Guardians of the Galaxy Disney Attraction?

[AlexanderMBush]

If Universal is going to sue. Would they do it when the ride is first announced or wait until the ride is completed?

I'd argue when the ride is first announced.

 

[Scott W.]

I'd argue when the ride is first announced.

I'd think that too but it would be pretty cruel to have them build the ride and then make them knock it down.

 

[Mad Dog]

Thanks for validating the OU article.

Also I've been lead to believe that Disney thinks they can get away with it despite the agreement. Universal will then sue. Remember this is the company that had to stop selling time shares in for their new expensive Hawaii property for awhile because they didn't register/whatever to sell. The head of DVC was then fired.



Happy for your confidence.


Also remember WDWNT's "LOTR TO WDW!" post y'all.

It's not unheard of for business executives, government leaders or heads of other types of organizations to ignore the legal opinions of their law departments, attorneys, or solicitors. Lot's of big executive ego's out there. Ultimately, they end up paying for their missteps.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

If Universal is going to sue. Would they do it when the ride is first announced or wait until the ride is completed?

I made a slip and said sue, I meant go into arbitration and have a judge decide (correct me if I'm wrong @SeventyOne ).

 

[SeventyOne]

I made a slip and said sue, I meant go into arbitration and have a judge decide (correct me if I'm wrong @SeventyOne ).

No, you're right. But I could see either side trying to sue after arbitration (unless Disney just gives up).

It would be weird, tho--announcement means nothing. As I said, they can build the ride--they just can't advertise it after it's done. Universal's lawyers might make a friendly call.

 

[Mike S]

Just let California to be the lucky one on this subject.

In what crazy backwards world is the butchering of Tower of Terror "lucky?"

 

[IzzyB]

Goodness you are stretching. I believe there are big plans for Energy at the moment, but 2018 with plans for a THIRD RIDE? No, not happening.

Let's put things in perspective. Star Wars Land is currently rubble (LMA is down now), yet it's not expected to open until late 2019/early 2020-ish.

Universe of Energy is still in operation and even those that are saying this is likely to happen like Martin or Lee say UoE isn't likely to close until NEXT September. There's no way this ride opens in 2018 and it may be a stretch it even opens before SWL. The goal from what is being said is 2020/2021.

Agreed. I am still in the not happening camp, but if it were to happen I expect 2020 or 2021 based on whether SWL opens in 2019 or 2020. I don't see them opening two lands in the same year. They want people coming year after year to see the new stuff. One land a year is even faster than Universal at this point, so I imagine it won't be that. I imagine a year being skipped at some point between lands.

 

[Nick]

WDWNT is reporting that GOtG for both DLR and WDW will be announced at Saturday's SDCC Marvel Studio's panel.

RUMOR: Guardians of the Galaxy Attractions for Disney Parks to Be Announced at San Diego Comic Con? | WDW News Today

...And yes, I don't buy it.

That article shouldn't even be classified as rumor, it's pure speculation.

They never once mention of a source or anything. They basically just say that because it's a hot rumor + Marvel Panel at SDCC = Ride Announcement. Genius!

In what crazy backwards world is the butchering of Tower of Terror "lucky?"

This is basically Disneyland's equivalent of Frozen Ever After. The theme doesn't fit it's surroundings, it's a cheap overlay to an existing attraction that is already fairly popular as is.

At least it's not WDW's TOT though. That one's actually good.

 

[Disneyhead]

This is such a horrible corporate brainfart, how can it NOT happen? It's like watching a train wreck in super slow motion.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

This is such a horrible corporate brainfart, how can it NOT happen? It's like watching a train wreck in super slow motion.

"Disney's stupid enough to do this" is probably the BEST evidence I've read that suggests it's coming lol

 

[NJBrandon]

Can you sue because someone says they will breach a contract? Don't you have to wait until the contract is actually breached?

 

[Nick]

Can you sue because someone says they will breach a contract? Don't you have to wait until the contract is actually breached?

You mean once it's announced? I'd assume so as they have put out a public statement of intent to do something that may violate a contract.

If Universal was to wait until opening day, Disney could come back and say "We publicly announced the ride x number of months ago... why are you just NOW coming to us with a lawsuit?"

EDIT: @hatetofly seems to think it's happening:

 

[Mike S]

You mean once it's announced? I'd assume so as they have put out a public statement of intent to do something that may violate a contract.

If Universal was to wait until opening day, Disney could come back and say "We publicly announced the ride x number of months ago... why are you just NOW coming to us with a lawsuit?"

EDIT: @hatetofly seems to think it's happening:

That makes 4.

 

[brianlo]

Awkward moment when GotG become part of the Avengers

It's not retroactive.

For example, there is a Star Wars Marvel comic. Using some very strange comic book logic (comic books do weird things), if Jedi were to pop up in the Avengers Universe, Disney would neither lose the rights to Star Wars, would not be able to include Iron Man in a Star Wars attraction and nor would Universal gain the ability to do anything Star Wars/Jedi.

The contract doesn't stymy Marvel's ability to do whatever they want creatively moving forward on the comic book end, nor does it give Universal a stranglehold on everything Marvel has or ever could do. The same principle applies to the MCU, which really has even less to do with the Universal contract than the MCA side of things.

A valid point may exist for Drax, although if he really falls under the umbrella of the GoTG family despite starting life on the Avengers side, we could have a sticky Quicksilver-esque situation there.

 

[brianlo]

No need to be patronizing...

This rumor is such a mess with all the legal crap and everything else that no one deserves to be called out for being wrong. If Lee and Co get it wrong, I know I'm not going to ridicule them.

I agree, as long as people are respectful about it, there is no reason for them to be jumped on for being wrong.

There are of course less than respectful opinions from either side. Have at those people I say.

 

[twebber55]

Thanks for validating the OU article.

Also I've been lead to believe that Disney thinks they can get away with it despite the agreement. Universal will then sue. Remember this is the company that had to stop selling time shares in for their new expensive Hawaii property for awhile because they didn't register/whatever to sell. The head of DVC was then fired.



Happy for your confidence.


Also remember WDWNT's "LOTR TO WDW!" post y'all.

Rioriz has some contacts i wouldnt blow him off or dismiss him

 

[Brian G.]

That makes 4.

To clarify Hate's post. It's not from any insider tip, just too much noise to ignore.

 

[DoubleJ]

There is far, FAR, too much noise to flat out deny this is happening. We have 3 of the most reliable insiders, each I'm sure with different sources, claiming this is happening. Height balloons over Epcot. Bob Iger recently saying, about the Anaheim and Orlando parks: "We have plans for Marvel that we have not specifically announced, so I don't want to get any more detailed than that. But we have got concepts for a really good Marvel presence." All the signs point to this happening. Getting inside the minds of Disney executives is foolish.

 

[Brian G.]

There is far, FAR, too much noise to flat out deny this is happening. We have 3 of the most reliable insiders, each I'm sure with different sources, claiming this is happening. Height balloons over Epcot. Bob Iger recently saying, about the Anaheim and Orlando parks: "We have plans for Marvel that we have not specifically announced, so I don't want to get any more detailed than that. But we have got concepts for a really good Marvel presence." All the signs point to this happening. Getting inside the minds of Disney executives is foolish.

I know he said that about Anaheim, but I didn't hear him say that for Orlando. He said the opposite (testtrack posted it earlier today in the thread.)

 

[DoubleJ]

I know he said that about Anaheim, but I didn't hear him say that for Orlando. He said the opposite (testtrack posted it earlier today in the thread.)

Testtrack, I believe, was referring to Bob's comments in the 2016 Annual Shareholders Meeting on March 3rd, in which he said: "The rights that we do not have to Marvel east of the Mississippi and prevent us from doing certain things in Orlando with the Marvel characters and franchises are I believe in perpetuity. There is nothing imminent and there isn't an expiration date." The question Bob was answering asked solely about developments with the Marvel contract, nothing more, nothing less. I'm referring to Bob's interview at the 3rd Annual MoffettNathanson Media and Communications Summit on May 18, 2016 (a more recent date than the comments testtrack was referring to) a transcript as well as audio of the interview is available on the Walt Disney Company Investor Relations website.