Originally Posted By wahooskipper So, why did they do it Jim? Ego? Do you think they made a $2 billion purchase solely for ego? I don't think they are infallible by any stretch but I have to think some smart people gave the greenlight to this purchase based on some sound reasoning. How does an Avengers monorail train passing by the front of the Magic Kingdom do anything to detract from the guest experience?
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <So, why did they do it Jim? Ego? Do you think they made a $2 billion purchase solely for ego?> It was $4 billion. Not that I'm counting. Why did Disney buy them? I have no idea why, in 2011, The Walt Disney Company would want to buy Marvel Entertainment for that kind of money. It seems very weird to me. Now, 25 years ago? When Marvel was struggling, and before all the various assets had been used and abused and already done in theme parks? Yeah, that makes more sense to me. <How does an Avengers monorail train passing by the front of the Magic Kingdom do anything to detract from the guest experience?> I'm not saying that it detracts. Like it or not, in March 2012, Marvel is part of the extended Disney family, and they have an audience at their theme parks who would probably be interested in seeing 'The Avengers.' I wonder how many people understand that Marvel is now owned by Disney. And as you mention, does it really matter? But when you talk about branding, and powerful brands, and Disney having one of the biggest names in entertainment and so forth...Marvel is a very, very diluted, dare I say, worn out brand. We used to visit Universal Studios Hollywood 10-12 years ago when we had annual passes. The Marvel Mania restaurant was up there -- lasted for about 18 months. Then, a shop with Marvel merchandise, prices slashed over and over again. It just didn't move of the shelves for about a year. And for Disney to pay that kind of money, for essentially a library of superheroes that are so incredibly saturated in the market already. It just seems odd. Maybe it's clearer and makes perfect sense to someone else here and they can explain it.
Originally Posted By dshyates "How does an Avengers monorail train passing by the front of the Magic Kingdom do anything to detract from the guest experience?" It's crass commercialization. It has all the class of a wrapped city buss. And I like to keep my $730 parking lot view "Deluxe" Resort experience as crass commercialization free as possible. Even if it is "Walt's City Buss in The Sky".
Originally Posted By dshyates Oh, and I don't give one wit about Disney buying Marvel. I am sure the sharp pencil boys crunched all the numbers and if all the planets align like they planned I am sure it will pay off. As far as Marvel in the parks? What the hell, give those damned princesses a run for their money. As far as concern for the Disney Brand. You guys do know that they sell Mickey Mouse Toilet Paper at Walmart, right?
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORGOCH: What's yer point? Here in Morva they sells toilet paper fer yer outhouses with my big, fat sister's picture on it! If she can git that popular why cain't Thicky 'n Thinnie Mouse git that popular??
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Crass commercialism? I'm sorry that even existed during Walt's time. The Disneyland/Wonderful World of Color as much as I love them and will watch them every chance I get but the shows were nothing but promotions for the Disneyland or the next upcoming film. As for superhero films being on the wane. That might be true in a year or two, but not this year. It's pretty much guaranteed that the top two or three movies of the year will be The Dark Knight Returns and the Avengers. And the Amazing Spiderman will also finish in the top ten, so they are hardly waning.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>When you start thinking about it -- what is Disney doing exactly?<< They are following Iger's business plan: to take any franchise they can get their hands on, and suck all life out of it. When he became head honcho, Iger said that he wanted to explore the possibilities of new ways to view existing properties. As we've seen over the last 7 years (has it really been that long!?), he really just wanted to make as much money as possible in the short-term, by squeezing the archives, while slowly whittling down the production side of the company to nothing. When he announced a couple years ago that the new plan for the studio would be to release only big-budget "tent pole" films (since they seem to be the ones that make the most money), I saw that it was the beginning of the end. While they had the potential to make the most, they were also the biggest financial risk. By putting all of the studio's eggs in one basket, he began a very serious decline in the company that we are really just starting to see the tip of. The studio creates the content that feeds the other arms of the Company. When there aren't any decent movies, there's nothing to cross-promote. When there's nothing to cross-promote, then Iger is out of a job, as he can't seem to do anything else. >>So, why did they do it Jim? Ego? Do you think they made a $[4] billion purchase solely for ego?<< Simple. Iger saw it as another brand that he could squeeze all the life out of. It does seem a little odd to pick a brand that appears to have relatively limited life left by the time Disney really gets control (and with a relatively limited core audience), but it was there for the taking. Iger doesn't create; he simply expands existing franchises.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I'm not sure when Disney gets to start making money on Marvel characters, but I'll throw this into the stew for your consideration: I have 4 young nephews, living on opposite sides of the country, and for them it's ALL about super heroes and wrestlers and UFC. They've got clothing, action figures, school supplies, DVDs, Wii games -- you name it. Visit the toy aisle at Target some time, you'll see Marvel (and DC) character stuff from infants on up.
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn Maybe Disney is thinking ahead. A purchase of Universal is on the horizon.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 I don't mind that Disney advertises and tries to have synergy. Sure, Walt used TV and film to advertise his products too. However, I wish Disney wouldn't be so crass about it like wrapping a Monorail like any city bus. It just brings the real world in, and makes you realize it's a moving billboard. The Monorails that Disney sold to Bally's in Las Vegas have these kinds of advertising on them...do we really need Disney to start looking like Vegas?
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I wonder how many people, when filling out a guest survey, make mention of the wrapped monorails? It seems like a quick trip from wrapping a monorail to the place looking like Vegas. Now, if someone hands me a card on the way between the monorail and the maingate that has scantily clad women with the headline: Girls, Girls Girls then I will admonish said individual (before slipping the card into my back pocket).
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 Is using the monorail to advertise the latest Disney blockbuster any more crass than selling a $7.50 Mickey Mouse shaped rice krispy treat throughout the resort?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Is using the monorail to advertise the latest Disney blockbuster any more crass than selling a $7.50 Mickey Mouse shaped rice krispy treat throughout the resort?<< No, but all bets are off once the treats are Spider-man shaped.
Originally Posted By dshyates "Is using the monorail to advertise the latest Disney blockbuster any more crass than selling a $7.50 Mickey Mouse shaped rice krispy treat throughout the resort?" Yes, now if there was an ad for the opening of Avengers on the rice crispy treat then you may have a point.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>selling a $7.50 Mickey Mouse shaped rice krispy treat throughout the resort<< Super villains everywhere are furious they didn't think of that crime first!
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<Yes, now if there was an ad for the opening of Avengers on the rice crispy treat then you may have a point.>> Disney is the business to make money and create awareness for its products(John Carter notwithstanding) and the Avengers just happens to be one of those products.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt I think any kind of advertising on the Monorails - whether it's a park anniversary or the latest studio blockbuster - is tacky.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>I'm 38 and still haven't out grown some of that stuff<< I read somewhere that men over the age of 60 are the largest demographic of comic book buyers. I think that comic books might be an endangered species as kids don't seem to be interested in them anymore. Why read aout Batman when you can be Batman on your XBox?
