Comcast and Marvel

[Metro West]

Originally Posted by doconeill

Disney hasn't hurt the Star Wars brand by only have the one ride, JTA and the occasional Star Wars Weekends any. And now they own it. I don't think there is any danger of "hurting the brand". Even still, the brand does not belong to Universal at all. If the brand goes south, re-theme. It's not Universal's responsibility to grow the brand.

They simply do not have the ability to expand without end. And they have a much more profitable brand to exploit right now.

[rag10576]

Eventually Uni may give in. Space is limited and costly. For the time being its profitable to keep Marvel or maybe they break even with the royalties that are being paid. Somehow Disney will get the rights. It might be benifical to cut the ties.

[Horace Horsecollar]

If Disney had owned Marvel back in the 1990s, it's doubtful there would now be a Marvel Super Hero Island at IoA.

However, the status quo of having Marvel Super Hero Island at IoA works well for Marvel (Disney) and Universal.

Universal invested a lot of money in 1998 and 1999 to build Marvel Super Hero Island. That investment has been paying off ever since. Although Harry Potter is now the "star" at IoA, the Marvel Super Hero Island helps to make IoA a full-day park with highly repeatable attractions.

Universal continues to have a top-notch immersive attraction in the form of The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man ride, which was upgraded to digital 3-D projection. In addition, Marvel Super Hero Island also has timeless thrill rides that appeal to guests who like that sort of thing: Doctor Doom's Fearfall, The Incredible Hulk Coaster, and Storm Force Accelatron. IoA's Marvel section continues to be a popular themed land. And let's not forget the revenue from dining and merchandise.

Marvel (Disney) earns licensing income and merchandise revenue from the deal. It's a steady stream of pure profit for Marvel (Disney), without having to invest hundreds of millions of dollars to build something new. (Disney likes deals that provide pure profit.) It also keeps the characters in front of guests, helping to build an audience for new Marvel Studios movies.

If Disney wants to invest substantial capital in its own Marvel attractions, Disney (with its international partners) can do so at Disney parks California, France, Japan, Hong Kong, and Shanghai.

It's good business for Universal to keep the status quo.

It's good business for Disney to keep the status quo.

[rag10576]

I totally agree. However there is no room for growth at Uni IOA Marvel area. That needs to be looked at.

[dadddio]

Originally Posted by rag10576

I totally agree. However there is no room for growth at Uni IOA Marvel area. That needs to be looked at.

How can they 'look at it'? It's not as if they can create real estate.

[Horace Horsecollar]

Originally Posted by rag10576

I totally agree. However there is no room for growth at Uni IOA Marvel area. That needs to be looked at.

Actually, there's a good-sized expansion opportunity between Marvel Super Hero Island and Toon Lagoon.

All that's currently there is the former Pandemonium Cartoon Circus amphitheater, some game booths, and a lot of landscaping. It's "belongs" to Toon Lagoon, but that really doesn't mean anything. In fact, the area is barely used at all. It currently feels more like a no-man's land than a real part of Toon Lagoon.

There's no reason why Marvel Super Hero Island could not expand into this area -- but only if both Universal and Marvel (Disney) see it as good business for their respective companies.

[HeyItsNickCA]

Originally Posted by SpacePlace

Disney is just going to have to try and be smart and act quick on securing exclusive licensing for the next "Harry Potter" type series

Disney may already have a winner on their hands. I’m not sure if anyone here has heard of the ‘’Percy Jackson’’ series. Basically, it’s about a boy in the modern world who learns he is the Greek god Poseidon son and goes on quests to defeat to defend Olympus from Kronos, the father of the Gods, who was overthrown by Zeus and has risen from the depths of the Underworld to overtake Olympus and destroy the Gods forever. Of course, there is more to the story but that’s a quick explanation of the story.

There has already been one movie, ‘'Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief,’’ which was a success in the box office. However, there are problems because some fans think the movie wasn't good because it wasn't true to the book – the basis of the movie was true but some extras weren't included. There is a second movie coming out that has a new director which will decide the series future considering on how well they do with the movie. I mention the series because Hyperion Books publishes the books and Hyperion Books is a Disney company. The movie however is released by 20th Century Fox but I’m sure that Disney could secure their permission for theme parks. Even if Universal tried to get rights from 20th century fox, I’m not sure they could considering the movies are based on the books and the books belong to Disney.

[doconeill]

Percy Jackson was a surprising success I think...although it did better overseas than it did in the U.S. Whether it has the material to be a theme park capable franchise, I don't know.

And it all depends on who has the rights to what at this point. Just because Hyperion is the publisher does not mean they control those rights, or that Disney gets first dibs. The rights are a complicated business, and with a company like Disney (publisher, studio, distribution, TV networks, theme parks, etc.) they have to walk a fine line between corporate synergy and monopoly.

[rag10576]

Lets stick to marvel. Also 2014 BIg Hero 6 will be out in theaters. Does anyone know if Disney can use these characters in their parks?

[doconeill]

Originally Posted by rag10576

Lets stick to marvel. Also 2014 BIg Hero 6 will be out in theaters. Does anyone know if Disney can use these characters in their parks?

Big Hero 6 must be flying way under the radar...didn't even hear that they were planning a movie, apparently an animated one. Of more visibility is Guardians of the Galaxy, which will be live action. But neither really contain "household name" characters, so unless they take off like crazy, I doubt that they'd get used except for short-term promotion.

But I believe they are free and clear from the Universal contract. They are limited to what they are using and the "family" around them (i.e. I think it would be tough for Disney to use Kitty Pride or Rogue from X-Men, even though they have never been used AFAIK at Universal...)

[Lewisc]

Originally Posted by rag10576

I totally agree. However there is no room for growth at Uni IOA Marvel area. That needs to be looked at.

Looked at by whom? Lucas didn't make Disney expand Star Wars or Indian Jones. Do you think Disney can make Universal expand Marvel?

There is room as per PP. Should Universal see the need they could expand in the area near Jurassic park, might need a walkway. They could shrink Toon Town. Could also add Marvel in the Studios.

Originally Posted by HeyItsNickCA

Disney may already have a winner on their hands. I’m not sure if anyone here has heard of the ‘’Percy Jackson’’ series. Basically, it’s about a boy in the modern world who learns he is the Greek god Poseidon son and goes on quests to defeat to defend Olympus from Kronos, the father of the Gods, who was overthrown by Zeus and has risen from the depths of the Underworld to overtake Olympus and destroy the Gods forever. Of course, there is more to the story but that’s a quick explanation of the story.

Having book or even movie rights doesn't automatically mean they have theme park rights. The first Narnia movie did 3X the gross of Percy Jackson. Plus the underlying super powers are that of the parents. Zeus Poseidon etc. Those characters are in the public domain and are already part of IoA.

Originally Posted by rag10576

Lets stick to marvel. Also 2014 BIg Hero 6 will be out in theaters. Does anyone know if Disney can use these characters in their parks?

Stick to marvel. OK. Universal has the rights.

Many of us think Spiderman and the Forbidden Jorney are both superior to any any recent Disney attraction. Disney buying the rights from Universal, aside from being very unlikely, might not even be an improvement

[rag10576]

Spiderman is good. Marvel has so much potential under Disney. With the small area in Uni being called IOA just isnt enough for such a large brand.

[dadddio]

Originally Posted by rag10576

Spiderman is good. Marvel has so much potential under Disney. With the small area in Uni being called IOA just isnt enough for such a large brand.

It is what it is. Universal is unlikely to abandon the Marvel characters and they are unlikely to be able to expand them further. I imagine that the licensing agreement requires Disney approval for any new attractions. That is unlikely to happen.

I doubt that Disney is bothered much by the inability to use those characters in their parks. They can always expand using the Star Wars franchise or any or all of the Pixar movies or any of their other properties. They also have done a pretty good job creating rides and attractions that aren't based on any of the above.

[rag10576]

There are other charcters that could be used. We will see uf that ever happends.

[doconeill]

Originally Posted by rag10576

There are other charcters that could be used. We will see uf that ever happends.

We're three years in to Disney owning Marvel, and nothing yet.

Universal got the rights to all the character families that people are most familiar with.

We're more likely to see something at Disneyland than anything at WDW, unless Disney can really break out some of the other character families with a big hit movie, beyond possible promotional appearances.