

[asianway]

Not trying to be argumentative, but that is not true. It may have been in 2009 or 2010 when all of the points were not sold, but as of June 30, 2011 DVD declared 100% of their available rooms at BLT tower for DVC inventory. This included the equivalent of 267 2 bedroom villas and 14 3 bedroom villas. What's left for Disney cash reservations is less than 5% of inventory. In any given year as owners trade in points for cruises or non-DVC hotel rooms Disney will assume additional cash rooms in replacement.

Here's some simple math. The average 2 bedroom villa goes for 370 points a week. If there are the equivalent of 267 2 bedroom units declared that works out to 5.1 million points. The 14 3 bedroom villas average about 870 points a week or the equivalent of 600K additional points. That adds to 5.7M points. The total points available for sale is 5,733,350. If your number is correct and there are only 150 rooms for DVC but 5.5M points sold the average weekly rental would be about 705 points per room (5.5M divided by 150 divided by 52 weeks). Check out the point charts. It's high, but not that high

You are correct, points are declared into the Condominium as sales proceed - 150 was the start point.

 

[ford91exploder]

You are correct that the rooms aren't cleaned daily, but they are also quite a bit larger than an average hotel room. A 2 bedroom villa has 2 bedrooms, 3 full bathrooms and a full kitchen and living room. In your average hotel room its 1 bathroom and a bedroom. The 267 equivalent 2 bedroom villas is actually more than 534 regular rooms and the 3 bedroom villas are like cleaning at least 3 hotel rooms so its the equivalent of at least 576 regular hotel rooms. Daily housekeeping at a hotel consists of making the bed and replacing towels with a little straightening up. They only fully clean the room at checkout. I'm just not seeing the big conspiracy here, but we can agree to disagree.

The problem here is a 200 Room timeshare in Manhattan run by Westin their annual houseskeeping budget is 1.1 Million and that includes daily cleaning and turndown service,

I think we can all agree NYC is one of the most expensive cities in the world. So how does Disney justify such a high figure in a low cost/low wage area such as Orlando other than being wildly inefficient or cooking the books I dont see a third alternative.

 

[stevehousse]

I don't get the obsession with the DVC numbers?!?

If I wanted to take a math class I'd be in school and not on a Disney park fan site...these "simple math" posts are lame...

 

[raymusiccity]

You WIN the funniest post of the night....

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20564926,00.html

They fit right into the Vegas Casino life...

*1023*

You WIN the funniest post of the night....

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20564926,00.html

They fit right into the Vegas Casino life...

*1023*

i'll drink to that !

 

[PhotoDave219]

Absolutely not. I have friends who planned conventions this summer at WDW and the absurd prices they charge are borderline sickening. I believe it was $80 for a gallon of iced tea.

Wawa has iced tea at 3 for $5. Total of a gallon and a half...

 

[71jason]

Wawa has iced tea at 3 for $5. Total of a gallon and a half...

But much like Starbucks coffee, it lacks that Disney Magic.

 

[flynnibus]

BULL. It is exactly that.

They preach family values and gambling not being compatible when it suits their profit motive and then engage in it elsewhere at the same time. It is Disney defending its turf on one hand while dealing a hand with the other.

Do you honestly believe anyone looks to Disney as the moral beacon for Florida and believes it's motivation in the fight is to save Florida citizens from the evils of gambling?

Do you honestly believe there can be no conflicts of messaging between separate divisions when you are a global conglomerate?

You're taking a local issue and trying to apply it to the global company. I haven't seen Disney lobbying against gambling anywhere except where it is about competing with their theme parks. Disney's local interests in the P&R division aren't always going to take precedence over the entire family of companies under the TWDC umbrella.

I have no idea why you want to dance this one ... Save your strength and put your tin foil hat on as I will have a new thread with new (and troubling -- to me and others) stuff Disney doesn't want you to read this weekend, if possible. Can't wait to read all the folks saying 'yeah, sooooooo what?'while meetings get held at TDO!

While I'm sure you think you've uncovered a gem here... you might be sad to learn this drum has already been beaten about Marvel/Disney and gambling. Almost 2 years ago... (edit: I see someone else has already posted this reference... )

http://robot6.comicbookresources.co...f-hypocrisy-in-south-florida-gambling-debate/

Disney is under fire from a conservative Washington, D.C., think tank for opposing a plan that would allow casino developers to build massive resorts in South Florida, all while the entertainment giant licenses its Marvel comics superheroes to gambling websites.

The Institute for Liberty, an opponent of healthcare reform that characterizes itself as “an aggressive defender of the rights of individuals to pursue the American dream,” has launched a television ad called“Disney’s Dark Side” that accuses the company of hypocrisy: Although the House of Mouse contends it’s “protecting Florida’s family-friendly image,” IFL argues it’s more concerned with these resorts encroaching on Walt Disney World’s market share.

“The truth?” the TV spot’s narrator says. “Disney’s so-called family-friendly image includes profiting from licensing comic book characters to online casinos.”

That’s certainly true. An online search for “Marvel casino slots” brings up countless results — including, plainly enough, Marvel Slots, which provides information on games featuring Spider-Man, the X-Men, the Hulk, Captain America, Ghost Rider and Fantastic Four. Blade, Daredevil and Elektra also have their own slots (as you can see in the image above). Of course, it’s not only Marvel: Warner Bros.-owned DC Comics has a deal with Cryptologic for online slots featuring Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, The Sandman, Watchmen and Green Lantern, among others. There’s also one based on Mike Mignola’s Hellboy.

But neither Warner Bros. nor Dark Horse has a dog, or a resort, in the South Florida casino fight. You can watch the TV spot below.

 

[flynnibus]

Simple question for you : do you think TWDC wants to publicly be associated with gambling? Yes or no, leave the BS on the dance floor.

I don't think TWDC as a parent would really care. If it did, it wouldn't impact them greatly to squash this IP licensing. It's a drop in the ocean.

Would the P&R division? They've already demonstrated they want to paint gambling as outside their intended product and have actively engaged to discourage it in their turf. But I doubt any are pulling their hair out over this as it's old news and both TWDC and it's P&R division have continued their paths without this derailing them.

 

[flynnibus]

Everything I've read says that guy used the Florida costs as guidelines to decide how much money Aulani would need to run. Never mind that the property is in Hawaii and everything costs more over there.

Ok - thx for that. This still doesn't support @ford91exploder 's model. If he followed the FL model of 'building in other resort costs' - he couldn't well get in trouble for leaving out the special sauce of building in other resort costs. There is more to it than simply that

 

[Big C 73]

Shouldn't this thread be moved to the Disney Company thread? No? Sure seems like it. This is about the resort right? Un-spirited chit chat.

 

[flynnibus]

I think the point that's being missed is that they have actively marketed Spiderman to kids. It's just like why they don't put Mickey on a bottle of beer or a pack cigarettes. Again, to me, in my opinion, it's really bad show. But again, they are a business. One that will do this sort of thing now. My expectations are now lower. Thank you.

I think you gloss over that while the Marvel product is marketed to children - it is not exclusively a kid product.

Iron Man is a drunk, womanizing playboy. Not exactly the poster hero for your 8 yr old. The demographics for Marvel are not just toddlers.. but males.

When they put Mickey Mouse on the slot machines... I think you might have a moral argument. But these are separate brands. This should be even LESS contentious than Touchstone/etc was because this isn't even the same company doing it.. where Touchstone was basically just a front.

 

[Darth Sidious]

Wawa has iced tea at 3 for $5. Total of a gallon and a half...

Yup, except if you're having an event at WDW you have to buy food and beverages through the mouse. It's crazy...

 

[lebeau]

Shouldn't this thread be moved to the Disney Company thread? No? Sure seems like it.

This thread went off the rails at least 300 pages ago. At this point, it should have a sign which reads "Enter at your own risk." There is no telling what the argument of the day will be. The only thing you can count on is that it will be contentious.

And probably have nothing to do with Disney World...

 

[scout68]

But much like Starbucks coffee, it lacks that Disney Magic.

The last time I had magic tea Disney had nothing to do with it.

 

[tissandtully]

This thread went off the rails at least 300 pages ago. At this point, it should have a sign which reads "Enter at your own risk." There is no telling what the argument of the day will be. The only thing you can count on is that it will be contentious.

And probably have nothing to do with Disney World...

Ah, 300 pages ago, it seems like such a simpler time.

 

[lebeau]

Ah, 300 pages ago, it seems like such a simpler time.

Seems like only yesterday I was blissfully unaware the Avengers were featured on lottery tickets. Where has my youth gone?

 

[1023]

During the period of time that Touchstone was producing films such as "Pretty Woman", the primary source of information for people was their local sources. Local sources consisted of newspaper, television, news magazines, and radio news. In more affluent demographics, delivery of the Wall Street Journal and similar publications might also have been in the mix. Information as to what exactly made up a company's holdings, their division structure, or corporate make up wasn't easily available.

Back then, information was harder to come by. I utilized BBS well before many of my peers because I had resources they could not posses and interest in tech. Prior to services like AOL, the reach of most people was still their local sources. In today's society, information is readily available within seconds from multiple internet connected devices.

Why is this important? It is important because many of the arguments made about Disney's participation in licensing it's IP have involved reaching back to find examples of similar controversial themes. Touchstone films is part of Disney. Was that common knowledge back then? To my recollection it was not. Did the release of "Pretty Woman" in 1990 have controversy? Sure it did. The likes of programs such as The 700 Club made it one.

The fact that Disney owned film divisions that played along controversial themes was not easily appropriated information.

{Pause}

Actually, forget it. Nuances in this format of a discussion will not help convince others of divergence. You either recognize that Disney's public image is one oriented around the family or you don't. They may produce, license , or sell things that are contrary to that image. It is up to the individual to decide if that concerns them or not. Disney is not controversy free for any extended period of time. This one may cause them trouble.

Let's move onto what may or may not be coming to the Happiest Places on Earth. I would love some good Disney News. I myself have about 12 attraction ideas if anyone knows someone interested.

*1023*

 

[lebeau]

Touchstone films is part of Disney. Was that common knowledge back then?

I was 13 and I remember it being a big deal when Splash came out. Lots of media attention around Disney releasing a PG-13 movie with brief nudity.