Uni waiting for Marvel Buyout from Disney?

michael.fumc

michael.fumc

Well-Known Member
Matt_Black said:
Yeah. Now, Oswald was a big part of the Epic Mickey games, and the first one was very well received, so I'll give him that. Other than that tough, he's not made big ripples in the pop culture landscape. Granted, part of that is Disney's fault for not doing a whole heck of a lot with him. Give him an alternate design and throw him a guest spot on the Mickey Mouse Clubhouse or something.
Click to expand...
I agree if Oswald needs more visibility, he needs to be in infinity, cartoon shorts, and other guest spots, my family and I love Oswald especially my youngest but he is hard to find
 
Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
I'm not pretending Oswald is as big a merchandising moneymaker as Star Wars. But he does sell merchandise. What's your beef with him anyway?
Click to expand...
No beef with him... Why would I have a beef with a fictional character? I'm not crazy... What is your beef with the Muppets? You seem to have the unhealthy obsession with all things not Disney which Disney then buys, which then becomes Disney...

I just look at reality... The Walt Disney Company looks to make money... The IPs they purchased are all money makers... And like any company looking to increase profits, the Walt Disney Company will look to exploit the money making IPs so they make even more money.. Oswald is just a foot note in the company's history... Same with many of their own original IPs... Some things just aren't money makers and won't be... Hence, Disney not using or exploiting them...

IF Disney decided to do something worthwhile with Oswald, like a full length animated feature, and it was actually a good movie, then bravo to them... If the movie became successful, and drove up merchandising for the character, and they added something in the parks, then great... But until then, Oswald wallows in nowhere land...
 
Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
mahnamahna101 said:
What's your beef with the Muppets? ;)And I've never seen a piece of Oswald merch at Walmart, the mall or even WDW... certainly can't sell as much as you think. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of Kermit/Piggy/Fozzie/Animal/Beaker stuff, not to mention Sesame Street.

No one ever said Oswald was a bad character - just that he isn't a huge merch machine. I'd rank all of these above Oswald in terms of merch sales

  1. Disney Princesses
  2. Star Wars
  3. Marvel
  4. Winnie the Pooh
  5. Mickey and Friends
  6. Cars
  7. Disney Fairies
  8. Toy Story
  9. The Muppets
  10. Pirates of the Caribbean
  11. Disney Classics
  12. Nightmare Before Christmas
  13. Kingdom Hearts
  14. TRON
  15. Phineas and Ferb
  16. Finding Nemo
  17. Monsters, Inc
  18. Duffy Bear
  19. Indiana Jones
  20. Mighty Ducks:D
  21. Potentially Oswald
I just can't see him being a moneymaker in the way you portray him
Click to expand...

I would lower TRON on your list, lower than Duffy, Nemo, and P&F... Even Monsters Inc.
 
Fractal514

Fractal514

Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther said:
The Marvel characters were not created/adapted/developed by Disney, so they don't fit in with the traditional Disney aesthetic. They're just acquisitions, purchased by the same cement-headed CEO who wanted to sell Disneyland to foreigners. And of course I know not all of the Marvel superheroes wear tights. Some of them wear armor and the Hulk wears hobo pants. Woo hoo. Forgive me for not focusing on superhero attire.

We've been having a conversation on another thread about what a messed-up grab bag DHS is because it has so many off-brand IPs in it. I personally think it would be great if TDO jettisoned Indiana Jones, Star Wars and Aerosmith and just made the Tower a haunted hotel (it'd still be a great ride), the RocknRoller coaster just a rollercoaster set to rock music and put in more rides and attractions based on Disney movies. What the heck, throwing out the junk and bringing in more actual Disney rejuvenated DCA. Maybe the same intelligent approach could help DHS. ;)
Click to expand...


Blah Blah Blah? I'm sorry but that kinda tells me that trying to have a real discussion here is likely to be a waste of time, but in the hopes that we can really dig into this with an open mind...

I think you're right, if Disney acquired the rights to My Little Pony and put it into Fantasyland, I'd be upset. But I would trust that Disney wouldn't do that because it would be a horrible fit. But that isn't what is being discussed, we're not talking about Spider-Man taking over Main Street. If properly executed I think just about anything could be a good addition, and part of properly executing it is finding the proper place for it to go.

As for the Hollywood Studios argument, I think that there is some truth in the fact that HS is a mish-mosh of themes, but that, to me, isn't the fault of the rides but rather the overall theming. Should they decide to do a Lucasland, in addition to Pixar Place, and then perhaps a Marvel Studios, the theme could very easily come together that the Studios are about the various movie studios Disney owns and something cool could be done with that.

I don't really want to see the Marvel heroes showing up all over the parks, but at the same time I don't want to see Frozen in Norway, so I don't think it really is about where the property originated, but more about whether or not Disney should be adding that type of character theming to places in general.
 
Thrill

Thrill

Well-Known Member
danlb_2000 said:
One reason I would be skeptical of this is that the Uni/Marvel contract was made back when Marvel was close to bankruptcy, so the contract has very favorable terms for Uni. The actual amounts Uni has to pay are redacted in the contract but I would bet that they are pretty good and the can only increase with the rate of inflation. So the amount Uni is paying now is probably a huge bargain considering the current popularity of Marvel. I doubt they could pick up another franchise of equal popularity at that price.
Click to expand...

I am not a lawyer, but there's a chance things have changed.

Based on my reading of the contract between Universal and Marvel, if a third party comes to IoA (read: Warner Bros. with Harry Potter) and gets compensated based on park attendance/revenue/etc. (do they?), then Marvel must be offered the same deal. Granted, I am a bad reader, and this depends entirely on how the HP deal is structured, but I'd bet that WB was favored heavily in that particular contract.

Also, I'm not sure if I misread the exclusivity section as well, but Disney might be limited to using Marvel only in California and Paris. Japan, Hong Kong, and mainland China are all part of one region in the exclusivity shrinkage of the Marvel contract, assuming that The Amazing Spiderman constitutes something of comparable scope to Marvel Superhero Island (I argue that it does, and the fact that the ride in Tokyo opened nearly 5 years after Marvel Superhero Island suggests that Universal would argue the same). Disney's bailing out potentially 4 resorts by buying this contract out.

EDIT: Skimmed the Harry Potter contract. They get a flat fee annually and a cut of merchandise. I don't know what that means for Marvel/Disney.
 
Last edited:
Matt_Black

Matt_Black

Well-Known Member
Hong Kong isn't limited, as they're getting a full on Iron Man attraction. Japan and mainland China? Don't know about that.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Thrill said:
I am not a lawyer, but there's a chance things have changed.

Based on my reading of the contract between Universal and Marvel, if a third party comes to IoA (read: Warner Bros. with Harry Potter) and gets compensated based on park attendance/revenue/etc. (do they?), then Marvel must be offered the same deal. Granted, I am a bad reader, and this depends entirely on how the HP deal is structured, but I'd bet that WB was favored heavily in that particular contract.

Also, I'm not sure if I misread the exclusivity section as well, but Disney might be limited to using Marvel only in California and Paris. Japan, Hong Kong, and mainland China are all part of one region in the exclusivity shrinkage of the Marvel contract, assuming that The Amazing Spiderman constitutes something of comparable scope to Marvel Superhero Island (I argue that it does, and the fact that the ride in Tokyo opened nearly 5 years after Marvel Superhero Island suggests that Universal would argue the same). Disney's bailing out potentially 4 resorts by buying this contract out.

EDIT: Skimmed the Harry Potter contract. They get a flat fee annually and a cut of merchandise. I don't know what that means for Marvel/Disney.
Click to expand...
What section suggests a new deal based on later deals?
 
asianway

asianway

Well-Known Member
Thrill said:
I am not a lawyer, but there's a chance things have changed.

Based on my reading of the contract between Universal and Marvel, if a third party comes to IoA (read: Warner Bros. with Harry Potter) and gets compensated based on park attendance/revenue/etc. (do they?), then Marvel must be offered the same deal. Granted, I am a bad reader, and this depends entirely on how the HP deal is structured, but I'd bet that WB was favored heavily in that particular contract.

Also, I'm not sure if I misread the exclusivity section as well, but Disney might be limited to using Marvel only in California and Paris. Japan, Hong Kong, and mainland China are all part of one region in the exclusivity shrinkage of the Marvel contract, assuming that The Amazing Spiderman constitutes something of comparable scope to Marvel Superhero Island (I argue that it does, and the fact that the ride in Tokyo opened nearly 5 years after Marvel Superhero Island suggests that Universal would argue the same). Disney's bailing out potentially 4 resorts by buying this contract out.

EDIT: Skimmed the Harry Potter contract. They get a flat fee annually and a cut of merchandise. I don't know what that means for Marvel/Disney.
Click to expand...
USJ is no where near Tokyo
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Thrill said:
Section V, F. Only relates to deals based on park revenue, and Warner's deal does not, as far as I know.

Fine, but that's really not the point. The point is that most of Asia is considered one unit by the Marvel/Universal contract as far as exclusivity is concerned.
Click to expand...
Those changes in payments would not alter the rights to characters or how those rights are retained, just the basis for payments. Marvel was also allowed to turn down such an offer.

Also, the second Marvel Super Hero Island had to open, or at least be declared, two years after the opening of Islands of Adventure. A single ride would hardly count as the deal is for a land and Spider-Man is instead in New York.
 
Thrill

Thrill

Well-Known Member
Matt_Black said:
Most, not all. Again, Hong Kong appears to be an exception.
Click to expand...

Hong Kong was specifically mentioned, but this:

lazyboy97o said:
Also, the second Marvel Super Hero Island had to open, or at least be declared, two years after the opening of Islands of Adventure. A single ride would hardly count as the deal is for a land and Spider-Man is instead in New York.
Click to expand...

As for payments, the idea was that the deal originally favored Universal because Marvel was incredibly desperate at the time. Disney would have a lot more incentive to buyout the contract with Universal if Universal's payouts turned out to be really small (which they probably still are, because Marvel never got a chance to restructure the payments).
 
unkadug

unkadug

Follower of "Saget"The Cult
I think Disney buying My Little Pony is an excellent idea. And a MLP dark ride in Fantasyland would be a Potter Swatter.

I can just see the Bronies kicking a** in this thread...It would be quite funny!
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Thrill said:
As for payments, the idea was that the deal originally favored Universal because Marvel was incredibly desperate at the time. Disney would have a lot more incentive to buyout the contract with Universal if Universal's payouts turned out to be really small (which they probably still are, because Marvel never got a chance to restructure the payments).
Click to expand...
The problem though is that there is no clause relating to Marvel paying to end the deal. This means that, regardless of what Universal is paying, they can ask for any amount of money to relinquish their rights. It's come up int he past, but when you consider the costs of designing and building a replacement, lost income during construction and some profit, a number near $1 billion is not unreasonable. Even if Universal agreed to something less, you'd still have Disney dumping another few hundred million dollars into developing and building a big E-Ticket or small land. That is an exorbitant amount of money for Disney to invest in Walt Disney World, an amount without any recent parallel.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom