Disney-Marvel buyout

[nytimez]

Do you really think that it is in Universal's best interest to be paying Disney royalties for Disney IP? Do you think they want Disney looking at their books? Universal cannot add any new Marvel attractions without Disney's approval. This means that sooner of later their attractions will become outdated and less popular. Disney itself has to update even its most classic attractions. Also, if Universal in any way neglects the Marvel attractions quality, Disney has an out of the contract. Disney is holding all the cards with Universal's Marvel deal. Therefore, it makes since that Universal would explore other options or replacements for the Marvel franchise. The survey mentioned Star Trek, Avatar, and of course Lord of the Rings which they mentioned may be a new area or a new theme park. Although, I doubt Universal has land enough for a new theme park.

If it means blocking a key competitor from using some of the most popular characters in comic books and on film, yes -- I think they're happy to do it.

Those attractions represent a very significant investment. They're not going to tear it all out and replace it with Star Trek just to keep Disney from looking at the books -- especially since most of the key numbers are out there already anyway.

 

[rugman1969]

Thanks for the info update. Wow, so much more to it than i ever imagined.

 

[jerivera]

Universal will likely keep the characters for the foreseeable future. However, paying royalties to Disney for their use, that has got to be a sour pill to swallow!

<- Universal

 

[Figment632]

It is already starting they are selling Marvel merch in Mouse Gears.

 

[DCTooTall]

Also another key thing to remember was that the Marvel deal was completed around the same time as Disney rebranded ToonDisney into DisneyXD. By gaining access to all the marvel properties, they dramatically increased the programming they had available for their "new" Young-male demo targetted cable channel.

 

[jco_direwolf]

What I've heard from various sources. Is that Marvel licensing is a mess. I've heard that Disney lawyers believe they will be unraveling the tangle of agreements marvel has been involved in over the last 50 years for quite some time.

 

[fannatic]

We'll see won't we?

 

[anthony2k7]

What I've heard from various sources. Is that Marvel licensing is a mess. I've heard that Disney lawyers believe they will be unraveling the tangle of agreements marvel has been involved in over the last 50 years for quite some time.

surely no business enters licensing agreements that last 50 years though? all the agreements will expire in far less than 50 years i'd have thought.

 

[nytimez]

surely no business enters licensing agreements that last 50 years though? all the agreements will expire in far less than 50 years i'd have thought.

That's not true at all. The best example is right there at Disney World: Winnie the Pooh. Disney has all the rights in perpetuity.

 

[skiingfast]

Leases depending on state are often for either 99 or 100 years. In a sense they go forever, or as far as the signers can see beyond their lifetime.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

However, paying royalties to Disney for their use, that has got to be a sour pill to swallow!

Universal is not paying Disney a nickel. Universal's contract is with Marvel. They pay Marvel. It matters not who owns Marvel, they pay the same regardless.

Universal has the upper hand in this. They own the theme park rights to the most coveted Marvel characters. Whether Universal is willing to tale a buy-out remains to be seen but I can't see any reason to do it unless it's a very attractive offer. And because of anti-trust concerns, Marvel's access to Universal's accounting books is very limited.

BobK/Orlando

 

[Galen_50]

Universal is not paying Disney a nickel. Universal's contract is with Marvel. They pay Marvel. It matters not who owns Marvel, they pay the same regardless.

Universal has the upper hand in this. They own the theme park rights to the most coveted Marvel characters. Whether Universal is willing to tale a buy-out remains to be seen but I can't see any reason to do it unless it's a very attractive offer. And because of anti-trust concerns, Marvel's access to Universal's accounting books is very limited.

BobK/Orlando

Which means they are now paying Disney. Take it from someone who spends alot of money each week in his local comic store. This was not a partnership, this was a flat out purchase of Marvel by Disney (which unrelated, has alot of comic readers worried that there favorite Marvel comics may be changed or toned down). Disney now owns all of Marvels contracts and also has to honor all of Marvels contracts. Without knowing the specifics but knowing how business works, Marvel most likely get a percentage of sales based on their characters. his would mean if there was any question, they could ask for a review of the financials. Now that Disney is the owner of said characters, they could ask for a review of the financials. Not saying they will, because they may not care at all how much Universial is making at their theme park. What it does do is keep them from added to the Marvel section without Disney's approval. This also goes for alot of he other Marvel agreements. Several of the movie studios that currently have the rights t Marvel characters are pushing thur movies so they do not lose the rights to them. Word in the industry is after the original prolems with the Spiderman rights, Marvel put it nto the contacts that if a movie is not released after a certain time frame frokmthe previous movie, the rights will revert back to marvel (now Disney). That is why in the next couple of years you are going to see both the Spiderman and Fantastc our francises rebooted and another Ghost Rider movie pushed thur. Disney knew what they were doing when they purchased Marvel. Either they are going to make alot of money having other people do all the work, or they wil get the property back to do what they want to do with it. I only wish it would lead to the price of a Marvel comic book bing lowered.

 

[fannatic]

From what I've heard, and on this matter I do believe the source, is that Disney actually has a person visit Universal perhaps on a monthly basis to check for quality control of the attractions. If it does not meet to Marvel's standards, they have an out with the contract. Make no mistake about it, Disney has their lawyers all over the current contracts searching for ways to break them. People may complain about this, but if I paid $4 billion for a comic book company and couldn't use the characters in my most profitable U.S. park I'd be doing the same thing. Disney will play hardball with the current contracts in the same way that they will deal with the law suit about Marvel characters. I've also heard that Imagineers are going over what characters they can legally use in the Florida parks for use in future attractions. Yes, they are allowed to choose among the thousands of characters that Universal isn't using. These characters may not be the most popular now, but what better way to promote second tier characters than at featured attractions at Disney parks.

 

[nytimez]

Disney actually has a person visit Universal perhaps on a monthly basis to check for quality control of the attractions. If it does not meet to Marvel's standards, they have an out with the contract.

While I can believe that there is some kind of clause related to this, I doubt it's as simple as this sounds. "Quality" would have to be defined in some legal way in the contract. The way these things usually work, then, is that if that "quality" is not met, it would have to be expressed by Disney to Universal in what specific way that it fell short. Then, Universal would be given time to correct/rectify it, assuming there's legal agreement that the issue is a violation of the contract.

Remember, they went into this contract with Marvel as a willing partner, not a company hoping to fill the contract with "gotcha" landmines.

Disney can and will play hardball and in the roughest way possible, but this isn't a cakewalk for them. Universal has rights as expressed in the contract, and the only real way they would give those rights to Disney is with an overwhelming financial offer. That offer would have to compensate Universal for what it paid to obtain those rights, for the re-theming of the area, and make up for profits Universal feels it would lose if it didn't have Marvel characters. Otherwise, Universal has absolutely no incentive to agree to it.

 

[KINGBOBOFTHENORTH]

Otherwise, Universal has absolutely no incentive to agree to it.

Exactly.
As I said, Universal has the upper hand when it comes to the Marvel characters that they have the theme park rights to.

BobK/Orlando

 

[MassJester]

I'm not at all sure that Disney needs to grab these rights back to make the purchase of Marvel worthwhile.

Presumably, Marvel was receiving value for those rights, and as such that value now will go to benefit the new parent company. Disney is free to exploit the other Marvel characters in Orlando, and the whole product line beyond the eastern US.

The details of the contract (including its duration) are points that we may never know (unless it becomes the subject of litigation), and so assertions as to what may be inside beyond the public statements of the parties are purely speculative.

 

[chartle]

Has Disney ever said why they bought Marvel?

I don't think that Disney bought then so they could add some characters to their parks.

Also I think Disney is doing OK with what they have.

I really don't think you will see a Marvel character at any park because of the fact that Universal seems to have all the A list characters tied up (at least in the minds of the general public).

If Disney adding ones that they could would people look at then as B or C list characters? Which US could use against them.

 

[nytimez]

Has Disney ever said why they bought Marvel?

I don't think that Disney bought then so they could add some characters to their parks.

Also I think Disney is doing OK with what they have.

I really don't think you will see a Marvel character at any park because of the fact that Universal seems to have all the A list characters tied up (at least in the minds of the general public).

If Disney adding ones that they could would people look at then as B or C list characters? Which US could use against them.

So when Bob Iger said characters will be appearing in parks, he didn't really mean it?

They didn't buy Marvel to do one thing with it. Or two things. Or three. They bought it for everything -- the movies, the comics and the characters, and they plan to use them. You don't spend a few billion dollars on something you plan to leave on the shelf.

 

[chartle]

So when Bob Iger said characters will be appearing in parks, he didn't really mean it?

They didn't buy Marvel to do one thing with it. Or two things. Or three. They bought it for everything -- the movies, the comics and the characters, and they plan to use them. You don't spend a few billion dollars on something you plan to leave on the shelf.

That article was kind of what I was looking for but still very ambiguous.

I really haven't done much reading of the sale outside a little bit on these boards. The most I have read is the basic Disney buys Marvel.

I think it would be a weird universe to see Marvel characters in both parks. I'm pretty sure its one of the signs of the end of the works as we know it.

 

[Figment632]

Perhaps the 3rd gate in DLP would include Marvel.