Lifetime pass?

[nytimez]

I don't get why Disney screwed the college students out of the lifetime passes if they were really the first ones through the gates.

The story I heard is that they wanted a wholesome family.

 

[Wadecool]

The story I heard is that they wanted a wholesome family.

That is messed up. Walt hadn't even been dead 5 years yet at that point, and this may well be the first instance of him spinning in his cryogenic chamber deep below POTC.

 

[nytimez]

That is messed up. Walt hadn't even been dead 5 years yet at that point, and this may well be the first instance of him spinning in his cryogenic chamber deep below POTC.

They were probably still stinging from "Yippie Day" at Diseyland the previous year.

For anyone unfamiliar, here's the weird story of the "hippie invasion" of Disneyland that led to police in full riot gear surrounding Sleeping Beauty Castle in 1970.

 

[slmjam]

Interesting story. We were at Disneyland over Thanksgiving and got to ride in the Lilly Belle train car with about 10 other folks. The subject of lifetime passes came up. This wouldn't be the easiest or best way to get a lifetime pass, but the CM who rode in the train car told all of us that if you deliver a baby inside the Disneyland Park, the baby receives a lifetime pass to Disneyland. To her knowledge, this 'event' has only happened once that she knew of.

 

[wbeem]

Somebody better not tell Tom Bricker.
Seriously though I can't see that as being all that true either, there are some amazing photos out there Disney has acquired and I don't see them giving away something 'money can't buy' for right to a photo.

I have no reason to think the CM was pulling my leg. Personally, I'd rather have cash payment. As a business transaction, giving a lifetime pass is probably easier than negotiating the payment.

A local stock photographer has a great photo of Cinderella's Castle that Disney uses in its annual shareholder report. According to him, Disney wanted the photo with transfer of copyright, but he wouldn't agree to those terms. They ended up licensing the photo exclusively from him for five years for $100K.

 

[nytimez]

I have no reason to think the CM was pulling my leg. Personally, I'd rather have cash payment. As a business transaction, giving a lifetime pass is probably easier than negotiating the payment.

A local stock photographer has a great photo of Cinderella's Castle that Disney uses in its annual shareholder report. According to him, Disney wanted the photo with transfer of copyright, but he wouldn't agree to those terms. They ended up licensing the photo exclusively from him for five years for $100K.

First, it is NOT easier to give a lifetime pass than negotiate payment for a photo. Especially for Disney. They have entire offices dedicated to the negotiation of rights and payments, and they nickel and dime every single one.

Second, they did not pay a local stock photographer $100K for a photo of their own castle to use in the shareholder's report. Sorry -- I believe you when he says he told you that, but I don't believe he told you the truth.

 

[Eljay]

Here's a couple news articles about lifetime passes that have been awarded to various families:

Wow! Thanks for those links TBDave, finally some verified info!

 

[danielephant]

Found a story on the first guest to enter Disneyland. It says he was awarded a lifetime pass.

Ticket To Ride

I really enjoyed this story!

 

[wbeem]

First, it is NOT easier to give a lifetime pass than negotiate payment for a photo. Especially for Disney. They have entire offices dedicated to the negotiation of rights and payments, and they nickel and dime every single one.

Second, they did not pay a local stock photographer $100K for a photo of their own castle to use in the shareholder's report. Sorry -- I believe you when he says he told you that, but I don't believe he told you the truth.

Thanks for pointing out that everyone is telling me lies. Does that mean I shouldn't believe you, either?

 

[nytimez]

Thanks for pointing out that everyone is telling me lies. Does that mean I shouldn't believe you, either?

You can believe whatever you wish.

But there's no way in the world Disney gave someone a lifetime park pass for a photo they liked. Nor do I believe they payed a freelance photog $100,000 for the use of a photo of their own castle for five years.

 

[Robo]

they did not pay a local stock photographer $100K for a photo of their own castle to use in the shareholder's report. Sorry -- I believe you when he says he told you that, but I don't believe he told you the truth.

Thanks for pointing out that everyone is telling me lies. Does that mean I shouldn't believe you, either?

There would be no reason for Disney to pay someone a $100,000 photo fee for an image to use on a shareholder's report.
What would the need be for that?
What would the VALUE be to Disney to buy a photo of their own castle?

An "urban legend" is a story that sounds OK when first heard, but one that doesn't hold up under closer examination.
This kind of info sounds "legend-ish" to me.

 

[wbeem]

There would be no reason for Disney to pay someone a $100,000 photo fee for an image to use on a shareholder's report.
What would the need be for that?
What would the VALUE be to Disney to buy a photo of their own castle?

An "urban legend" is a story that sounds OK when first heard, but one that doesn't hold up under closer examination.
This kind of info sounds "legend-ish" to me.

The photographer is Joe Drivas. He took the photo with a Contax medium format camera for a different purpose and eventually negotiated the license with Disney.

It's absurd for you to say that there is no reason for Disney to pay someone else for a photo. It's not like every day is a picture perfect day and someone is there with a medium format to get just the perfect photograph. Although Disney has its own photographers, sometimes the subject matter just doesn't cooperate. If you find the image you want somewhere else, then you license it.

Photos for annual reports need to show things in the best possible fashion. The rate for a multi-year license is not out of line for a corporate of Disney's size, particularly when it's a photo of a signature feature of its theme parks.

 

[wbeem]

You can believe whatever you wish.

But there's no way in the world Disney gave someone a lifetime park pass for a photo they liked. Nor do I believe they payed a freelance photog $100,000 for the use of a photo of their own castle for five years.

As you said, you can believe whatever you wish. I'm curious as to what background you have in negotiating such things?

 

[Robo]

It's absurd for you to say that there is no reason for Disney to pay someone else for a photo.

OK. I'll accept the nomination.

Photos for annual reports need to show things in the best possible fashion.

To spend $100,000 for a photo to use on the cover of a document purporting felicitous corporate financing is, well...

That just doesn't seem to pass the "smell test."

.

 

[chartle]

Thanks for pointing out that everyone is telling me lies. Does that mean I shouldn't believe you, either?

No one is lying to you.

Things that are very rare or out of the ordinary often have many Urban Legends.

(Just in case) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_legend

There are tons of Urban Legends swirling around WDW and Disney, here is a list http://www.snopes.com/disney/disney.asp.

CM's often repeat these legends because either they believe them themselves or they are pulling one over on you.

For the first category a CM posted here that during training he was told that the rooms at the Contemporary are modular and could all be switched out in a single day with a crane. Not true, this one has a grain of truth because they were built as modular units on site as the frame work was built and slid into place but they were never designed to be removed at a later date.

Under the second there was a thread here that Jonny Depp dresses up as Jack Sparrow for one party night and doesn't tell anyone. There was a report that this is a UL that was started by the CM's and there was a tally board back stage on how many guests they got to believe them.

For me personally I don't think the story is true. Why would Disney pay $100,000 for the rights for a photo for just five years use to put on an internal publication? Even if it was the absolute best photo, one their own photographers (pros not Photo Pass) could take the same or similar pic for no cost.

 

[Eljay]

If anybody is interested, you can view the covers of the shareholders reports for the last 15 years here: http://corporate.disney.go.com/investors/annual_reports.html
Click on the drop-down menu where it says 2010 Annual Report, to see back to 1995.

I only see one partial view of Cinderella Castle, on the 2008 report.

 

[mill4023]

The photographer is Joe Drivas. He took the photo with a Contax medium format camera for a different purpose and eventually negotiated the license with Disney.

It's absurd for you to say that there is no reason for Disney to pay someone else for a photo. It's not like every day is a picture perfect day and someone is there with a medium format to get just the perfect photograph. Although Disney has its own photographers, sometimes the subject matter just doesn't cooperate. If you find the image you want somewhere else, then you license it.

Photos for annual reports need to show things in the best possible fashion. The rate for a multi-year license is not out of line for a corporate of Disney's size, particularly when it's a photo of a signature feature of its theme parks.

LMAO!!!!
It's truly astounding to me what some people will believe.

 

[mill4023]

As you said, you can believe whatever you wish. I'm curious as to what background you have in negotiating such things?

One doesn't need any specific background to know your story is totally false. All that is required is a brain and a teeny tiny bit of common sense.

 

[Kurt Miller]

Great story

 

[mesaboy2]

ZTA.