Disney Rumor Alert!

[TheTXTaylors5]

Actually, I believe the planned Israel pavilion was cancelled due to mutual Disney & Israel funding issues (Disney - Eisner not wanting to put more cash into the money sinkhole Epcot; Israel's need to up their defense budget). Thus, the Israel exhibit in the Millennium Village: cheaper, and no security or political issues.

As you know, Israel was represented at the Millennium Village in 1999 with Israel funding more than $1.8 million dollars on the pavilion. There was a BIG debate on whether Jerusalem would be portrayed as the political capital of Israel. Disney has always stated that the Millennium Village was a non-political event. However, The United Arab Emirates, a group of leading Palestinians and The Arab League were all onboard to boycott all Walt Disney products and all its affiliates. It was estimated that this would be a $100 million dollar loss to Disney. The Disney company president Al Weiss met with Arab leaders. Shortly after that, Jerusalem was kept out of the Israel pavilion at the Millennium Village. Coincidence? I think not. Disney had a contract with Israel for the Millennium Village. So, they kept the agreement. However, after reading numerous websites on the matter, Disney really didn't want to get "political" and add Israel as a "permanent" pavilion. Look at all the trouble they had just for an exhibit! I also wanted to comment that back when all this was happening, a member of the Saudi royal family and major shareholder in the EuroDisney operation in France, Prince Al Walid bin Talal, said he had intervened personally with the Disney chairman, Michael Eisner, urging him to change the theme of the exhibition. I checked and Prince Al Walid bin Talal is still the major shareholder of Disneyland Paris. He currently holds a 10% stake in Euro Disney SCA (Disneyland Paris). So, I wouldn't place bets that Israel will be at Epcot anytime soon ...

Jennifer

 

[challer]

As you know, Israel was represented at the Millennium Village in 1999 with Israel funding more than $1.8 million dollars on the pavilion. There was a BIG debate on whether Jerusalem would be portrayed as the political capital of Israel. Disney has always stated that the Millennium Village was a non-political event. However, The United Arab Emirates, a group of leading Palestinians and The Arab League were all onboard to boycott all Walt Disney products and all its affiliates. It was estimated that this would be a $100 million dollar loss to Disney. The Disney company president Al Weiss met with Arab leaders. Shortly after that, Jerusalem was kept out of the Israel pavilion at the Millennium Village. Coincidence? I think not. Disney had a contract with Israel for the Millennium Village. So, they kept the agreement. However, after reading numerous websites on the matter, Disney really didn't want to get "political" and add Israel as a "permanent" pavilion. Look at all the trouble they had just for an exhibit! I also wanted to comment that back when all this was happening, a member of the Saudi royal family and major shareholder in the EuroDisney operation in France, Prince Al Walid bin Talal, said he had intervened personally with the Disney chairman, Michael Eisner, urging him to change the theme of the exhibition. I checked and Prince Al Walid bin Talal is still the major shareholder of Disneyland Paris. He currently holds a 10% stake in Euro Disney SCA (Disneyland Paris). So, I wouldn't place bets that Israel will be at Epcot anytime soon ...

Jennifer

There's no doubt about what you said, but the "Coming Soon: Israel" went up and down the same times as the "Coming Soon: Spain" signs. It is well known and documented that Eisner saw how much money Epcot lost in its first few years and wanted to stop putting money into it. So, while Morocco and Norway were allowed to be completed, new projects like Israel, Morocco, and the expansion of World Showcase behind its west side were shelved.

It's a shame that Disney caved to a threatened Arab boycott. The other big companies that were threatened by or experienced an Arab boycott tended to do just fine. (Nestle since 2006, Coca Cola 1968-1991, Mattel, Motorola, Ralph Lauren, Nabisco - even the NY Yankees! plus tons more.) I understand the desire to avoid politicization of the parks, but if it comes from a threatened boycott regarding a state that was in the middle of pushing forward with the Oslo peace accords and working towards peace, then something was seriously wrong there. Clearly, the Arab League and the Palestinians were much more interested in not allowing Israel any representation not because of politics, but rather out of a desire for delegitimization. If not, why make such a fuss about a country that you are deep in the process of making peace with?

Anyway, I have a feeling this may be delving into a political discussion. So, I'm just going to say that there could have been a wonderful pavilion made for Israel without it being politicized, but some out there would have politicized it anyway. It's a shame that Disney would cave to those people.