The Spirited Back Nine ...

PrincessNelly_NJ

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure when those rumors were, but if it was around 10 years ago then it would have been during a time when Disney and Apple weren't exactly best buds. Due to Eisner burning a lot of bridges with Pixar and Apple not long before he left.


I could be wrong, but I personally thing Apple would be more likely to have some issues with an EPCOT-Google/Android sponsorship than any of the above.

From the link posted by danlb above, looks like the festival was either canceled or was never going to happen in the first place...
Idk... businesses do what they need to survive. If Google came along and wanted to provide sponsorship for something, I don't think disney would say no. It would be a great way to get people in the parks at no cost to Disney.

But honestly, Idc who sponsors it, but I would be all for more "future" in future world. I would love to see an exhibit on current tech in development.
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
Idk... businesses do what they need to survive. If Google came along and wanted to provide sponsorship for something, I don't think disney would say no. It would be a great way to get people in the parks at no cost to Disney.

But honestly, Idc who sponsors it, but I would be all for more "future" in future world. I would love to see an exhibit on current tech in development.
Disney isn't in a position where they're struggling to survive though. At one point in time they relied on corporate sponsorship, but this is no longer required whatsoever due to how incredibly large and profitable Disney has grown on their own. I'm unsure, but I could see Apple having some sway on the matter if they voiced their opposition to Google/Android sponsoring something. And Disney is probably eager not to repeat Eisner's attempt to burn bridges with Apple if they did so. Whether Apple would express such dislike of this or not is the question, but I wouldn't put it past them.

Conflicts of interest have occurred in the past between sponsor corporations and Disney. I believe Kodak has interfered successfully on at least two occasions regarding EPCOT attractions. One was when Figment was going to be green originally when Imagination was in the creation process, the colors from Fujifilm at the time apparently (Kodak's protests prompting them to change his color to purple instead). All articles i've read about the pitched but never built Mt Fuji coaster have stated that Kodak also voiced their animosity towards that project and this contributed at least partially to its cancellation.
 

PrincessNelly_NJ

Well-Known Member
Oh I agree. I hate that WoL & Odyssey have become special events pavilions. I have a love/hate relationship with UoE. I love Jamie Lee Curtis & the 20 minute air conditioned nap, I hate everything else about it.

Epcot does need some love and some help way beyond a third theatre but by comparison it is nowhere remotely in the ballpark of the horrid shape of DAK/DHS.
I agree, Epcot isn't as bad as people like to say.
I think Captain EO & Imagination need to be replaced or updated. And Epcot could use one more solid E-ticket to take some pressure off Test Track & Soarin but I think overall, I look forward to Epcot more than any of the other parks in WDW.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
I agree, Epcot isn't as bad as people like to say.
I think Captain EO & Imagination need to be replaced or updated. And Epcot could use one more solid E-ticket to take some pressure off Test Track & Soarin but I think overall, I look forward to Epcot more than any of the other parks in WDW.

Well, lost in the talk of Tokyo and other spam, Captain Eo was supposed to be replaced & Imag have some work done to it. But that money was switched to Soarin.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Disney isn't in a position where they're struggling to survive though. At one point in time they relied on corporate sponsorship, but this is no longer required whatsoever due to how incredibly large and profitable Disney has grown on their own. I'm unsure, but I could see Apple having some sway on the matter if they voiced their opposition to Google/Android sponsoring something. And Disney is probably eager not to repeat Eisner's attempt to burn bridges with Apple if they did so. Whether Apple would express such dislike of this or not is the question, but I wouldn't put it past them.

Conflicts of interest have occurred in the past between sponsor corporations and Disney. I believe Kodak has interfered successfully on at least two occasions regarding EPCOT attractions. One was when Figment was going to be green originally when Imagination was in the creation process, the colors from Fujifilm at the time apparently (Kodak's protests prompting them to change his color to purple instead). All articles i've read about the pitched but never built Mt Fuji coaster have stated that Kodak also voiced their animosity towards that project and this contributed at least partially to its cancellation.

Ive heard those stories about Kodak. Im fine with the purple dragon. If he was green, he would look too much like the Philly Phanatic.
 

WDW95

Active Member
Does anyone think the GMR could be leaving and Toy Story Playland will be built in its spot. It kind of makes sense though. It would eliminate the long, narrow, and congested corridor in front of TSM and would make the "Toy Story Area" feel more like a complete land instead of the Pixar Studio theme they have now. When they add the third track, the whole building may be re-themed to fit in better with Toy Story Playland.
 

PrincessNelly_NJ

Well-Known Member
Disney isn't in a position where they're struggling to survive though. At one point in time they relied on corporate sponsorship, but this is no longer required whatsoever due to how incredibly large and profitable Disney has grown on their own. I'm unsure, but I could see Apple having some sway on the matter if they voiced their opposition to Google/Android sponsoring something. And Disney is probably eager not to repeat Eisner's attempt to burn bridges with Apple if they did so. Whether Apple would express such dislike of this or not is the question, but I wouldn't put it past them.

Conflicts of interest have occurred in the past between sponsor corporations and Disney. I believe Kodak has interfered successfully on at least two occasions regarding EPCOT attractions. One was when Figment was going to be green originally when Imagination was in the creation process, the colors from Fujifilm at the time apparently (Kodak's protests prompting them to change his color to purple instead). All articles i've read about the pitched but never built Mt Fuji coaster have stated that Kodak also voiced their animosity towards that project and this contributed at least partially to its cancellation.
They don't need the sponsorship... but a number of their rides could use some "extra funding" for maintenance and upkeep.
But we are talking a tech festival not an attraction. You can't have a tech festival of just google or just apple because so many other companies are out their paving the way in technology using robots and etc.
They may not have one company sponsor it but have many business showcase.

Outside of My Magic+, what financial pull does Apple have on Disney? Apple doesn't make money for Disney. And we all know, Iger loves to make money any way he can.
 

PhotoDave219

Well-Known Member
Does anyone think the GMR could be leaving and Toy Story Playland will be built in its spot. It kind of makes sense though. It would eliminate the long, narrow, and congested corridor in front of TSM and would make the "Toy Story Area" feel more like a complete land instead of the Pixar Studio theme they have now. When they add the third track, the whole building may be re-themed to fit in better with Toy Story Playland.

I'm pretty sure I have a gosh-darn flipping good reason why I feel so strongly about nothing bad happening to GMR.

I'm pretty sure I don't have any gosh-darn flipping intentions of sharing that reason.
 

PrincessNelly_NJ

Well-Known Member
And you just can't compete with the Phanatic, the best mascot in professional sports!
yup... the best.
tumblr_lmn3zbQXY01qbublko1_500.gif
 

the.dreamfinder

Well-Known Member
Courage, something the weatherman will never have.
businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-30/tim-cook-im-proud-to-be-gay
Throughout my professional life, I’ve tried to maintain a basic level of privacy. I come from humble roots, and I don’t seek to draw attention to myself. Apple is already one of the most closely watched companies in the world, and I like keeping the focus on our products and the incredible things our customers achieve with them.

At the same time, I believe deeply in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, who said: “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’ ” I often challenge myself with that question, and I’ve come to realize that my desire for personal privacy has been holding me back from doing something more important. That’s what has led me to today.

For years, I’ve been open with many people about my sexual orientation. Plenty of colleagues at Apple know I’m gay, and it doesn’t seem to make a difference in the way they treat me. Of course, I’ve had the good fortune to work at a company that loves creativity and innovation and knows it can only flourish when you embrace people’s differences. Not everyone is so lucky.

While I have never denied my sexuality, I haven’t publicly acknowledged it either, until now. So let me be clear: I’m proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me.

Being gay has given me a deeper understanding of what it means to be in the minority and provided a window into the challenges that people in other minority groups deal with every day. It’s made me more empathetic, which has led to a richer life. It’s been tough and uncomfortable at times, but it has given me the confidence to be myself, to follow my own path, and to rise above adversity and bigotry. It’s also given me the skin of a rhinoceros, which comes in handy when you’re the CEO of Apple.

The world has changed so much since I was a kid. America is moving toward marriage equality, and the public figures who have bravely come out have helped change perceptions and made our culture more tolerant. Still, there are laws on the books in a majority of states that allow employers to fire people based solely on their sexual orientation. There are many places where landlords can evict tenants for being gay, or where we can be barred from visiting sick partners and sharing in their legacies. Countless people, particularly kids, face fear and abuse every day because of their sexual orientation.

I don’t consider myself an activist, but I realize how much I’ve benefited from the sacrifice of others. So if hearing that the CEO of Apple is gay can help someone struggling to come to terms with who he or she is, or bring comfort to anyone who feels alone, or inspire people to insist on their equality, then it’s worth the trade-off with my own privacy.

I’ll admit that this wasn’t an easy choice. Privacy remains important to me, and I’d like to hold on to a small amount of it. I’ve made Apple my life’s work, and I will continue to spend virtually all of my waking time focused on being the best CEO I can be. That’s what our employees deserve—and our customers, developers, shareholders, and supplier partners deserve it, too. Part of social progress is understanding that a person is not defined only by one’s sexuality, race, or gender. I’m an engineer, an uncle, a nature lover, a fitness nut, a son of the South, a sports fanatic, and many other things. I hope that people will respect my desire to focus on the things I’m best suited for and the work that brings me joy.

The company I am so fortunate to lead has long advocated for human rights and equality for all. We’ve taken a strong stand in support of a workplace equality bill before Congress, just as we stood for marriage equality in our home state of California. And we spoke up in Arizona when that state’s legislature passed a discriminatory bill targeting the gay community. We’ll continue to fight for our values, and I believe that any CEO of this incredible company, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, would do the same. And I will personally continue to advocate for equality for all people until my toes point up.

When I arrive in my office each morning, I’m greeted by framed photos of Dr. King and Robert F. Kennedy. I don’t pretend that writing this puts me in their league. All it does is allow me to look at those pictures and know that I’m doing my part, however small, to help others. We pave the sunlit path toward justice together, brick by brick. This is my brick.
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
Outside of My Magic+, what financial pull does Apple have on Disney? Apple doesn't make money for Disney. And we all know, Iger loves to make money any way he can.
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2004-02-03/business/0402030189_1_eisner-pixar-steve-jobs

I could see them having a say if they chose to express opposition towards a Google sponsorship. The question is whether they would bother being against it in the first place. But if Apple said they don't want it, Disney execs would most likely listen and be very careful (wary) about ignoring Apple.

Does anyone think the GMR could be leaving and Toy Story Playland will be built in its spot. It kind of makes sense though. It would eliminate the long, narrow, and congested corridor in front of TSM and would make the "Toy Story Area" feel more like a complete land instead of the Pixar Studio theme they have now. When they add the third track, the whole building may be re-themed to fit in better with Toy Story Playland.
That would look absolutely hideous to have TSPL in place of GMR.
 

Bairstow

Well-Known Member
IMHO I would rather a ride with awesome HD screens that are operational 95% of time over AA's and physical effects that look cheesy or don't work for prolonged periods. Universal is playing to their strength.

...but with Gringotts they've built a ride with last-generation's HD screens that runs about 70% of the time.

To me it was less visceral and more jumbled. Count me as one of the old fogeys that couldn't tell what the heck was going on 98% of the time on Transformers.
It's a well done ride. The ride system is well done. Personally, that ride just didn't do it for me, and I probably wouldn't ride it again if I went to the park. I'd just do Mummy one more time and call it even.
But, I'm the dude with the Kitchen Kabaret obsession, so I'll admit my tastes might not be ones shared by a lot of folks.


I know I've cast a lot of shade at Gringotts for disappointing me, but I hated, hated Transformers.
To paraphrase Shakespeare, it, and the movies it's based on are stories told by idiots, a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom