Marvel Contract?

[chartle]

Since DL and possibly other parks are getting Marvel Characters how doe the contact with Universal stand at this time?

The same.

The contract only applies to east of the Mississippi in the US and only to themeparks.

 

[Kaewin]

When does the terms of the contract run out anyway? I had heard about negotiations were going to be opened up at some point but that was before I had heard the rumors of Marvel in Disneyland last year.

 

[doconeill]

When does the terms of the contract run out anyway? I had heard about negotiations were going to be opened up at some point but that was before I had heard the rumors of Marvel in Disneyland last year.

There is no expiration. As long as Universal keeps playing the license and meets the other obligations of the contract, they keep the rights.

Now, whether Universal dislikes the fact that Disney is exercising rights to the characters elsewhere enough to consider selling the contract back or opting out is another thing...

 

[jujube]

There is no expiration. As long as Universal keeps playing the license and meets the other obligations of the contract, they keep the rights.

Now, whether Universal dislikes the fact that Disney is exercising rights to the characters elsewhere enough to consider selling the contract back or opting out is another thing...

I'd think they'd love the free advertising!

 

[doconeill]

I'd think they'd love the free advertising!

Or revile that they are doing it for several other parks...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Or revile that they are doing it for several other parks...

Nope...symbiosis

Uni advertises for Disney's movies and merch

Disney's movies and merch advertise for unit's parks


There seems to be somekind of issue with this idea

 

[doconeill]

Nope...symbiosis

Uni advertises for Disney's movies and merch

Disney's movies and merch advertise for unit's parks


There seems to be somekind of issue with this idea

No, I understand that. But now we are talking about something different...the idea that Universal is advertising for Disney's movies, merch, and west coast/international parks., while Disney reciprocates for just one park...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

No, I understand that. But now we are talking about something different...the idea that Universal is advertising for Disney's movies, merch, and west coast/international parks., while Disney reciprocates for just one park...

But to what end?

If comcast/ universal gets fed up with promoting Disney...they still can't do anything about it.
Why would they weaken their parks by dropping characters frOm what is rapidly becoming big money franchises?

The answer is: they wont...the benefit doesn't outweigh the risk.

I hate to say it: but it looks like Iger hit a homerun with the marvel buy...far more than he could have ever dreamed...it figures

 

[doconeill]

But to what end?

If comcast/ universal gets fed up with promoting Disney...they still can't do anything about it.
Why would they weaken their parks by dropping characters frOm what is rapidly becoming big money franchises?

The answer is: they wont...the benefit doesn't outweigh the risk.

I hate to say it: but it looks like Iger hit a homerun with the marvel buy...far more than he could have ever dreamed...it figures

I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying it is possible that Universal can still end up on the short side of this, such that they might consider changes down the road when fiscally prudent and the comic-book-movie fad has ended, and either re-theme the area or switch over to another franchise...unless they got he contract so cheap it can't possibly make sense to do so.

 

[DCTooTall]

I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying it is possible that Universal can still end up on the short side of this, such that they might consider changes down the road when fiscally prudent and the comic-book-movie fad has ended, and either re-theme the area or switch over to another franchise...unless they got he contract so cheap it can't possibly make sense to do so.

From what I read of the contract..... Universal got the contract for a virtual song. Considering in the mid-90's when the contract was written Marvel's draw wasn't entirely known, Universal essentially took a large risk at the time which has since paid off handsomely.

Essentially, From a $$ standpoint, At this time the only requirements are for Universal to spend a certain percentage of their marketing budget highlighting the Marvel properties as long as a minimum spend is spent. With the billboards around Orlando, and other "resort wide" marketing that includes the Marvel Island, This isn't that hard to do.

They also must dedicate a % of space for marketing of Marvel merchandise. Again, This isn't that hard of a requirement for them to meet, especially with the shops around the Marvel Island meeting a majority of the space requirements.

And then there is the annual Licensing Fee. At this point of the contract, The fee structure is set as a simple reoccurring fee with an annual increase based off a agreed upon inflation index. After the annual fee minimum requirement is met, I believe there may also be a small flat percentage to account for overall park revenue... but with the credits they receive and they way it's written, it wouldn't be any concern either. All the initial fees and lump sum payments required in the contract were met years ago. Since the contract sets the increases to those fees based on the rate of inflation, they are not impacted by the increasing value of the properties themselves. Even better, They get a credit towards those park licensing annual fees on all licensing fees attached to the Marvel Merchandise sold which is sold by the resort.... So let's say that they buy a $5 Marvel Action Figure from Hasbro [or whoever], and Hasbro pays $1 of that wholesale cost back to Marvel to meet their licensing fee requirements, Universal gets credit for the $1 towards their park Licensing fees.

In a way, with the increasing value of the Marvel characters, and toy/Merch contracts being written much different than the park contract, It's more likely that the cost of licensing the properties for toys and trinkets will increase at a higher rate than the fees required by Universal for the Park rights. This will only lead to a win for Universal since people will want more marvel merch because of the movies, which would in turn give them not only the nice profit on the merch sales, but also additional credit towards the required fees to be paid to Marvel for the license.

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying it is possible that Universal can still end up on the short side of this, such that they might consider changes down the road when fiscally prudent and the comic-book-movie fad has ended, and either re-theme the area or switch over to another franchise...unless they got he contract so cheap it can't possibly make sense to do so.

One problem with this is when Fad has ended, would not be desirable for Disney Park either.

 

[fannatic]

Does anyone remember Tony Baxter's idea for a feature length attraction? Since the "contract" only covers the parks, I think Disney should build a big ticket Marvel attraction at Downtown Disney. It would supposedly make its money back a lot faster than traditional theme park rides.

 

[chartle]

1. Does anyone remember Tony Baxter's idea for a feature length attraction?

2. Since the "contract" only covers the parks,

3. I think Disney should build a big ticket Marvel attraction at Downtown Disney.

4. It would supposedly make its money back a lot faster than traditional theme park rides.

1. I'm assuming that this would be like the other shows like the Star Trek experience.

2. Define a "park"

3. I think an attraction is an attraction so covered in the contract.

4. Are you sure? They would have to charge much more than say Flights of Wonder. How much was the Star Trek Experience?

 

[dairylives]

One problem with this is when Fad has ended, would not be desirable for Disney Park either.

Five years ago, i might've been able to write of superhero flicks as just a "fad", but it looks like they are here to stay. We are coming up on 15 solid years of huge superhero blockbusters, with the most recent breaking tons of records. You may not care for them, but they aren't going anywhere any time soon.

 

[tjkraz]

Five years ago, i might've been able to write of superhero flicks as just a "fad", but it looks like they are here to stay. We are coming up on 15 solid years of huge superhero blockbusters, with the most recent breaking tons of records. You may not care for them, but they aren't going anywhere any time soon.

For the most part, I agree. But I think "Cogswel_Cogs" point was that Universal would only let the license lapse if interest in the Marvel properties has waned dramatically. And if its popularity is on the downside, Disney isn't going to sink hundreds-of-millions into a theme park presence either.

As for the films, quality will win out. Films starring fringe characters like Green Lantern and Ghost Rider haven't done well largely because of the poor quality of the product. But with good writing, directing and acting talent, audiences would turn out for a film featuring relatively unknown comic book characters.

 

[pilferk]

I'm not arguing with you. I'm just saying it is possible that Universal can still end up on the short side of this, such that they might consider changes down the road when fiscally prudent and the comic-book-movie fad has ended, and either re-theme the area or switch over to another franchise...unless they got he contract so cheap it can't possibly make sense to do so.

Consider this:

They're paying what, by all accounts, is a pretty reasonable licensing fee to Marvel (Disney). Remember, this deal was signed before the HUGE comic book/mass media explosion with a Marvel company that was (at the time) not in a real solid financial position (recovering from bankruptcy filed in 1996). Increases are based on rate of inflation..not current value of the IP.

They've invested not only hundreds of millions of dollars in the development of the island (in "yesterday money", by the way), but tens (if not hundreds) of millions more in advertising and branding.

They have, on that island, what is widely considered one of the best theme park attractions IN THE WORLD (Spiderman).

The IP's the island surrounds have NEVER been more valuable...and thus have never been as cost-effective as they are now.

I just don't see any reasonable case to be made that Universal would WANT to punt Marvel out the front door any time in the foreseeable future. Marvel/Disney has franchise movies planned out for the better part of the next decade. It would be a HORRIBLE business decision for Uni....and the only way you could get around it is if Disney threw literal TRUCKLOADS (think in terms of BILLION, not MILLIONS) of cash at Universal.

And I don't see how Disney could justify that expenditure to it's shareholders JUST to get the characters into ONE resort in Orlando. Maybe they can...stranger things happen (ABCFamily, anyone?) in business. But it's a tough sell, IMHO.

The crux of the whole discussion is "fiscally prudent". I can't see any reason why it would be now, and I don't foresee any event that would make it so in the near term.

15+ years from now? Maybe.

 

[dairylives]

For the most part, I agree. But I think "Cogswel_Cogs" point was that Universal would only let the license lapse if interest in the Marvel properties has waned dramatically. And if its popularity is on the downside, Disney isn't going to sink hundreds-of-millions into a theme park presence either.

As for the films, quality will win out. Films starring fringe characters like Green Lantern and Ghost Rider haven't done well largely because of the poor quality of the product. But with good writing, directing and acting talent, audiences would turn out for a film featuring relatively unknown comic book characters.

To be fair, this is the same company that refuses to market "princess movies", and then puts millions into FLE.... It all comes back eventually. Even the princesses franchise, one of Disney's biggest draws, was near non-existent at a point in time (mid 60's through the 80s) but they built entire parks around the concept.

 

[tjkraz]

To be fair, this is the same company that refuses to market "princess movies", and then puts millions into FLE.... It all comes back eventually. Even the princesses franchise, one of Disney's biggest draws, was near non-existent at a point in time (mid 60's through the 80s) but they built entire parks around the concept.

But Universal knows all of this and it begs the question of what sort of conditions would have to occur for them to let go of what appears to be a rather modest licensing agreement.

It's a Catch-22. As long as Marvel remains popular, the license has value to US. If Marvel's popularity wanes to the point that US is willing to walk away, Disney isn't going to sink theme park dollars into Marvel attractions either.

 

[pilferk]

As for the films, quality will win out. Films starring fringe characters like Green Lantern and Ghost Rider haven't done well largely because of the poor quality of the product. But with good writing, directing and acting talent, audiences would turn out for a film featuring relatively unknown comic book characters.

Psst...Green Lantern is DC.

The most recent Ghost Rider (Spirit of Vengence) had a $57 million budget (the 100+ million budget published is incorrect, FYI...that was the original budget which was slashed)...and grossed 130+million worldwide. Not great, but not shabby for a fringe character.

I agree with the point, though. Quality wins out in the end. Comic films have gotten enough of a high profile to attract top talent (writing, directing, and acting). I don't see that changing until the top tier movies stop being a license to print money (aka The Avengers and likely the new Spiderman and Batman (also DC) films this summer).

 

[fannatic]

Feature Length attractions are not parks, but they are like rides. They would have a Broadway level priced ticket. They would last about 2 hours. This isn't a rumor, it's just an idea from the 90s. It was suppose to be the future of themed entertainment. I have heard that Disney may be planning a Marvel show for DD with Cirque. Also, according to Screamscape (I know) the renewal date for the contract is sometime in 2018. They suppose that if it is renewed, that Disney's terms will be a real pain for Universal. Marvel is now worth at least twice what Islands of Adventure is. If they're still going strong in 2018, it would be fun to see what Disney wants for a renewal - maybe owning half the park?