More Marvel at Disney

Even if they could use Marvel characters (either by negotiating something or just using characters who are not excluded), I have to wonder how great a "Marvel Land" would be thematically. Other than rides and characters, I don't see how you could have an immersive land themed around Marvel. For the most part, it basically takes place in a version of our world (other than space-based stories, i.e., Guardians). Compared to Star Wars, Pandora, even Toy Story, those are all different worlds.
 
I enjoy Marvel, and Marvel based rides at WDW would be cool, but I would rather see them use the money that would go to buying out the contract, to actually build rides for something they can use.
That's what I meant, just worded it wrong. Oops.
 
Even if they could use Marvel characters (either by negotiating something or just using characters who are not excluded), I have to wonder how great a "Marvel Land" would be thematically. Other than rides and characters, I don't see how you could have an immersive land themed around Marvel. For the most part, it basically takes place in a version of our world (other than space-based stories, i.e., Guardians). Compared to Star Wars, Pandora, even Toy Story, those are all different worlds.
I think that they could create a "war" zone, like making a land out of Wakanda where they all came together, or even the fight scene in endgame.
They could create "portals" to each character's place in time, and have Dr. Strange the "ruler" of the land, so you can go through the different places Marvel takes place, like mini lands. As
I'm typing this I like the portal idea more. Its popular enough to have a huge land, big enough to fit reasonably sized "mini lands" for each character/group of characters.
 


Even if they could use Marvel characters (either by negotiating something or just using characters who are not excluded), I have to wonder how great a "Marvel Land" would be thematically. Other than rides and characters, I don't see how you could have an immersive land themed around Marvel. For the most part, it basically takes place in a version of our world (other than space-based stories, i.e., Guardians). Compared to Star Wars, Pandora, even Toy Story, those are all different worlds.
That's a very good point.
 
How much can Disney keep buying without getting near-term substantial returns? They aren't a bottomless pit of money and their film division releases more flops than hits. Marvel has paid for itself many times over at this point and possibly Pixar. But they still haven't recouped their 4.3 billion acquisition of Lucasfilm...vastly overpaid 71 billion for Fox...just bought out Comcast's share of Hulu and then it's supposed to be a good idea for Disney to pay it"s biggest competitor untold amounts of money to be able to use characters it already owns? That's BEFORE any money is spent developing a Marvel land at WDW.
 
I'm curious if Universal reaches a point where it would rather not have Marvel in its parks. I could see this going either way. As Disney's Marvel Studios productions continue to be a major part of what they do, and as they become more and more associated with Disney, people will start to associate Universal parks as having "Disney" in them, like Universal is promoting a Disney product in its parks and got to "borrow" the characters (obviously not the case, but as we get more removed from Marvel not being owned by Disney and people forgetting the time before the MCU). On the other hand, as Marvel is massive in popular culture now (just think what it was like before the MCU), it's free advertising for Universal's in-park characters.
 


I'm curious if Universal reaches a point where it would rather not have Marvel in its parks. I could see this going either way. As Disney's Marvel Studios productions continue to be a major part of what they do, and as they become more and more associated with Disney, people will start to associate Universal parks as having "Disney" in them, like Universal is promoting a Disney product in its parks and got to "borrow" the characters (obviously not the case, but as we get more removed from Marvel not being owned by Disney and people forgetting the time before the MCU). On the other hand, as Marvel is massive in popular culture now (just think what it was like before the MCU), it's free advertising for Universal's in-park characters.

Both good points. I would hope Disney would have Universal come to THEM with a deal. Disney is in a position of strength on this one. They don't NEED Marvel in WDW and certainly should NOT spend a lot of money getting them back.
 
Both good points. I would hope Disney would have Universal come to THEM with a deal. Disney is in a position of strength on this one. They don't NEED Marvel in WDW and certainly should NOT spend a lot of money getting them back.

I agree. Given how much Marvel has changed in popular culture just over the last decade and given that the MCU is clearly going through a lot of changes, worrying about getting characters that may not be as big in 10 years as they are now, replaced by a new wave of movie characters, it's just more reason they don't NEED Universal's characters.
 
I agree. Given how much Marvel has changed in popular culture just over the last decade and given that the MCU is clearly going through a lot of changes, worrying about getting characters that may not be as big in 10 years as they are now, replaced by a new wave of movie characters, it's just more reason they don't NEED Universal's characters.

Right on!

Of course it would be nice to get them back but Disney needs to really stop spending so much money for everything it's wanting to acquire.
 
I'm curious if Universal reaches a point where it would rather not have Marvel in its parks. I could see this going either way. As Disney's Marvel Studios productions continue to be a major part of what they do, and as they become more and more associated with Disney, people will start to associate Universal parks as having "Disney" in them, like Universal is promoting a Disney product in its parks and got to "borrow" the characters (obviously not the case, but as we get more removed from Marvel not being owned by Disney and people forgetting the time before the MCU). On the other hand, as Marvel is massive in popular culture now (just think what it was like before the MCU), it's free advertising for Universal's in-park characters.

The big thing to remember is that the licensing fee Universal pays can only go up by the rate of inflation. Considering the difference in the popularity of Marvel between the time the contract was made and now, Universal is probably paying a bargain price for those rights. Since Universal licenses a lot of it's IP's from others, if they were to remove Marvel they wouldn't find a deal anywhere near as good as the one they currently have for Marvel.
 
How much can Disney keep buying without getting near-term substantial returns? They aren't a bottomless pit of money and their film division releases more flops than hits. Marvel has paid for itself many times over at this point and possibly Pixar. But they still haven't recouped their 4.3 billion acquisition of Lucasfilm...vastly overpaid 71 billion for Fox...just bought out Comcast's share of Hulu and then it's supposed to be a good idea for Disney to pay it"s biggest competitor untold amounts of money to be able to use characters it already owns? That's BEFORE any money is spent developing a Marvel land at WDW.

It's hard to say if Disney have actually recouped the cost of the Lucasfilm acquisition. Yes, the box office numbers on the four films they have released don't cover it, but there are lot of other revenue streams, BlueRay/DVD, TV licensing, merchandise, the TV shows, ILM, Skywalker sound, etc.
 
It's hard to say if Disney have actually recouped the cost of the Lucasfilm acquisition. Yes, the box office numbers on the four films they have released don't cover it, but there are lot of other revenue streams, BlueRay/DVD, TV licensing, merchandise, the TV shows, ILM, Skywalker sound, etc.

The net profits from the film's theatrical runs equals about 1/4 of the acquisition cost. That leaves a whopping near 3 billion from the ancillary's you mentioned to make up the difference. One troubling thing I've read is that merchandise sales have been in the toilet for the last 3 years.
 
The big thing to remember is that the licensing fee Universal pays can only go up by the rate of inflation. Considering the difference in the popularity of Marvel between the time the contract was made and now, Universal is probably paying a bargain price for those rights. Since Universal licenses a lot of it's IP's from others, if they were to remove Marvel they wouldn't find a deal anywhere near as good as the one they currently have for Marvel.

Hmmm...hadn't considered that.

Still...Disney continuing to pay their biggest competitors ungodly sums after the INSANE amount they paid for Fox(HALF of Disney's TOTAL valuation) just feels reckless and off the rails.
 
I'm not overwhelmed by the DCA Marvel plans yet, so Disney not getting the rights isn't a big deal to me.
In all fairness, they don't have the available land they would in WDW.

Still, Comcast/Universal already(intentionally?) got Disney to pay 19 billion more for Fox and then getting them to pay untold amounts on the liscence to use their own IP just makes Comcast look like masters in this ongoing "arms race" with Disney and Disney look incompetent and flailing.
 
Last edited:
Even if they could use Marvel characters (either by negotiating something or just using characters who are not excluded), I have to wonder how great a "Marvel Land" would be thematically. Other than rides and characters, I don't see how you could have an immersive land themed around Marvel. For the most part, it basically takes place in a version of our world (other than space-based stories, i.e., Guardians). Compared to Star Wars, Pandora, even Toy Story, those are all different worlds.

One quick idea. Asgard would be cool. Imagine walking on the Bifrost.
 
How much can Disney keep buying without getting near-term substantial returns? They aren't a bottomless pit of money and their film division releases more flops than hits. Marvel has paid for itself many times over at this point and possibly Pixar. But they still haven't recouped their 4.3 billion acquisition of Lucasfilm...vastly overpaid 71 billion for Fox...just bought out Comcast's share of Hulu and then it's supposed to be a good idea for Disney to pay it"s biggest competitor untold amounts of money to be able to use characters it already owns? That's BEFORE any money is spent developing a Marvel land at WDW.

Actually they have recouped the Lucasfilm purchase - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/30/six...sfilm-disney-has-recouped-its-investment.html

Iger facilitated the purchase of Pixar in 2006 for $7.4 billion and Marvel Entertainment in 2009 for $4 billion. Both production companies have gone on to make billions at the box office — a whopping $17 billion for Marvel across 20 films and $13.2 billion for Pixar over 13 films, according to Box Office Mojo.

Marvel land would cost around $1B and would easily make that back, investing in parks has the best ROI
 
Actually they have recouped the Lucasfilm purchase - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/30/six...sfilm-disney-has-recouped-its-investment.html

Iger facilitated the purchase of Pixar in 2006 for $7.4 billion and Marvel Entertainment in 2009 for $4 billion. Both production companies have gone on to make billions at the box office — a whopping $17 billion for Marvel across 20 films and $13.2 billion for Pixar over 13 films, according to Box Office Mojo.

Marvel land would cost around $1B and would easily make that back, investing in parks has the best ROI
Yes...somone posted this lone article previously in this thread and I find it to be silly. Like I said...it's the only article to be found(at least I can't another one) making this claim.

The whole article is based on an analyst that says "by any other measure, Solo was a success" but since it didn't measure up to previous Star Wars films it was deemed a failure. That position alone zaps his credibility for me. A film that lost 100 million dollars is not remotely successful in ANY context. Plus it couldn't even make 400 million worldwide. 400 million is routinely exceeded by multiple films a year with much smaller budgets and not nearly the brand power of Star Wars.
 
Last edited:

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top