Test Track Losing GM Sponsorship?

[Melanie]

From Orlando Sentinel

Jason Garcia | Sentinel Staff Writer
March 4, 2009


GM's last lap on Epcot's Test Track?

One of Walt Disney World's marquee sponsorship deals is in jeopardy.

Struggling U.S. auto giant General Motors Corp. is considering pulling out as sponsor of Test Track, the high-speed Epcot attraction among the most popular rides in all of Disney World.

A 10-year contract between Disney and GM expires this year. And GM, which lost $31billion last year and is relying on loans from the federal government to stay in business, may not be able to afford to renew the pact.

Disney and GM are negotiating new terms but have so far been unable to strike a deal. GM has indicated it wants a resolution by the end of this month.

"We're still in discussions with them and haven't made a decision," GM spokeswoman Kelly Cusinato said. "It's definitely one that I think people are doing everything they can to preserve."

It is a lucrative partnership for Disney: Though neither company would discuss the terms, Automotive News reported last month that GM pays Disney close to $5million a year.

GM and other original corporate sponsors in Epcot, which opened in 1982, paid as much as $35million over 10years for their initial contracts, according to a former Epcot executive. The German engineering giant Siemens AG is currently paying Disney a reported $100million over 12years to sponsor Epcot's Spaceship Earth attraction.

Disney would not discuss details of its talks with GM.

"We continue to have a relationship with General Motors and are having ongoing discussions about continuing our relationship," spokeswoman Kim Prunty said Tuesday.

For GM, the marketing advantages of its Test Track sponsorship are obvious. The attraction is a top draw in Epcot, which lures an estimated 11million visitors each year, making it the second-busiest theme park at Disney World and the third-busiest in the United States.

The ride features vehicles, controlled by onboard computers, that carry guests through a series of simulated car-safety tests. During the 5 1/2-minute ride, guests are exposed to 100-degree temperature changes; bounced around hairpin turns; and hurtled through a final, outdoor sprint that reaches 60mph — the fastest top speed of any ride at Disney World.

Logo everywhere
GM's presence is everywhere. The carmaker's corporate logo is splashed throughout the pavilion that houses the ride. The queue includes a room featuring aerial photos of GM "proving grounds" around the world, from a desert track in Mesa, Ariz., to a cold-weather course in northern Ontario. Guests exit through a swanky showroom displaying more than a dozen GM vehicles and a gift shop hawking pink Cadillac ball caps, die-cast Corvettes and electronic-toy Hummers.

There are even computer terminals and a customer-service desk for guests to order GM sales brochures.

When the ride debuted in March 1999, GM's then-vice president for marketing and advertising in North America said it would "help build brand awareness, corporate image and ultimately introduce new customers to GM dealers and our products."

The benefits extend beyond advertising. Disney also purchases GM vehicles — including Chevy Trailblazers and Silverados and Saturn Vue hybrids — for its corporate fleet as part of the sponsorship deal, according to people familiar with the arrangement.

But as valuable as the pact is to GM, the company may no longer be able to afford it. The automaker has warned that it could go bankrupt without as much as $16.6billion in loans from the U.S. government — on top of $13.4billion in taxpayer loans it has already received.

GM would not be the first major corporate sponsor to drop out at Epcot. General Electric, ExxonMobil and AT&T are all former sponsors, while newcomers include Siemens and Hewlett-Packard. Theme-park analysts also say they are certain Test Track would continue operating even if GM pulled out, as the ride's capacity is vital to managing park crowds.

But losing GM would further pressure profits at Disney World, which is relying on deep hotel and ticket discounts to keep visitors coming despite the struggling economy.

Replacements?
Finding a replacement sponsor also could be tricky. A rival company is unlikely to want to take over a GM ride without making substantial changes, said Steve Baker, a former Epcot executive in charge of corporate sponsorships.

"Anybody coming in paying that kind of money would want their own fingerprints," said Baker, who is now president of Baker Leisure Group, an Orlando themed-entertainment consulting firm.

The most likely targets for a replacement sponsor at Test Track would be other car manufacturers. But the entire industry is struggling as the global recession depresses auto sales.

Marketing executives at Toyota Motor Corp. have discussed internally the prospect of sponsoring Test Track. But Joe Tetherow, a spokesman for Toyota Motor Sales USA, said "it would be premature to speculate on what's going to happen."

"We're cutting a lot of costs right now," Tetherow said. "But, obviously, there's going to be opportunities from time to time that come along that we might want to take a look at."

[Ian]

Nooooooooooooooooooo!!!

My VIP ride access would be no more!!! :(

[Goofeygal]

OH NO same here.:(

[BMan62]

Maybe they could get a government bailout? :thedolls:

Hopefully, a deal could be worked out to keep TT running without any stoppages due to sponsorship.

[Stu29573]

Hopefully, a deal could be worked out to keep TT running without any stoppages due to sponsorship.

Sure they will! They would never let a whole building go dark because they couldn't find a sponsor...Oh, wait...:(

[Polynesian Dweller]

Nobody should be surprised that this might happen (still a might at this point). GM is barely alive on life support and its got to be difficult to justify this expense when you are getting rid of dealerships and employees.

For that matter, giving up 43% of revenue on the 4/3 deal doesn't exactly put Disney in that great shape either.

[brownie]

I was just speculating about this with my wife on Sunday! I'd be surprised to see GM's sponsorship continue at this point. I don't really see any of the automakers in a position to take in on should GM pull out. It's a shame, I'd like to see GM continue as the sponsor.

[azcavalier]

I could see Ford or Toyota taking this on. Obviously, Toyota was mentioned in the article. Ford, on the other hand, is an american company, and during the whole bailout precedings they said that the bailout would be a great backup plan, but they actually think that they can return to profitability without the bailout funds. It sounds like they're in better shape than most. Just a thought. I don't see how Disney would close Test Track.

[DizneyRox]

I can't imagine GM maintaining sponsorship. I don't expect them to survive much longer so they probably don't have much choice.

I never really understood the whole sponsorship thing. I can't recall ever making any kind of purchase decision based on ride sponsorship. In fact, if they gave me a GM car at the end of the ride, I would just sell it and buy something else I wanted.

It will be interesting what Disney will have to do to remove the sponsorship tie ins. Will they go through the expense of removing them, or just let it go. Obviously the big hitters will go, but even in SSE, the AT&T logos were all over long after they dropped out.

[GrumpyFan]

I've been wondering about this. It will be interesting to see what happens here.

GM and Chrysler are both in pretty bad shape right now, and Ford is only in slightly better shape. I wouldn't be surprised to see all three of them merge into one in the next 5-10 years, unless they drastically change the way they run their business.

The other car makers aren't doing too good right now either. In fact, the only car maker who actually made money in the last quarter was Hyundai. Go figure. I can't see them taking over Test Track at this point, but who knows? In this economy, anything could happen.

[TheRustyScupper]

1) Unless Disney really backs off on price, I think it will happen.
2) Of course, if WDW backs off, then other sponsors will want reductions.
3) Let's see what happens.

[Ian]

I can't imagine GM maintaining sponsorship. I don't expect them to survive much longer so they probably don't have much choice.Not that I'm saying I expect their sponsorship deal to continue, but you can't possibly be serious about not expecting them to survive much longer.

Without injecting politics into the discussion, you can trust me when I say that there is no way our President, who got elected on the backs of the unions, will ever, in a million years, allow GM to go belly-up.

Not to mention that there is actually a national security interest in their survival. Auto manufacturing plants are key to a large militarization effort, should one ever become necessary again.

I would say there are few certainties in this economy, but one of them is definitely that General Motors will continue to receive government support while they retool and refocus.

[Tinkerbellaella]

I never really understood the whole sponsorship thing. I can't recall ever making any kind of purchase decision based on ride sponsorship. In fact, if they gave me a GM car at the end of the ride, I would just sell it and buy something else I wanted.

I completely agree with you.

Granted, I am not a frequent visitor to Disney World, but before this discussion I couldn't have told you who or if the ride was sponsored by a car company. Are a lot of the rides sponsored by other companies? If so, won't those rides be in jeopardy in this economy?

[Dixie Springs]

"T3" (Toyota Test Track). Even though they're begging their own government for $$ too, it's possible....

[lockedoutlogic]

I completely agree with you.

Granted, I am not a frequent visitor to Disney World, but before this discussion I couldn't have told you who or if the ride was sponsored by a car company. Are a lot of the rides sponsored by other companies? If so, won't those rides be in jeopardy in this economy?


not only all the pavilions in the futurewold side.....but all of the country pavilions also paid to have their spaces in EPCOT originally...

Basically....the construction was so overblown and EPCOT was such a different concept in 1980 that Disney used the leverage of their new product to get corporations (most of which are now long gone) and the representative countries to pay operational costs in exchange for exposure in EPCOT

It was a good plan....but it will be difficult to maintain sponsorship in the future

GM will not be able to support test track....and if they don't....i would guess that Disney might just pull the plug. the ride has been in many ways an out and out disaster....a reportedly 300 million went into the planning, construction, and redesigns over the 8 years of development. By far the most expensive themepark attraction in history. And one that has never been received that well and can't stay operation for more than an hour.

As far as GM....I'm not sure there is any feasible way to save it. They've just not evolved far enough to stay competitive.

Unions are a big part of it....because workers are being paid 60 years of benefits for 30 years of work....and that can't be self-sustaining.

But GM is to blame at least as much. One word for you: Hummer
They deserve it.

the real stink of it is (and i'll try not to get political) is that the 5 million american workers that are almost entirely supported by the Big 3.....if those jobs go, we will never get anything equivalent back.
We don't make anything....we haven't for years...we are a bunch of soft handed blowhards (myself included) that go to offices with our Iphones or Blackberrys and do no substitive work.

We've become ridiculously spoiled....lots of money for no physical work.....spent on imported luxury goods and frivilous activities (cough....cough....cough)

GM is gone from EPCOT...probably from the rest of the world map as well....and i don't think test track will be too far behind....unless Toyota or Hyundai feels like getting some ego-boosting signage

[caryrae]

I never thought of this before and honestly don't know but what do the Sponsors for the attractions do? Do they pay for the attraction and to keep it going?

[ayeckley]

Not to mention that there is actually a national security interest in their survival. Auto manufacturing plants are key to a large militarization effort, should one ever become necessary again.

Although that was certainly true in WWII, I don't believe it is anymore. Back then, the auto plants had a full range of manufacturing capabilities (foundry, casting, forging, machining, assembly, etc.). Modern auto plants no longer have those end-to-end capabilities - they have been spun off to specialty manufacturers and not really part of the "big three" anymore. The only *potential* exception I can think of off-hand in the US would be Ford's River Rouge site and the nearby supporting plants.

I often wonder if anyone in DC is tasked with thinking about things like this anymore...

[Crow]

i cant see GM justifying the sponsorship if they are in such bad shape.
just wonder what will happen to the ride.

[lockedoutlogic]

I never thought of this before and honestly don't know but what do the Sponsors for the attractions do? Do they pay for the attraction and to keep it going?


yes....in a nutshell....disney puts out a fancy presentation on how much exposure products and brands get....

and when the companies ink....the funds are used directly for operational costs

[lockedoutlogic]

i cant see GM justifying the sponsorship if they are in such bad shape.
just wonder what will happen to the ride.


I think it would've have gone sooner or later anyway....

this might be a catalyst.

If you ask me....time for a retrofit: World of Motion!!!

[TheRustyScupper]

I never thought of this before and honestly don't know but what do the Sponsors for the attractions do? Do they pay for the attraction and to keep it going?

1) Yes.
2) Disney actually has sponsors pay for operation and upkeep.
3) Thus, Disney makes profits with little cost.
4) And, they keep admission prices high.
5) Sweet deal, no?

Some Non-Exhibit Sponsors:
. . . Coke gives all the soda and bottled water for free
. . . Kodak gives all the park maps for free
. . . Nescafe gives the coffee for free
. . . etc

[Tekneek]

So... Disney is probably going to try to find a new sponsor... Tesla Motors, perhaps? This will require some significant changes to the concept.

If that fails, are they going to raise prices, since their preferred margin for Test Track will no longer be there? Or come up with a "rehab" / "overhaul" of TT that will make it less expensive to run (and less fun for us). Wonders of Life died a slow death, due mainly to lack of investment from Disney itself, once its sponsor was lost.

[MOJoe]

1) Yes.
2) Disney actually has sponsors pay for operation and upkeep.
3) Thus, Disney makes profits with little cost.
4) And, they keep admission prices high.
5) Sweet deal, no?


DANG! I wish i owned a Theme Park! ;)

[GothMickey]

**cough cough** cars overlay **cough cough**

In all seriousness, GM will be out as a sponsor. And honestly, I can understand why. I cannot understand how a company crying poverty, begging for government bailouts, saying they won't have enough cash to last another 3 months, and laying off workers can justify 10 million bucks to sponsor a theme park ride. Maybe Toyota can come in and take over sponsorship.

[lockedoutlogic]

So... Disney is probably going to try to find a new sponsor... Tesla Motors, perhaps? This will require some significant changes to the concept.

If that fails, are they going to raise prices, since their preferred margin for Test Track will no longer be there? Or come up with a "rehab" / "overhaul" of TT that will make it less expensive to run (and less fun for us). Wonders of Life died a slow death, due mainly to lack of investment from Disney itself, once its sponsor was lost.

i think that test track will go after GM...barring some willing (aka "gullible", "stupid") sponsor stepping in....

Rocket Rods had a somewhat similar track record at Disneyland....GM sponsored it....GM pulled out.....ride was a ridiculous maintenance drain....disney pulled the plug.

Remember: specific rides make no money whatsoever.....the gate prices are there to really only support operation
The money is made on merchandise and food....
So losing the operating subsidy would be a backbreaker for test track....in my opinion.

Mission: Space will probably face a similar issue when Hewlett Packards deal expires.....

[lockedoutlogic]

**cough cough** cars overlay **cough cough**

In all seriousness, GM will be out as a sponsor. And honestly, I can understand why. I cannot understand how a company crying poverty, begging for government bailouts, saying they won't have enough cash to last another 3 months, and laying off workers can justify 10 million bucks to sponsor a theme park ride. Maybe Toyota can come in and take over sponsorship.


i like your angle....but a cars overlay is almost impossible....

test track is a horribly design thrillride that has restrictions and isn't suitable for all ages....

what do you do with it? It's not appropriate for young kids and it really doesn't provide any thrills to appeal to anyone else....

What a disaster it has been....complete and outright....
The "thrill" overlay in EPCOT has been one of the longest, wasteful, half-hearted construction projects in Disney history....

So far....they've spent 15 years on Test Track, Mission Space, and a copy from DCA....

Soarin is rehashed....the other two are marginal audience operating revenue drains....

And I'm not even gonna scratch the surface of Imagination....

Horizons and World of Motion....I say

[Ian]

In all seriousness, GM will be out as a sponsor. And honestly, I can understand why. I cannot understand how a company crying poverty, begging for government bailouts, saying they won't have enough cash to last another 3 months, and laying off workers can justify 10 million bucks to sponsor a theme park ride. Maybe Toyota can come in and take over sponsorship.$10 million a year, while it sounds like a lot, is really very little to a major corporation. I'm actually shocked that's all it costs them. Citibank was going to pay $400 million for 20 year naming rights on the new Mets stadium. That's $20 million a year for far less exposure.

I have no trouble believing that the exposure from this attraction generates them $10 million or more a year in revenue. It might be a smart business decision to keep going with it, especially with some of the new "green" exhibits they have and such. I think it really raises people's awareness of the brand, the vehicles, and where GM is going.

Everyone needs to remember not to go overboard with this whole "every nickel corporate America spends that doesn't go into a worker's pocket is a waste" mentality. There are legitimate reasons to enter in to sponsorship arrangements.

[GothMickey]

$10 million a year, while it sounds like a lot, is really very little to a major corporation. I'm actually shocked that's all it costs them. Citibank was going to pay $400 million for 20 year naming rights on the new Mets stadium. That's $20 million a year for far less exposure.

I have no trouble believing that the exposure from this attraction generates them $10 million or more a year in revenue. It might be a smart business decision to keep going with it, especially with some of the new "green" exhibits they have and such. I think it really raises people's awareness of the brand, the vehicles, and where GM is going.

Everyone needs to remember not to go overboard with this whole "every nickel corporate America spends that doesn't go into a worker's pocket is a waste" mentality. There are legitimate reasons to enter in to sponsorship arrangements.

While what you are saying is probably true, it is a PR nightmare. Citi has been and continues to answer to their naming rights to Citi Field for the Mets. Citi is getting billions in bailouts, laying off thousands of workers, selling off parts of their business, and taking plenty of flack for their $400 million spent on naming rights to a stadium. Don't you think GM would get the same treatment from people? I am sure they would, and rightfully so. If your company is crying poverty, sponsoring a theme park attraction is not the way to spend money. Not until you return to profitablilty.

Locked: I was only kidding and being sarcastic about a Cars overlay. I sure as heck hope not.

[Aggie97]

I have no trouble believing that the exposure from this attraction generates them $10 million or more a year in revenue. It might be a smart business decision to keep going with it, especially with some of the new "green" exhibits they have and such. I think it really raises people's awareness of the brand, the vehicles, and where GM is going.

Everyone needs to remember not to go overboard with this whole "every nickel corporate America spends that doesn't go into a worker's pocket is a waste" mentality. There are legitimate reasons to enter in to sponsorship arrangements.

I agree that smart corporate sponsorship arrangements can have immense value.

But it's extremely difficult to directly correlate the ROI of sponsorships, versus other more directly trackable types of marketing and advertising campaigns.

Unfortunately during times of budget slashing, I know first-hand how challenging it can be to justify sponsorships to corporate executives who are looking at things from a short-term bottom-line perspective.

[lockedoutlogic]

$10 million a year, while it sounds like a lot, is really very little to a major corporation. I'm actually shocked that's all it costs them. Citibank was going to pay $400 million for 20 year naming rights on the new Mets stadium. That's $20 million a year for far less exposure.

I have no trouble believing that the exposure from this attraction generates them $10 million or more a year in revenue. It might be a smart business decision to keep going with it, especially with some of the new "green" exhibits they have and such. I think it really raises people's awareness of the brand, the vehicles, and where GM is going.

Everyone needs to remember not to go overboard with this whole "every nickel corporate America spends that doesn't go into a worker's pocket is a waste" mentality. There are legitimate reasons to enter in to sponsorship arrangements.

What world are you living in there, Trump?:secret:

Citibank.....is very shortly either going to have to be SOCIALIZED....or sold off into pieces for 10 years and busted down to Corngrower's Federal Credit Union to eliminate it's debt....

GM....can now only survive if the goverment props them up....and that will be politically impossible very soon. Even if they are given a trillion dollars.....nobody wants their cars anymore (the places that matter: the population centers)...it's about perception...and their perception is that their products are 1/2 to 1/3rd of their equivalent of the foreign counterparts. Extensive research about this came to light in the last six months.....an average american comsumer feels they will get somewhere between one third and one half the use and satisfaction out of an american car than they will a mercedes, toyota, honda, or even....yes.... a HYUNDAI!!!

At this point a Yugo would be a more attractive sell....

It's not that 10 million a year is alot for sponsorship or marketing....it isn't....IF....big if....the entire corporate system hasn't been operating on false perceptions and artificially bloated balance sheets for years....

which they clearly have.....the money was never there.....now....the executives are attempting to dig every penny out of the cushions and get outta Dodge....in the case of Chrysler....literally

It sure seems the game has changed to me....and that involves a complete rebuilding of how the "system" works....

Perhaps we should have the money in our accounts to cover our purchases......as should the corporations.....a little revolution every now and then is a healthy thing.

It's not that every penny should go to the worker.....it's that the smartguys were so clever....and they ran the ship into the iceberg....and now the fallout goes to everyone else....not just Central Park East

[Ian]

Again ... you're all overcomplicating things. You've been watching the news too much.

$10 million sponsorship arrangement that leads to $20 million in sales is a good thing, no matter how you slice it.

Of course, I have no clue if that's the case. I'm just saying, the knee-jerk anti-corporation mentality that's gripping America is overblown.

[GothMickey]

Again ... you're all overcomplicating things. You've been watching the news too much.

$10 million sponsorship arrangement that leads to $20 million in sales is a good thing, no matter how you slice it.

Of course, I have no clue if that's the case. I'm just saying, the knee-jerk anti-corporation mentality that's gripping America is overblown.

And the problem there is they aren't making $20 million off a $10 million investment. When you ask the government for $15 billion in bail out funds, there is no way they can put $10 million on something as friviouls as a theme park attraction. The sponsorship is done.

[Aggie97]

And the problem there is they aren't making $20 million off a $10 million investment.

Do we really know that to be the case, though?

In my opinion, perception is the true issue. How many WDW guests will walk out of Test Track making the "Gee, how much bailout/taxpayer money did GM waste at Disney World?" joke? I have to imagine that is a primary concern for GM, even if maintaining a sponsorship like Test Track is in their best long-term financial interest.

[Tekneek]

It won't matter whether WE know that or not. If GM thinks it, can they prove it? If enough people get upset about it, will it matter what GM can even prove? When you line up at the government trough, the game changes and you are subject to more than just economic forces.

This comes from both ends of the political spectrum on nearly every major political issue.

[princessgirls]

$10 million a year, while it sounds like a lot, is really very little to a major corporation. I'm actually shocked that's all it costs them. Citibank was going to pay $400 million for 20 year naming rights on the new Mets stadium. That's $20 million a year for far less exposure.

I have no trouble believing that the exposure from this attraction generates them $10 million or more a year in revenue. It might be a smart business decision to keep going with it, especially with some of the new "green" exhibits they have and such. I think it really raises people's awareness of the brand, the vehicles, and where GM is going.

Everyone needs to remember not to go overboard with this whole "every nickel corporate America spends that doesn't go into a worker's pocket is a waste" mentality. There are legitimate reasons to enter in to sponsorship arrangements.

Citigroup is still giving $20 million for the naming rights of Shea...even with the government bailout!!
I'm a GM girl. Every vehicle I have owned has been a General Motors car.
GM is staying in Nascar, and hopefully they will be able to continue their sponsorship of Test Track.
Julie:mickey:

[GrumpyFan]

Interesting discussion this has turned into.

GM can easily justify this expense on the books. It's called marketing and advertising, which is necessary for a major corporation of this size. The return is rather hard to quantify though, and some might even argue irrelevant. In the end, it's about brand awareness and getting their name into the consumer's mind.

Regardless of whether GM continues as a sponsor or not, I don't see this attraction going anywhere. It's one of 3 attractions at Epcot that actually help draw a consistent crowd.

[Scar]

Citibank was going to pay $400 million for 20 year naming rights on the new Mets stadium. That's $20 million a year for far less exposure.Hey... is that supposed to be a shot? :blush:

[WDWNut02]

That's horrible! Where in the world will I go to buy a Saturn SUV now?

[Zone Stop]

... And one that has never been received that well and can't stay operation for more than an hour ...

Okay, so I see that you're the wrong demographic, and apparently speaking to us through a time portal to 1999.

Test Track will remain open, because it's immensely popular and closing it would be a poor operation decision.

However, I agree with those of you who think it'll go sponsorless.

[lockedoutlogic]

Okay, so I see that you're the wrong demographic, and apparently speaking to us through a time portal to 1999.

Test Track will remain open, because it's immensely popular and closing it would be a poor operation decision.

However, I agree with those of you who think it'll go sponsorless.

You missed the guts of that....

it is mechanically a bad ride system....all moving parts are replaced regularly.....the computer systems scram all the time....and Goodyear was brought in to design special tires....

and they still replace them every week.

it's a completely unsustainable ride...and i don't think disney would hesitate to pull the plug if there was no sponsorship dollars....

they've shown no qualms about leaving ride locations closed and dormant for extended periods of time......the list is growing long


And i contest the notion that Test Track is that popular....
WDW ride systems used to be designed almost exclusively with volume in mind.....it is the reason for the omnimovers....the reason there are 2 space mountains mirrored....the reason almost all of epcots attractions were people mover type rides....the disportionate number of boat systems and tram rides...etc

Their parks are much larger than an average park....so volume can create distortion..

In this case....the fastpass system along with the 3 rider rows creates and artificial balloon in the quene line. Fastpass has had similar effect on peter pan's flight....notably...but other shows as well. Soarin' doesn't have enough screens to handle the normal volume of EPCOT....so we wait 90 minutes.

I think test track....while not unpopular....is really only an average at best draw at WDW

[Polynesian Dweller]

I think test track....while not unpopular....is really only an average at best draw at WDW
Yes, but without actual numbers how do you know? The perception is that's its quite popular and it sure seems to be from the lines and the number of people asking about riding it. Without hard numbers, both thoughts are equally valid.

[Zone Stop]

lockedoutlogic, my point is that most of your concerns are either 10 years old and have already been addressed, or apply to any ride, not just Test Track.

And the computer systems very rarely "scram" (and on the minuscule occasions when they do, see the comment about "apply to any ride"), they detect a potentially unsafe situation before it happens, and then prevent it from happening - which is why Test Track also has a top-notch safety record.

[DizneyRox]

Test Track DOES still close often, for whatever reason. Maybe not in the off season, but in the summer, it's not uncommon for there to be delays. Last time I was hit wit TWO during my wait in the fastpass line.

It is one expensive ride to maintain, I don't think Disney woud absorb the operating costs, there's just too much breakage and there's no return. At least GM could argue that the costs of running the ride help sell their cars. Rethemiong it to Cars would be a stretch that would probably require a lot of rework for what? Would they really sell more Cars merch? It really sells itself, I told think they would see much return.

And while I don't mind TT at all, it is a good ride, if I dont get on it (which happens a lot since I refuse to wait in those lines) it's not a big deal.

[Stu29573]

Manybe Ford could take it over? Since they didn't "shake hands with the devil" and take cash, they really could boost their image here. "Look, we didn't take your tax money AND we're working with Disney!":number1:

[lockedoutlogic]

Manybe Ford could take it over? Since they didn't "shake hands with the devil" and take cash, they really could boost their image here. "Look, we didn't take your tax money AND we're working with Disney!":number1:

ford is gonna go too.....they just are quite as stupid as the other two

[lockedoutlogic]

lockedoutlogic, my point is that most of your concerns are either 10 years old and have already been addressed, or apply to any ride, not just Test Track.

And the computer systems very rarely "scram" (and on the minuscule occasions when they do, see the comment about "apply to any ride"), they detect a potentially unsafe situation before it happens, and then prevent it from happening - which is why Test Track also has a top-notch safety record.

the concerns are still persistent though....and with lack of sponsorship....the the bottomline becomes more blaring in the eyes of Operations....

It costs a fortune to maintain that thing....it always has and always will. There are six onboard computers (obselete...by the way) and...i believe....9 wheels on every car....and their performance still is terrible after all these years.

When it was new and it didn't work that was a problem....now add fatigue, stress, and age to the equation.

I don't think they'll shutter the ride the minute sponsorship falls through....they really can't.

But they are in danger of really jeopardizing that side of the park...

The "pre-emptive" rehab and overhaul that started in the 1990's has taken forever and cost a fortune....and it sure seems like the park is falling behind the cutting edge/ thrill angle they intended on capturing with the renovations.

Horizons is gone (it was outdated....but something)....Imagination is shot and probably needs to be razed and started from scratch.....innoventions is still worthless....the universe of energy is way past its usefullness.....mission space yielded lawsuits and ridiculous amounts of injuries/ DEATHS...Test Track continues to be the little ride that could....but can't...and wonders of life was abandoned "because they felt like it"

I'm just saying that the state of EPCOT is not very good.....and test track is part of the problem....not the solution

And now....with money freezing and capital expenditures all but eliminated.....it could be 5 or more years before anything is addressed there.....

If i were the management (which i'm not because i have this silly notion that construction should occur when the parks AREN'T packed for a year or two)....here's what i would do:

1. Halt any tinkering in futureworld other than for fixing operational issues
2. Add two country pavilions (yes....i know that's a bean counter/ sponsorship thing too...but let me just be naive and simplify it for the moment)
3. Shift marketing towards the adult audience the showcase to provide cover for construction on the otherside
4. Raze Imagination and start from scratch....the ride has been ruined beyond repair....and it's pathetic that HISTA is still there.....we can't get a new 3-D every 15 years or so?
5. Once Imagination is up...or better yet close to it....Think about gutting out Universe of Energy to get something a little more "today"...by then Ellen's talkshow should be gone too...so no cross-marketing
6. Then take Test Track out....completely...use the building if possible....but definitely get that ridiculous cash guzzler replace


just a thought:secret:

[cgriff]

test track is a horribly design thrillride that has restrictions and isn't suitable for all ages....

And in another post I think you referred to it as a miserable failure... Yet TT remains one of the most popular rides at Epcot (#1 for many years until the opening of Soarin'), and still in the upper echelon of all rides (by popularity) in the entire WDW Resort.

If it was designed to entertain, then it sounds more like a success than a failure i think.

:car:

[Zone Stop]

There are six onboard computers (obselete...by the way)
2 - and they work just fine.


....9 wheels on every car....
22, 4 tires, 16 guide wheels, and 2 speed-checking wheels.


and their performance still is terrible after all these years.
Opinion, not fact.


<lots of words about what should be done with Epcot, including that "... Imagination ... has been ruined beyond repair...">
Well, at least it looks like you and I can at least partially agree on some things.

[GothMickey]

For those who think GM will still continue to be the sponsor, read the atricle on Yahoo. Their own auditors say they won't survive and may have to seek bankruptcy protection. They received $13.4 billion in federal loans, are seeking $30 billion from the government bailout money, and have lost $82 billion in the last 3 years. In 2008 alone, they lost $30.9 billion. I just don't see this sponsorship lasting any longer.

[GothMickey]

Do we really know that to be the case, though?

Tell me, when you invest $10 million intom something, and lost $83 billion in a three year span, did you make $20 million off the investment?

When GM says they don't have funds to operate, I don't care what is budgeted for marketing. They are in dire straits and really in trouble financially.

I am not looking for GM to leave and letting TT go sponsorless. But, it doesn;t make financial sense for then to spend this money on a theme park attraction. And if you want to use brand recognition as the excuse, more people see their commercials on TV than their name on an Epcot attraction.

[lockedoutlogic]

2 - and they work just fine.


22, 4 tires, 16 guide wheels, and 2 speed-checking wheels.


Opinion, not fact.


Well, at least it looks like you and I can at least partially agree on some things.

so since you work in EPCOT maintenance...i have a couple of questions:

1. Are they still burning through tires?
2. Have they increased the capacity to more than the 1500 or so an hour that they could muster before? (unlike the 2500+ and hour movers and shakers in the Magic Kingdom)
3. Do actual GM mechanics work on the cars? And if so...do they give Disney a break on their $140 an hour labor charges?

on a side note: Maelstrom - What's that all about?:mickey:

[lockedoutlogic]

And in another post I think you referred to it as a miserable failure... Yet TT remains one of the most popular rides at Epcot (#1 for many years until the opening of Soarin'), and still in the upper echelon of all rides (by popularity) in the entire WDW Resort.

If it was designed to entertain, then it sounds more like a success than a failure i think.

:car:

I think you're making the mistake of not considering Disney's management take on what is a "success" and what is not....

As customers...we see a 45 minute wait and think that a ride is a hit....

WDW Operations....on the other hand....see nothing but labor outlays, utility costs, maintenace and repairs (big one in the case of test track) and other operational expenses....they then add up all those costs and compare it to the park revenue.....something test track has never really added to because it's not a big merchandise pusher....
And don't forget that it cost a literal forturne to build.....almost 10 years of disaster design, redesign, testing, retesting, and millions of dollars in labor to conduct all this madness on site.....not including the design and fabrication costs....

I just don't think test track is consider to be as vital or successful as those standing in the single rider line are lead to believe.

[caryrae]

I do have to say we avoid TT lately because it seems to be down a lot. The last time we tried it we went with a group of people who had never been to WDW before. We got on the ride and while on the ride it stopped working 5 or 6 seperate times, it was horrible.

[Ian]

For those who think GM will still continue to be the sponsor, read the atricle on Yahoo. Their own auditors say they won't survive and may have to seek bankruptcy protection. They received $13.4 billion in federal loans, are seeking $30 billion from the government bailout money, and have lost $82 billion in the last 3 years. In 2008 alone, they lost $30.9 billion. I just don't see this sponsorship lasting any longer.The sponsorship, maybe not, but the press release you're referring to is just the faux "cry for help" that GM has to put out there to enable the Administration to give them more money.

Trust me ... the government funding is coming (and it's small potatoes, really, in the grand scheme of this bailout) and GM will not be going under. They said something very similar publicly about GMAC awhile ago and about the parent (GM) a few months before that. And then they both got bailed out.


Tell me, when you invest $10 million intom something, and lost $83 billion in a three year span, did you make $20 million off the investment? YES! If the alternative was that you lose $83.02 billion!

Again, please don't misinterpret what I'm saying here. I'm not saying I think GM is going to continue with the sponsorship deal. And I'm not saying that they do, in fact, make any money off of it.

What I am saying is that the knee-jerk dismissing any sponsorship arrangement as ineffective and outrageous in the face of accepting government bailout money is wrong. How can GM expect to remain any kind of going concern if they're not advertising and keeping their brand out there??

And, again, no matter what anyone may thing, $10 million per year for a company of GM's size is peanuts.

[Stu29573]

I still think Ford should take it over. There is even a history there between Ford and Disney at the '64-'65 Worlds Fair. Don't get me wrong, I like GM ok (and currently drive a GM car), but my grandfather was a strict Ford man, and I would rather see them take it than Toyota...

[Ian]

btw, for those who had questions about the origins of the whole ride sponsorship arrangement ... that was Walt who started that way back when with Disneyland and the World's Fair attractions.

It was his idea originally to have corporations share cost of development and maintenance of his attractions.

[lockedoutlogic]

btw, for those who had questions about the origins of the whole ride sponsorship arrangement ... that was Walt who started that way back when with Disneyland and the World's Fair attractions.

It was his idea originally to have corporations share cost of development and maintenance of his attractions.

Indeed....though the 64 World's Fair and the early days of Disneyland were kinda a different scenario....

I don't know that even Walt would think that companies should be paying 5-10 million a year for 20+ year old shows and attractions that are often increasing overlooked and fading into the background of the WDW landscape....

[GrumpyFan]

If i were the management (which i'm not because i have this silly notion that construction should occur when the parks AREN'T packed for a year or two)....here's what i would do:


Sorry, but IF you were, you would probably receive a lot of guest complaints. Because there seem to be several here who disagree with your opinions.

Whether you like TT or not, a lot of people do and ride it everyday which cannot be contested. Is it because it's one of the few thrill rides there, or is it because they're a captive audience? Doesn't really matter. It's a major attraction. And, like other attractions, that are kept even though they are burdens on operations like CoP, they can't easily be removed from the lineup. Of course, TT doesn't have the same kind of sentimental value as CoP, but because it is one of only a few attractions in that park, it's pretty much necessary to keep it running.

[GothMickey]

Going back to the original post, GM paid Disney $35 million over 10 years in 1982? In a press release I read online, Automotive News claims GM is paying Disney $5 million a year. So, if it still is a 10 year deal, I assume $50 million is being paid to Disney, not $10 million that we been tossing around. That is a lot of money.

[GothMickey]

Sorry, but IF you were, you would probably receive a lot of guest complaints. Because there seem to be several here who disagree with your opinions.

Whether you like TT or not, a lot of people do and ride it everyday which cannot be contested. Is it because it's one of the few thrill rides there, or is it because they're a captive audience? Doesn't really matter. It's a major attraction. And, like other attractions, that are kept even though they are burdens on operations like CoP, they can't easily be removed from the lineup. Of course, TT doesn't have the same kind of sentimental value as CoP, but because it is one of only a few attractions in that park, it's pretty much necessary to keep it running.

TT is popular. What locked is trying to say is, the numbers are very deceiving. We have to stop looking at 70 minute wait times and look at it through management eyes. They don't care about wait times, they care about money. And TT is a ride that has major issues. Tires are constantly replaced, the computer system old. The ride is a maintenance nightmare. This isn't from my point of view. This comes from people involved with the attraction. Will management, who is always looking to cut costs, going to allow a sponsorless TT run for the next 5 to 10 years? Probably not. The ride isn't going anywhere in the next year or two, but, without a sponsor,TT will go the way of other sponsorless attractions. Just look at WoL.

[lockedoutlogic]

Going back to the original post, GM paid Disney $35 million over 10 years in 1982? In a press release I read online, Automotive News claims GM is paying Disney $5 million a year. So, if it still is a 10 year deal, I assume $50 million is being paid to Disney, not $10 million that we been tossing around. That is a lot of money.

they paid 3.5 per year for 10 years...35 million from 82-91.....world of motion was razed in 91 and i assume the test track concept....or whatever ambitious project idea that devolved into test track....was negotiated between GM and Disney at that time...

I can only assume that Disney promised GM the greatest amusement park ride in history....one so famous and historic that it ranked above the Coney Island Cyclone, Pirates of the Caribbean, and the Beast...
And GM assumed that would lead to such joy for GM that they would be able to sell Geos and Saturns to thrilled riders off a "show dump" carlot behind the odyssey....undoubtedly driving up World Drive to check in to their $400 a night 1971 constructed room at the Contemporary....

But anyway....the second sponsorship deal probably was for about 5 mil a year in operation expenses and probably a portion of the ride development costs....in exchange for disney buying 10+ million in trucks and vans over 10 years....

If their deal expires in 2009 or 2010---that's probably about right...as i'm sure they were negotiated through about the first 10 years of test track....

So disney is probably sitting on one side of the table asking for 10 million for 10 years....

And GM is sitting on the otherside (flanked by two congressman, a rep from the Federal OBM, a Treasury rep, an SEC rep, and a FBI agent) asking: "How on earth can we do that now?"

[lockedoutlogic]

TT is popular. What locked is trying to say is, the numbers are very deceiving. We have to stop looking at 70 minute wait times and look at it through management eyes. They don't care about wait times, they care about money. And TT is a ride that has major issues. Tires are constantly replaced, the computer system old. The ride is a maintenance nightmare. This isn't from my point of view. This comes from people involved with the attraction. Will management, who is always looking to cut costs, going to allow a sponsorless TT run for the next 5 to 10 years? Probably not. The ride isn't going anywhere in the next year or two, but, without a sponsor,TT will go the way of other sponsorless attractions. Just look at WoL.


Thank you for summing it up more succinctly than i could....

Test Track gets riders....not as many as most people seem to think....but it does well...
but that isn't disney's barometer....
It is bad technology and a headache for management....
This is well documented and 100% correct....not really up for debate.
The costs are staggering and will continue to be so....
and it's about costs and profits in the parks....not waitt imes, smiling faces. or making magical memories

[Bethanymouse]

Thank you for summing it up more succinctly than i could....

Test Track gets riders....not as many as most people seem to think....but it does well...
but that isn't disney's barometer....
It is bad technology and a headache for management....
This is well documented and 100% correct....not really up for debate.
The costs are staggering and will continue to be so....
and it's about costs and profits in the parks....not waitt imes, smiling faces. or making magical memories

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. TT has always been known to have long wait times and frequent break downs. A CM a few years ago told us it breaks down more often than it runs smoothly. I dont know what disney will do with the ride, if another sponsor will pick it up or not. Either way, it will probably need to be revamped. It is costing disney more money than they thought it would.

[Ian]

In a press release I read online, Automotive News claims GM is paying Disney $5 million a year. So, if it still is a 10 year deal, I assume $50 million is being paid to Disney, not $10 million that we been tossing around. That is a lot of money.No, I was already thinking $10 million per year, not $10 million over 10 years.

Again ... these numbers are near meaningless for a company the size of GM.

Do you know what GM spends a year on healthcare expenses for their employees?

$12 billion. That's billion with a "b."

Now how's that paltry $10 million look?

[MOJoe]

Has anyone brought up the fact that after you exit the actual ride you enter a General Motors Showroom. Only thing missing is the salesmen. So from a marketing standpoint, spending 10 million a year for the opportunity to have hundreds of thousands of people look at, touch and even sit in one of your products is a fair price. GM may have spent that much money on Superbowl TV ads alone last year. Just to get you into a dealership.
I am hopefull that GM survives this severe economic downturn. But if they don't, some company should see the value of this type of exposure.

[mrte62]

Based on GM's own internal auditors, there may not be a GM to save much longer. :ill:

Sorry to say, but things are going to get a lot worse - in all industries.

[Ian]

Has anyone brought up the fact that after you exit the actual ride you enter a General Motors Showroom. Only thing missing is the salesmen. So from a marketing standpoint, spending 10 million a year for the opportunity to have hundreds of thousands of people look at, touch and even sit in one of your products is a fair price. GM may have spent that much money on Superbowl TV ads alone last year. Just to get you into a dealership.
I am hopefull that GM survives this severe economic downturn. But if they don't, some company should see the value of this type of exposure.Oooh! Oooh! Pick me! I did!

That's exactly the point I've been trying to make as well. And also, you can buy a car there ... or at least arrange to buy one at a dealership near your home. So functionally it amounts to a big showroom.

[Aggie97]

The auditors' going-concern statement simply confirms what everyone has known for quite some time: that GM may not be able to continue operations under their current financial situation, and that investors should be aware of the risk.

Sometimes a going-concern statement is issued in the hopes of expediting financial assistance... which would seem likely in GM's case.

Neither its issuance nor Chapter 11 reorganization necessarily means that a company will "go out of business."

We don't know whether or not GM will continue their Test Track sponsorship under these conditions. But I still contend that smart sponsorships -- and Test Track provides a lot of positive exposure for a small price tag -- do have value for corporations, even those that are struggling.

[lockedoutlogic]

Has anyone brought up the fact that after you exit the actual ride you enter a General Motors Showroom. Only thing missing is the salesmen. So from a marketing standpoint, spending 10 million a year for the opportunity to have hundreds of thousands of people look at, touch and even sit in one of your products is a fair price. GM may have spent that much money on Superbowl TV ads alone last year. Just to get you into a dealership.
I am hopefull that GM survives this severe economic downturn. But if they don't, some company should see the value of this type of exposure.


Alot of good it does them....
I don't know if you've noticed....but nobody is buying that junk anymore

[lockedoutlogic]

Based on GM's own internal auditors, there may not be a GM to save much longer. :ill:

Sorry to say, but things are going to get a lot worse - in all industries.

i legitimately agree....at somepoint the political price will be too big to prop up large corporations that the consumers are not in a position - nor won't be for a couple of years at least - to save.
GM is practically the posterchild for this....
It's a longstanding american company with tremendous economic impact...but unlike AIG or Citibank....nobody believes that saving them is a national necessary evil.
It's hard....they have fallen behind due mainly to stubborness, greed, and stupidity
And they are burdened because their retired blue collar workers get basically 80% pay and full medical (for everyone) from retirement to the day they die...
That's gonna be a hard pill to swallow if the government tries to prop or buy them up....
nobody gets that kinda benefits anymore other than government employees.....
I think the political storm will bury any dems (and republicans....remember the auto industry enables the oil industry as well) who try to save it....very soon.

[Ian]

Alot of good it does them....
I don't know if you've noticed....but nobody is buying that junk anymoreI don't want to start a big debate about this, but you're just totally wrong.

General Motors sells the second most vehicles on the planet, behind Toyota by a sliver. And Toyota just surpassed them like 12 months ago.

Were they caught with their pants down by the high gas prices? Yes. Did anyone see that coming? No. Were people gobbling up their SUV's, leading to big profits for them before that? Yes.

GM's issues go back decades and decades and are mostly tied directly to their union obligations. I'm not saying that's the only reason they're failing, but it's definitely a part of it.

Bear in mind, too, that they used to wholly own GMAC, which was a cash cow for them when the mortgage biz was booming. Now that's gone, as well, so they've gotten a bit of a triple whammy.

But dude ... you can't say "no one is buying that junk anymore", because A. their cars actually have pretty decent quality scores and B. they still sell a heckuva lot of cars.

I understand you have very strong opinions on things, but you really very often confuse those opinions with facts. I think you've done that two or three times in this thread alone.

[DizneyRox]

GM is very big into fleet sales. I would be interested to know how much of their sales are to rental agencies, municipalities, etc. vs real people. Granted a sale is a sale, but in this economy, that's got to impact your bottom line even faster. I know many people who won't touch all the "American Garbage" myself included. I'm in the market for a car right now, and a GM dealership hasn't even cross my mind. There's was one literally across the street from my employer, until just last week. The car carriers came one day and took everything that would start.

[Ian]

I don't know where you're home base is, but there are areas of the country where you'd be more likely to find people driving with no pants on vs. driving a foreign car.

It's very regionalized, but there are still many areas of the country where American cars reign supreme.

In fact, outside of the Northeast and California that's pretty much the case.

[BMan62]

I don't know where you're home base is, but there are areas of the country where you'd be more likely to find people driving with no pants on vs. driving a foreign car.

It's very regionalized, but there are still many areas of the country where American cars reign supreme.

In fact, outside of the Northeast and California that's pretty much the case.

My problem is that none of the US automakers make a good 4-wheel drive vehicle, other than trucks. Where I live 4-wheel drive is almost a necessity in inclement weather - rain or snow. Front wheel and all-wheel drive vehicles just don't have the 'oomph' to climb the hills to get me where I need to go - home-work-home.

I used to drive all Chevrolet pick-ups - full size (Silverado) and the old S10 models - but downsized because I didn't need the hauling capacity and wanted better mileage. DW has been a Subaru lover for years and actually got me interested in them - before they went all AWD. I currently drive a Nissan Xterra and love it - better gas mileage than my old S10 and much better in mud and snow. DW has a Subaru Impreza 4WD. We are both keeping out vehicles until they fall apart - which should be quite some time based on the way they are holding up after the first 10 years.

Would I but from a US automaker again? If the price point and features were comparable to what I have now, yes. Otherwise, they can go pound sand.

Back to the original point: Given the dire circumstances GM faces, they need every bit of advertising they can get and with the throughput at WDW, $10M/year is 'chump change' for keeping their products visible.

[cgriff]

WDW Operations....on the other hand....see nothing but labor outlays, utility costs, maintenace and repairs (big one in the case of test track) and other operational expenses....they then add up all those costs and compare it to the park revenue.....something test track has never really added to because it's not a big merchandise pusher....

There is no FW attraction that is a real big merchandise pusher.

And regarding the design time & construction expense of TT, some people say that innovation is rarely cheap, or easy, or quick.

[lockedoutlogic]

I don't know where you're home base is, but there are areas of the country where you'd be more likely to find people driving with no pants on vs. driving a foreign car.

It's very regionalized, but there are still many areas of the country where American cars reign supreme.

In fact, outside of the Northeast and California that's pretty much the case.

Ummmmm.....

I don't know what newspaper you've been reading....

But the people who are in the "american only" segment you just decribed....have been wrong about just about everything for a decade....

The people in the second segment are kinda the ones who still had some grasp on reality....now the BUSINESSMEN in the second segment abused the people in the first segment.....

for that....it's truly regrettable....but it also takes any credibility away...

My point: we probably should look to the "american only" population as the leaders, morale compass, or light of the freeworld anymore

...whether or not that was ever true is up for debate

just an aside (is it veiled enough?)

[lockedoutlogic]

I don't want to start a big debate about this, but you're just totally wrong.

General Motors sells the second most vehicles on the planet, behind Toyota by a sliver. And Toyota just surpassed them like 12 months ago.

Were they caught with their pants down by the high gas prices? Yes. Did anyone see that coming? No. Were people gobbling up their SUV's, leading to big profits for them before that? Yes.

GM's issues go back decades and decades and are mostly tied directly to their union obligations. I'm not saying that's the only reason they're failing, but it's definitely a part of it.

Bear in mind, too, that they used to wholly own GMAC, which was a cash cow for them when the mortgage biz was booming. Now that's gone, as well, so they've gotten a bit of a triple whammy.

But dude ... you can't say "no one is buying that junk anymore", because A. their cars actually have pretty decent quality scores and B. they still sell a heckuva lot of cars.

I understand you have very strong opinions on things, but you really very often confuse those opinions with facts. I think you've done that two or three times in this thread alone.


Not to respond into a big thing....

But GM went from controling the market for close to 60 years.....to second place in the span of a decade....

you take me a little too literally....the no one is buying quip was tongue in cheek....

obviously people are buying.....but the real question is: who and why?

that will put us all on the right path if we really look at it

I agree that the hated, evil, working, simple, non-investing, generous, civic minded, blue collar labor contracts are to blame.....and they are bringing the slick, blackberry wielding, cosmestic surgeon patron, snake oil salesman white collar guys down with them....

see....that was tongue in cheek too....
of course - if you dig into it a little and take all things into consideration from all angles....you might be surprised at what degree of an exaggeration it is (and if you find out....fire and email to my Storm:))

But that's also part of the problem....GM's labor contracts, debt structure, acquisitions, investments, holdings...etc were all designed on the assumption of domination.

They weren't built to be number two....so how can they survive with their obligations if they slip to 3 or 4...which they will. They will still have hundreds of thousands of retired workers to support in virtual perpetuity...even if they fire everybody and farm out all the manufacturing to teh poorest people in Sri Lanka....At some point the unions will yield the current and future workers in favor of the deals they already have and stop concessions. And my contention is that is when the execs say "that's it....I'm out"...the plants are closed...the workers are laid off...and the scraps are sold to the highest (or most likely...only) bidders.

That's the issue....and only the United States has either the resource or pull to get them out of it....and my contention is that the politics will shortly overpower the economics of it.

but hey....you can claim higher insight and go that root....
But when the milk spoils in that camp....a little feet on the ground and less than optimistic portfolio predictions is the only medicine to cure the sickness....a natural and necessary grounding to return to balance (if that doesn't happen soon....then things will definitely be altered....perhaps not for the better)

As far as distinguishing facts from opinions.....you are probably right....

But when you understand what goes on under the hood at WDW and have lived it before....it really can make you fairly intuitive.

Test Track has not been a good investment....the upfront cost doomed it to that before it ever opened....Eisney publically scoffed about it on several occasions....this really isn't a bold statement here

It will survive for a time without a sponsor...but definitely not in the long run. It's Disney MO....There is no conceivable way they maintain either Test Track nor mission space for long after the sponsor goes...it's not as lucrative to them from a marketing and sponsorship standpoint than going ahead and assuming the construction cost on new pavilions...and racking up new sponsors and 5 years of "new this year" adds to generate gate

A new sponsor voids the argument....sponsorship maintains the level of water being taken on by the boat....it doesn't change the bottomline for disney....and also doesn't force their hand to replace the E ticket...which they would have to do in almost short order.

It's all moot anyway....once Harry Potter World opens nobody will go to EPCOT anyway...

see that too was tongue in cheek....but only to a certain extent....because everyone jumped on me when I said that Harry Potter and Universal would be forgotten and/or irrelevant by the time it opened....
and low and behold: harry potter has been banished from every walmart, barnes and noble, and burger king in the free world....and will be even more irrelevant in an also ran themepark suffering a huge hit in bad economic times....
I'm just gonna go ahead and confuse opinion with fact on that one....and stand the judgement of history

[Ian]

Wow ... to paraphrase Winston Churchill, never have so few offended so many in so short a time period.

Since my Momma always taught me not to say anything if I couldn't say anything nice, I think I'll just exit gracefully and go wash my obviously passe Chevy Tahoe.

Maybe I'll git me some grits and hog jowls, too, while I'm at it. I think there's a wrastlin' match on later that I don't want to miss.

[DizneyRox]

And Maw said no more skinny dippin' down by the crik! :D

[Boost]

I sincerely hope that if GM drops sponsorship of Test Track that Ford picks it up and runs with the ball. Sounds like Chrysler is not in any position to do it.

I also hope the Toyota DOES NOT get a footprint in the organization. The fact that we, as a country, do not buy American has in some part contributed to our current economic climate.

I know that some folks on here dearly love their import cars. I have owned Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi, Volkswagen, GM and Ford. My wife and I have two Ford SUVs in the driveway now and we love them.

BUY AMERICAN!!!!!

[Stu29573]

I sincerely hope that if GM drops sponsorship of Test Track that Ford picks it up and runs with the ball.

Ya see, THIS is what I've been saying all along. And they had the integrity to turn down the bailout money! I know if I buy a Ford, I won't have already paid for it once with my taxes!
GO FORD!!!

[lockedoutlogic]

Wow ... to paraphrase Winston Churchill, never have so few offended so many in so short a time period.

Since my Momma always taught me not to say anything if I couldn't say anything nice, I think I'll just exit gracefully and go wash my obviously passe Chevy Tahoe.

Maybe I'll git me some grits and hog jowls, too, while I'm at it. I think there's a wrastlin' match on later that I don't want to miss.

see now....there you go....well played!!!:thedolls:

[lockedoutlogic]

Ya see, THIS is what I've been saying all along. And they had the integrity to turn down the bailout money! I know if I buy a Ford, I won't have already paid for it once with my taxes!
GO FORD!!!

you wouldn't have been paying for it twice anyway.....

all your taxes have already been put towards the hundreds of billions already doled out in no bid contracts to the Missle Defense Shield

[iDisney]

harry potter has been banished from every walmart, barnes and noble, and burger king in the free world....and will be even more irrelevant in an also ran themepark suffering a huge hit in bad economic times....

Say what? I don't remember Harry Potter being banned. (Especially at Burger King?!) Am I missing something?

[The Joker]

I wouldn't be surprised if a Chinese or Indian car manufacturer jumps in with a lot of money.

[Stu29573]

you wouldn't have been paying for it twice anyway.....

all your taxes have already been put towards the hundreds of billions already doled out in no bid contracts to the Missle Defense Shield

Perhaps, but I have a choice about if I want to throw more of my money at GM or not.

However, my point is that there are other options for TT sponsorship that involve domestic automobiles, and I think they're kind of exciting.

[drummerboy]

Perhaps, but I have a choice about if I want to throw more of my money at GM or not.
Come on, Stu. You have a choice about who you buy your missiles from, too. :D

[lockedoutlogic]

Perhaps, but I have a choice about if I want to throw more of my money at GM or not.

However, my point is that there are other options for TT sponsorship that involve domestic automobiles, and I think they're kind of exciting.

Certainly an interesting premise.....

Ford still has alot of work to do to position itself for the future as well though....their lots are still filled with Explorers and Expeditions that used to be glutonous and silly.....and now are borderline irresponsible.

Let me be clear....I have no grudge against mom and dad's minivan to haul the kids.....nor a contractor's F-150 or 250 to do the job.....but the SUV era will probably go down as one of the biggest examples of consumerism gone amuck....

I would be just as happy to have Ford in Epcot as Toyota.....but that would probably require more change for the sponsor....as ford probably wouldn't like their logos painted over a ride that was built for GM

[lockedoutlogic]

Say what? I don't remember Harry Potter being banned. (Especially at Burger King?!) Am I missing something?


The point is the threat of harry potter was overblown.....but that was another discussion....so i won't hijack this one with that

[Stu29573]

Come on, Stu. You have a choice about who you buy your missiles from, too. :D

Come on down to Big Ed's Missile Emporium!!! :D

[lockedoutlogic]

Come on down to Big Ed's Missile Emporium!!! :D

Isn't that in Tora Bora? with shipping crates out back with "General Dynamics" "Lockheed" and "Grumman" labels still affixed?

Or maybe I saw that in Tora! Tora! Tora!.....i get confused sometimes

[Stu29573]

Isn't that in Tora Bora? with shipping crates out back with "General Dynamics" "Lockheed" and "Grumman" labels still affixed?

Or maybe I saw that in Tora! Tora! Tora!.....i get confused sometimes

Oh come on, you know they usually remember to white those labels out!

[lockedoutlogic]

Oh come on, you know they usually remember to white those labels out!


Yeah....but the kids who they paid a couple of bucks to do the concealing were probably distracted by LiveAid on the tube in '85 and I'm sure a couple slipped by

ok.....we're threadjacking here and are going to get censured.....I'm done with missiles

[grumpyguy]

gm is going bankrupt....who would want any association with that?

[TheRustyScupper]

I wouldn't be surprised if a Chinese or Indian car manufacturer jumps in with a lot of money.

1) How about Tonka?
. . . they have money
. . . their designs are timeless
. . . they don't break down
. . . they have many vehicles and vehicle types

2) Besides they have the best proving grounds
3) The hands of a two-year-old!

[d_m_n_n]

Has anyone brought up the fact that after you exit the actual ride you enter a General Motors Showroom. Only thing missing is the salesmen. So from a marketing standpoint, spending 10 million a year for the opportunity to have hundreds of thousands of people look at, touch and even sit in one of your products is a fair price. GM may have spent that much money on Superbowl TV ads alone last year. Just to get you into a dealership.


This is DH's favorite part of TT!! He could literally spend HOURS in there looking around without having a salesman standing over his shoulder. Granted, I am currently on Tahoe #4, but I think he would do this with any automotive company.

[lockedoutlogic]

Oh come on.....that was harmless!!!

[Figment78]

I'm with Ian on this one. I am so offended by some of the completed uneducated statements made by certain individuals in this post.

What is WRONG with our country that we can't allow companies to do their jobs and make a profit? If you are successful and want to have plastic surgery (mentioned previously in the post) or use a blackberry (to accomplish more work) or sponsor an attraction at a major theme park that not only brings you exposure to MASSES of people but also helps the actual park be a better place (I'm in the camp that Test Track is actually a popular attraction, which I personally enjoy also) - why is that so bad? Why can't the people in this country allow companies to make profits so that they can employ people, pay for the exorbitant cost of healthcare (I'm not referring to the GM healthcare plan, but to the healthcare plans of ALL businesses), and contribute to the greater good of the world. Do companies provide us with with products that we don't need - yeah. Do they provide us with ones we do need - sure! It's up to the consumer, not the media, not the goverment, to decide which is which.

Now, to correct a few statements that I've seen in this thread. General Motors does make cars that people want and are buying. The numbers do not lie. And even in my corner of the Northeast (Pittsburgh is considered part of the Northeast Region for GM), Chevrolet is the number one best-selling brand. The Chevy Corvette is one of the most iconic vehicles ever. And every single Camaro slated to be produced in 2009 is already sold - to people who do not even know what the price will be yet (has not been announced). And believe me, people WANT to buy Chevy's right now. They call us, come into our showroom, and email us all the time. It is not all GM's fault that the banks are turning these customers down for loans.

GM does make quality vehicles that consistently win consumer, critic and professional awards. They have an enormous focus on "greener" vehicles - in fact, one of the fleets of vehicles that GM provides is the Equinox FUEL CELL fleet. The Tahoe 2WD Hybrid gets the same fuel economy as a Civic and the 2010 Equinox (non-hybrid) coming out this fall will get the same fuel economy as the Ford Escape HYBRID. Did they wait too long to start making these vehicles? Sure. But they are making them, no doubt. (I work for a GM dealership, so these statements are facts, not opinions or something I heard on the news).

As far as the american automobile industry not being important to our country - that is also incorrect. The research and development that is conducted by the car manufacturers and their subsidiaries is definitely important to this country.

I also think there is some confusion about chapter 11 bankruptcy. It does not mean the company will go out of business. And as far as the auditors' report that came out (I used to be an accountant), they were simply stating what GM has been saying all along.

I really believe that if the media would simply stop using words like "depression" "crisis" "recession" etc - our country would regain some hope, a sliver of a positive outlook, and let go of some fear. If we continue to live in fear of the economic crisis, we will continue to feed that crisis by not spending and in turn, companies will struggle, and employees will struggle. For example, as the "big bad GM" continues to struggle, every downstream and upstream member of that chain struggles. Countless local goverments rely on GM dealers taxes, community organizations rely on our sponsorships, newspapers, websites, and countless other companies rely on our advertising. Thousands of people at Automart magazine lost their jobs over this. Local newspapers are scrambling to make up their lost revenue from the auto dealers (not just GM) pulling out of their papers. The list goes on and on. We as a nation, need to stand up and work smarter, from the top chief executives of large and small businesses (and not all CEO's are evil) to receptionists who can find a way to inject sunshine into callers' days. We need to believe in ourselves and avoid a depression. As Walt himself says "it's kind of fun to do the impossible." He would not have given up on our country, as our media wants us to do. He imagineered a new character and forged ahead.

[Stickey]

It will be interesting to see what develops with TT sponsorship. GM's struggles will certainly impact the ability to maintain its current sponsorship. Overall, the auto industry is facing severe challenges, therefore a new automobile sponsor is not likely to replace GM in the near future, at least at the rate Disney would like to receive for sponsorship of this popular attraction.

This is not the proper forum to critique the massive government bailout plan. The funds allocated to GM and Chrysler are minor compared to the billions being spent by Congress in areas that will not produce, or protect jobs. This discussion should not be turned into a GM bashing session filled with inaccurate statements and biased opinions.

U.S. automakers are saddled under the burden of operating with UAW contracts which require substantially larger compensation and benefits packages than those paid by foreign automakers. Add the perfect storm- record gas prices, a slowing economy, and a lack of liquidity, it is not surprising that GM is facing serious hardships. GM continues to produce many high quality vehicles that are competitive with, or superior to its foreign rivals.

[lockedoutlogic]

I'm with Ian on this one. I am so offended by some of the completed uneducated statements made by certain individuals in this post.

What is WRONG with our country that we can't allow companies to do their jobs and make a profit? If you are successful and want to have plastic surgery (mentioned previously in the post) or use a blackberry (to accomplish more work) or sponsor an attraction at a major theme park that not only brings you exposure to MASSES of people but also helps the actual park be a better place (I'm in the camp that Test Track is actually a popular attraction, which I personally enjoy also) - why is that so bad? Why can't the people in this country allow companies to make profits so that they can employ people, pay for the exorbitant cost of healthcare (I'm not referring to the GM healthcare plan, but to the healthcare plans of ALL businesses), and contribute to the greater good of the world. Do companies provide us with with products that we don't need - yeah. Do they provide us with ones we do need - sure! It's up to the consumer, not the media, not the goverment, to decide which is which.

Now, to correct a few statements that I've seen in this thread. General Motors does make cars that people want and are buying. The numbers do not lie. And even in my corner of the Northeast (Pittsburgh is considered part of the Northeast Region for GM), Chevrolet is the number one best-selling brand. The Chevy Corvette is one of the most iconic vehicles ever. And every single Camaro slated to be produced in 2009 is already sold - to people who do not even know what the price will be yet (has not been announced). And believe me, people WANT to buy Chevy's right now. They call us, come into our showroom, and email us all the time. It is not all GM's fault that the banks are turning these customers down for loans.

GM does make quality vehicles that consistently win consumer, critic and professional awards. They have an enormous focus on "greener" vehicles - in fact, one of the fleets of vehicles that GM provides is the Equinox FUEL CELL fleet. The Tahoe 2WD Hybrid gets the same fuel economy as a Civic and the 2010 Equinox (non-hybrid) coming out this fall will get the same fuel economy as the Ford Escape HYBRID. Did they wait too long to start making these vehicles? Sure. But they are making them, no doubt. (I work for a GM dealership, so these statements are facts, not opinions or something I heard on the news).

As far as the american automobile industry not being important to our country - that is also incorrect. The research and development that is conducted by the car manufacturers and their subsidiaries is definitely important to this country.

I also think there is some confusion about chapter 11 bankruptcy. It does not mean the company will go out of business. And as far as the auditors' report that came out (I used to be an accountant), they were simply stating what GM has been saying all along.

I really believe that if the media would simply stop using words like "depression" "crisis" "recession" etc - our country would regain some hope, a sliver of a positive outlook, and let go of some fear. If we continue to live in fear of the economic crisis, we will continue to feed that crisis by not spending and in turn, companies will struggle, and employees will struggle. For example, as the "big bad GM" continues to struggle, every downstream and upstream member of that chain struggles. Countless local goverments rely on GM dealers taxes, community organizations rely on our sponsorships, newspapers, websites, and countless other companies rely on our advertising. Thousands of people at Automart magazine lost their jobs over this. Local newspapers are scrambling to make up their lost revenue from the auto dealers (not just GM) pulling out of their papers. The list goes on and on. We as a nation, need to stand up and work smarter, from the top chief executives of large and small businesses (and not all CEO's are evil) to receptionists who can find a way to inject sunshine into callers' days. We need to believe in ourselves and avoid a depression. As Walt himself says "it's kind of fun to do the impossible." He would not have given up on our country, as our media wants us to do. He imagineered a new character and forged ahead.

Ok....

If any moderator is listening.....please remove my posts from this thread....

I apologize that the OBVIOUS sarcasm of some of my quips isn't so obvious. I personally don't have a problem pointing our generalizations and stereotypes...partly to poke fun at them, partly to acknowleged that it is dangerous NOT to acknowledge them. So we should just get rid of them...in this case.

I will however say, as a born and raised 'Burgher.....that it is not appropriate to give GM a pass on their predicament.

They were polluted by greed and irresponsibility....as has been rampant in several "pillar" sections of not only the US...but the world economy as well.

And now they really should be left to die.....even though it would hardship the union, blue collar work that I was raised to respect and revere as the builders of the modern world (and rightly so....until the greed permeated there as well)

But the economy has been run into the ground....at least for a few years.
Reality should be setting in everywhere....positive outlook is respectable, but this isn't a dot.com going belly up.
This is lending, insurance, housing, construction, banking, and domestic manufacturing being potentially destroyed....

The assessments of "worse crisis since the depression" is accurate. It's actually a tribute to many that things on the streets have not gotten worse very quickly.
But we need to be grounded....and reasonable...and responsible....and frankly, less greedy

[Hull-onian]

I

BUY AMERICAN!!!!!

:ditto:

[lockedoutlogic]

Hasn't that line been blurred substantially though?

As now many manufacturer make their parts in one place and assemble somewhere else....including the american companies?

[big blue and hairy]

Hasn't that line been blurred substantially though?

As now many manufacturer make their parts in one place and assemble somewhere else....including the american companies?
That is completely true. A lot of Toyota are built in this country. Not only has the line of where a car is from been blurred, so has the quality. American car companies now make cars that stack up against Japan's. Some of the cars from Korean manufacturers have become much better.

:sulley:

[AndrewJackson]

To... uhum... get back on topic...

I think GM will look long and hard at this one. The CEO is already being crucified for taking the private jet to Washington to beg for money. This would just be another incident for the public to complain about wasteful spending. I think it will be a PR decision for GM not to renew their sponsorship. Look for Ford to jump on board, or a foreign company. I could see Toyota wanting in on this as well.

[cgriff]

Hmmm, maybe Bridgestone would be interested in a piece of the TT sponsorship action? Big time tire manufacturer... Test Track is known for pushing auto tires to the limit... Disney/Pixar and Bridgestone recently teamed up for a Superbowl ad featuring the Mr & Mrs Potato Head characters from Toy Story, so there is a working relationship... Hmmmmmm....

[Ian]

Hmmm, maybe Bridgestone would be interested in a piece of the TT sponsorship action? Big time tire manufacturer... Test Track is known for pushing auto tires to the limit... Disney/Pixar and Bridgestone recently teamed up for a Superbowl ad featuring the Mr & Mrs Potato Head characters from Toy Story, so there is a working relationship... Hmmmmmm....That's a great idea and it could really work with very minimal retooling.

A new video is about all it would take. Maybe some different emphasis in the queue area and in the pre-show, as well.

[Rogerwdwfan]

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO :ack:

[DizneyRox]

A tire blowout test would fit well in the current antilock breaking test zone. :number1:

[CaptainSad]

This is what will happen.

1. GM will drop out as sponsor.
2. Test Track will go dark.
3. If no sponsor is found in the very near future, we will see a new ride of some type.

The reasons are they can't continue to use Test track with GM plastered all over the place. GM will take out anything that is on their books. And Disney will not just put up Disney's Test Track signs up. They need that sponsorship to keep it running.

I still say this is just the beginning. More will drop their sponsorships. This recession will last a couple of years. A lot of people have already cut back on vacations. The parks will get less crowded as the year go's along.

[lockedoutlogic]

This is what will happen.

1. GM will drop out as sponsor.
2. Test Track will go dark.
3. If no sponsor is found in the very near future, we will see a new ride of some type.

The reasons are they can't continue to use Test track with GM plastered all over the place. GM will take out anything that is on their books. And Disney will not just put up Disney's Test Track signs up. They need that sponsorship to keep it running.

I still say this is just the beginning. More will drop their sponsorships. This recession will last a couple of years. A lot of people have already cut back on vacations. The parks will get less crowded as the year go's along.

What's a matter with you, understanding Disney and how things work and "telling the truth" and all.....

Let's be serious here....this thread is now all financial speak patronizing talk and Faux News.....

stop being son LOGICAL!!!:thedolls:

[Ian]

This is what will happen.

1. GM will drop out as sponsor.
2. Test Track will go dark.
3. If no sponsor is found in the very near future, we will see a new ride of some type.

The reasons are they can't continue to use Test track with GM plastered all over the place. GM will take out anything that is on their books. And Disney will not just put up Disney's Test Track signs up. They need that sponsorship to keep it running.

I still say this is just the beginning. More will drop their sponsorships. This recession will last a couple of years. A lot of people have already cut back on vacations. The parks will get less crowded as the year go's along.Not for nothing, but when FedEx ended its sponsorship of Space Mountain, did Space Mountain go away?

[cgriff]

Not for nothing, but when FedEx ended its sponsorship of Space Mountain, did Space Mountain go away?

CaptainSad and LockedOut pwned.

[cgriff]

NASCAR could also be a possible sponsor or co-sponsor with a pretty good fit, though admittedly that would require more reimagining than, say, a Bridgestone sponsorship would.

[lockedoutlogic]

NASCAR could also be a possible sponsor or co-sponsor with a pretty good fit, though admittedly that would require more reimagining than, say, a Bridgestone sponsorship would.


I did actually think about this.....since it has a relatively new ESPN/ABC contract

[lockedoutlogic]

Not for nothing, but when FedEx ended its sponsorship of Space Mountain, did Space Mountain go away?

No...but i don't think that you can compare Test Track to Space Mountain in three key areas:

1. Public Acceptance....Space Mountain is core WDW with a following.....Test Track is "that neat car thing"
2. Cost....while space mountain is undoubtedly a pain in the but mechanically and cost wise....I don't think it would come close to TT in either area
3. Necessity to the park....with the world showcase, EPCOTs niche will always be more towards the adult crowd, making thrills not as integral. The Magic Kingdom is the fun park....rides and characters, we all know this

[Goofster]

Here's my take on this:

1) Disney wants GM to be a long term sponsor of TT;
2) GM wants to be a long term sponsor of TT;
3) Disney and GM negotiate a short term 2-3 year contract reducing GM's sponsorship fee for TT;
4) In 3 years when its renewal time, GM will either be in a better position or extinct; and
5) Disney can then renegotiate a more favorable sponsorship contract.

I think in the end, TT is (or will be) rolled into GM's general marketing budget, which really hasn't been reduced. This type of expense doesn't cause an uproar among the public.

[Goofster]

This is DH's favorite part of TT!! He could literally spend HOURS in there looking around without having a salesman standing over his shoulder. Granted, I am currently on Tahoe #4, but I think he would do this with any automotive company.

And this is why GM wants to continue sponsorship of TT. They're marketing budget is huge and this is merely a line item in it...as with the rest of its business, I'm sure its looking to reduce this expense with Disney...but still continue the sponsorship.

[Ian]

I think this thread has more than run it's course.

Let's let it die a quiet, natural death please. Don't make me close it.

[DizneyRox]

:flower:R.I.P.:flower: Test Track! We speak your name!

[Imagineer1981]

I could see Ford or Toyota taking this on. Obviously, Toyota was mentioned in the article. Ford, on the other hand, is an american company, and during the whole bailout precedings they said that the bailout would be a great backup plan, but they actually think that they can return to profitability without the bailout funds. It sounds like they're in better shape than most. Just a thought. I don't see how Disney would close Test Track.

I'd much rather have Ford buy the rights then Toyota, I'd want an american car company to represent Disney personally

[ShanPooh]

No, I was already thinking $10 million per year, not $10 million over 10 years.

Again ... these numbers are near meaningless for a company the size of GM.

Do you know what GM spends a year on healthcare expenses for their employees?

$12 billion. That's billion with a "b."

Now how's that paltry $10 million look?

How many employees does GM and its subsidiaries have, close to 1,000,000?
Not sure how it works in the auto industry, but I work for a public library and 60% of operating costs are employee related. I was a bit taken aback when I found out.
Still, when each of our 20 some-odd branches got 25 new copies of the last Harry Potter book, I thought it was a waste just for the "next big thing". When the mania calmed down a couple months later, we had 23 copies in the back room sitting on shelves and not circulating.
The whole TT thing reminds me of that in a way.
No it's really not a lot of money for big companies to do these kind of things. But when the economy is bad - people are going to be critical of companies spending money on frivolous-looking ventures, no matter how small.

Separate thought and totally my :twocents: Sure a 45 minute wait in line looks impressive and people think the ride is popular because of such a line but how much of that time is waiting for the ride to actually be operational?

[KevMcNJ]

A tire blowout test would fit well in the current antilock breaking test zone. :number1:


WDW wouldnt even be able to find a tire company willing to SELL them tires for this type of attraction.

No tire co. would want that kind of association
with their product

[DizneyRox]

WDW wouldnt even be able to find a tire company willing to SELL them tires for this type of attraction.

No tire co. would want that kind of association
with their product
Again, nobody gets my joke. Anyone remember a little while back, the Bridgestone/Explorer ordeal? I'm surprised Bridgestone is still in business after that one!

[cgriff]

Anyone remember a little while back, the Bridgestone/Explorer ordeal? I'm surprised Bridgestone is still in business after that one!

I remember Dateline NBC planting explosives in the gas tank of Explorers because they were producing an investigative report about the danger of SUVs, but they couldn't seem to find one that would spontaneously explode; so, they rigged them to go boom! I'm surprised NBC is still in business after that one!

[lockedoutlogic]

I remember Dateline NBC planting explosives in the gas tank of Explorers because they were producing an investigative report about the danger of SUVs, but they couldn't seem to find one that would spontaneously explode; so, they rigged them to go boom! I'm surprised NBC is still in business after that one!

yeah....that wasn't the bridgestone thing....

If i recall....the bridgestone thing was $400 "SUV" tires (you know....for use on the rugged, offroad conditions of the New Jersey Turnpike, Florida Turnpike, and the 405) were separating from the treads and causing loss of control of the vehicles....

[GrumpyFan]

How many employees does GM and its subsidiaries have, close to 1,000,000?
Not sure how it works in the auto industry, but I work for a public library and 60% of operating costs are employee related. I was a bit taken aback when I found out.


I've heard that for GM, their employee related costs are close to 80%, which is one of the big reasons for their troubles.

[cgriff]

yeah....that wasn't the bridgestone thing....

I know... the NBC thing was much *much* worse though... I brought it up as a way of providing a sense of proportion. Some things are more outrageous than others.

[lockedoutlogic]

I know... the NBC thing was much *much* worse though... I brought it up as a way of providing a sense of proportion. Some things are more outrageous than others.

I would say that actual traffic accidents would be bigger in proportion....

Made up "news" stories have become commonplace.....there is at least 1 station (usually more than one) on your cable that does it on everystory....as a matter of policy

[cgriff]

I would say that actual traffic accidents would be bigger in proportion....

You said it yourself, the Bridgestone faulty tire problems were "accidents"; whereas the NBC thing was a conspiracy, involving planning and forethought.

[lockedoutlogic]

You said it yourself, the Bridgestone faulty tire problems were "accidents"; whereas the NBC thing was a conspiracy, involving planning and forethought.

grain of salt....actual product safety risks outweigh a fake news story that was big for 3 days....but we can agree to disagree

[Tekneek]

I've heard that for GM, their employee related costs are close to 80%, which is one of the big reasons for their troubles.

You don't think their strategy of banking on big gas guzzling vehicles, just like they did 30 years prior, played a part as well? Could the fact that their top executives make a whole lot more than most of their foreign counterparts also play a role? It is also interesting to look at the difference in pay from the average employee to the CEO, which is also much larger for the Big 3 than their foreign counterparts.

[NYdaily]

I'm sure that TT will be sticking around, even if they lose sponsorship. Disney is set to build a clone in DCA in a few years -- well, except for the whole Cars themed overlay. The ride must work for them if they want to build another.

[GothMickey]

I'm sure that TT will be sticking around, even if they lose sponsorship. Disney is set to build a clone in DCA in a few years -- well, except for the whole Cars themed overlay. The ride must work for them if they want to build another.

TT is a maintenance nightmare. There are problems with it like you wouldn't know. The new ride technology for Cars is based on TT, but better, new and improved. Without GM's cash flow to Disney, TT won't be maintained as it should be.

[GrumpyFan]

TT is a maintenance nightmare. There are problems with it like you wouldn't know. The new ride technology for Cars is based on TT, but better, new and improved.

Sounds like something a potential new sponsor could negotiate. IE, they would sign for 5-10 years and provide an initial investment of x million dollars, but want it overhauled with the newer technology. If this happens it would probably be good for both Disney as well as the new sponsor. The attraction is 10 years old, so considering the technology used, it's certainly due for some serious maintenance/upgrades.

It would be neat to see a new sponsor come in and add their touches also. Maybe add a "test lab" showcasing their new ideas for fuel efficiency and safety.

[GothMickey]

Sounds like something a potential new sponsor could negotiate. IE, they would sign for 5-10 years and provide an initial investment of x million dollars, but want it overhauled with the newer technology. If this happens it would probably be good for both Disney as well as the new sponsor. The attraction is 10 years old, so considering the technology used, it's certainly due for some serious maintenance/upgrades.

It would be neat to see a new sponsor come in and add their touches also. Maybe add a "test lab" showcasing their new ideas for fuel efficiency and safety.

It really is time to let GM walk away. They have enough issues to deal with, mainly to make sure they stay in business. A new auto company would be the right sponsor. And you are right. An infusion of 5 to 10 million bucks would help with the updating of technology and software for this ride. Although, I wouldn't be upset if a new style ride were to replace TT. Just as long as it isn't character related.

[GrumpyFan]

Not really meaning to re-stoke this fire, buuut... let the speculation continue...

The following came from an article today at La Times


Eleven weeks before the release of its expensive summer sequel "Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen," the studio can't count on its key promotional partner to support a marketing blitz that helps drive mass awareness of Hollywood's big popcorn movies.

The struggling automaker, whose new Chevy Camaro is one of the stars of director Michael Bay's action film in which vehicles morph into giant robots, has sharply throttled back its contribution to the advertising campaign tied to the sequel's release June 24.

Officials from GM said the company's financial crisis prompted a change in plans. For 2007's "Transformers," GM backed a massive tie-in campaign, which even included TV commercials directed by Bay.


"We've pulled back on all of our marketing and advertising for obvious reasons, and spending is down dramatically," said Terry Rhadigan, communications director for Chevrolet, GM's biggest division. "It stands to reason that 'Transformers' would fall under that umbrella."

The timing couldn't be worse for the carmaker since its 2010 Camaro is just now rolling off assembly lines and being shipped to dealers. Rhadigan said although the relaunched Camaro was only a concept car and not available for sale when the first "Transformers" opened, its association with the film was highly beneficial. "It translated into awareness and boosted the overall image of Chevy," he said. "It's cool to be associated with a hot movie.
I'll start the speculating by saying that with GM pulling out of promoting for Transformors 2, their contract to renew TestTrack is probably in danger as well.

[caryrae]

How long could it take to know if they will or will not stop their sponsorship?

[GrumpyFan]

How long could it take to know if they will or will not stop their sponsorship?

I wouldn't look for a press release. These kinds of deals where the sponsor doesn't renew are usually not the kind of thing that gets "publicized". IF anything is mentioned, it will most likely be when/if a new sponsor signs up. IF they don't renew, you might start slowly seeing the GM images disappear and the showroom at the exit might even close, eventually. But, I would watch here on Intercot for anything like that.

[Ian]

I always find it ironic that a company says, basically, "We're not selling any cars. So we're pulling back on advertising and marketing spend."

Does that make sense to anyone???? :confused:

[iDisney]

I always find it ironic that a company says, basically, "We're not selling any cars. So we're pulling back on advertising and marketing spend."

Does that make sense to anyone???? :confused:

In most cases no, but I think that GM has so badly wounded their own reputation that extensive advertising right now is probably a waste of money. At least until they get back on their feet.

[GrumpyFan]

I always find it ironic that a company says, basically, "We're not selling any cars. So we're pulling back on advertising and marketing spend."

Does that make sense to anyone???? :confused:

Maybe they're just "re-focusing their energies". Or, maybe they're trying to avoid some ugly publicity or politicians snooping where they don't want them.

But, I agree it doesn't make sense. They need to spend money to make money.

[Polynesian Dweller]

I always find it ironic that a company says, basically, "We're not selling any cars. So we're pulling back on advertising and marketing spend."

Does that make sense to anyone???? :confused:

True to a point, but its really about bang for the buck and just how many cars are sold by rides on Test Track. Probably none. And how many people do you reach with TT anyway. A few million per year at most. A couple of good TV ads will reach that many in a couple of nights.

So the question for GM is not whether or not to advertise but where do their advertisement dollars do the most good and does TT pass the test of effective use of those dollars? And in the case of nearly bankrupt GM, you have to have money to spend money to make money and the don't have much money.

Even the bailout will barely keep them alive much less let them increase advertisement dollars or let them commit to multiyear sponsorship deals like TT right now.

[Ian]

I agree to a point, but I still maintain that the only thing that should determine whether or not they continue the sponsorship of TT is do they make money off it or don't they?

If they can't prove ROE on the sponsorship, then absolutely they should bail on it. But, of course, that would be the case if they were bankrupt or not.

But if they pay $10 million a year for it (a paltry sum in terms of advertising expenditures) and they can reliably trace it to revenue that is sufficiently in excess of the cash outlay.

And you do raise a good point in that they also have to evaluate the spend against other possible uses for the money that could bring a greater ROI. Whether it's T.V. or print or Internet or whatever.

What I hope, though, is that they don't just bow to political pressure to do away with anything that Washington doesn't feel is an "appropriate" expenditure for a corporation and they do what's right for GM.

I still maintain that, like it or not, the leadership of GM needs to run GM, not the Feds.

[drummerboy]

So the question for GM is not whether or not to advertise but where do their advertisement dollars do the most good and does TT pass the test of effective use of those dollars? And in the case of nearly bankrupt GM, you have to have money to spend money to make money and the don't have much money.

I agree with the principal, but I'm still not sure which is a more effective use of dollars. At TT, people who might not ordinarily go to a GM showroom, despite the commercials, may be more likely to look at, sit in, and get the feel of the GM products you come to after the ride. Somebody else already made the point that more cars might be sold because of that than because of the sound-bite commercials that may or may not be seen, depending on whether someone TVod past them or went for a snack break.

I don't know what the answer is, but I can see good arguments either way.

[lockedoutlogic]

Making better cars would help their sales tremendously....

(ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM ALERT)

[Ian]

There's nothing wrong with their cars, necessarily. Quality and MPG-wise they are as good if not better than their foreign counterparts.

I think their issue is ... they don't really make any cars I want to drive! Outside of the Corvette, that is.

I mean they don't have a single, solitary sports sedan that can compete with the Acuras, BMW's, Mercedes, Lexus, etc. It's like they completely ignored the new auto design standards and instead regressed and started offering Chevy Malibus again??

I love their trucks and SUV's, but even when I had my GM discount we still couldn't find a car they made that we wanted to buy. We bought an Acura TL instead, even though it ended up costing us a lot more.

[lockedoutlogic]

There's nothing wrong with their cars, necessarily. Quality and MPG-wise they are as good if not better than their foreign counterparts.

I think their issue is ... they don't really make any cars I want to drive! Outside of the Corvette, that is.

I mean they don't have a single, solitary sports sedan that can compete with the Acuras, BMW's, Mercedes, Lexus, etc. It's like they completely ignored the new auto design standards and instead regressed and started offering Chevy Malibus again??

I love their trucks and SUV's, but even when I had my GM discount we still couldn't find a car they made that we wanted to buy. We bought an Acura TL instead, even though it ended up costing us a lot more.

they do lack for that specific type of car....always have....

they try to shell off buicks and cadillacs as competitive to bmw and mercedes.....but they never have been.

If what they're saying is true...and their quality is onpar with the foreign counterparts....then they will regain some of their business over time.

My experience has been that my last GM car cost ridiculous amounts in parts and labor under normal use conditions....while the toyota and nissan i currently have have cost practically nothing.....and even the repairs i've had to make have been much less expensive at the shop than similar ones at american shops....

labor kills you at the garage just as much as it kills GM on the assembly line.

[DizneyRox]

At TT, people who might not ordinarily go to a GM showroom, despite the commercials, may be more likely to look at, sit in, and get the feel of the GM products you come to after the ride.
True. I would normally not set foot in a GM showroom, but on the same note, I make my way through the aftershow and I'm been known to say, Yeah, that's nice, too bad it's a GM.

I'm sure there are many that feel the same way.

[lockedoutlogic]

True. I would normally not set foot in a GM showroom, but on the same note, I make my way through the aftershow and I'm been known to say, Yeah, that's nice, too bad it's a GM.

I'm sure there are many that feel the same way.

I don't honestly believe that that showroom at Test Track has generated one new sale for GM.....

not one....

[Ian]

Well, I can immediately disprove that theory ... twice ...

I bought a Saab after checking it out in the TT showroom and my friend's wife bought a Saturn after seeing one there.

Their biggest problem (as evidenced by the comments here) seems to be one of perception. I've seen many people espousing the opinion that they wouldn't even consider driving a GM car.

Which is funny, because we've now owned six GM vehicles and not one of them had a single, solitary problem.

My BMW, on the other hand, was a piece of junk and my wife's Acura has had multiple issues. Both of them had recurring electrical/computer issues.

[Scott C]

I don't honestly believe that that showroom at Test Track has generated one new sale for GM.....

not one....

Sorry, my feb '02 trip cost me an extra $34,000 for an avalanche. Funny thing was I went out of my way to mention it to the TT staff at the info desk on my next visit -- they could have cared less. I wanted to show them that their sponsorship of TT was paying off and they did not care. Oh well.

Thanks
Scott C

[Jll3Sonex]

We needed to buy a replacement vehicle to tow our trailer - the van my DW has been driving has been getting a tad unreliable - but in the price range with the specs we had, GM just wouldn't suit. (No pickups, towing capacity of 3500 lbs, not too awful a price. 3 row seating would be good.) Chrysler's Aspen was considered - but the local dealer didn't have much in stock and it was too expensive considering fit and finish. Salesman didn't offer to search for anything in the area that would work. No idea when they'd get something in, didn't seem concerned about it. Wasn't really much of a surprise on the availability, to be sure. When you've got a company about to go under, making product isn't going to be a high priority. Making affordable product will be even less.

And the salesman attitude was odd. We seemed to be an annoyance, not a revenue source. In the midst of a sales downturn, you'd think they'd be at least SLIGHTLY pleased we dropped in.

(And now GM is going to have their warranties backed by the government. Looks like the GM salesfolk have turned on the "Government Salesman Mode" - "Buy it or not - we don't really care. I get paid the same whether you get a car or not, and it's a lot less hassle for me if you don't.")

Saturn VUE? Nope, couldn't haul enough. Saturn Outlook? Didn't feel good, fit and finish weren't there, and too expensive for the perceived value. There weren't ANY GM products available that were within striking distance of our criteria. And at every GM shop, the sales attitude was the same studied indifference.

Nissan? Toyota? "Nothing available, don't know when anything might be coming in." Apparently the lower gas prices have sparked a run on the larger models. Might have been able to swing a good deal for a Hummer H3, but... no third row seating and I'd need a stepladder to get my aged parents into it. Couldn't see THAT happening... plus the price was more than we wanted to pay - though we could get a slightly used one at CarMax for less.

Ended up looking at a Kia 'Borrego', and it's a heck of a lot more for a lower price than any comparable GM product. (Even beat Honda, Nissan, and Toyota..) AND the salesman wanted to make a sale - that was more than the GM folks seemed to want to do.

Be a darn shame if GM goes under - but they've kind of dug their own grave.

So now we drive a "Burrito" - only when I call it that my DW whaps me one...:drive:

[DizneyFreak2002]

I agree with the principal, but I'm still not sure which is a more effective use of dollars. At TT, people who might not ordinarily go to a GM showroom, despite the commercials, may be more likely to look at, sit in, and get the feel of the GM products you come to after the ride. Somebody else already made the point that more cars might be sold because of that than because of the sound-bite commercials that may or may not be seen, depending on whether someone TVod past them or went for a snack break.

I don't know what the answer is, but I can see good arguments either way.

Last year, after riding TT, I spent time in the show room... I even sat in a few cars and had a salesman point out a few features... He then took my name and address down and promised to send me brochures on the cars I had an interest in... Guess what?? NO BROCHURES!!! I know they may not be real GM salesmen, but, not a good way to drum up business for GM either...

[princessgirls]

We got the brochures from Test Track.

I love my 2002 Chevy Suburban. It's by far the best car I've ever owned. I will drive it until it dies...literally. It is well made and thankfully I've had no problems with it. My husbands 2007 Jeep was a piece of garbage, and he got rid of it after only 11 months. The fit and finish was terrible. Shakes, rattles and leaks...

I'm so saddened by the whole economic downturn and it's effect on GM. They do make a good product.
I pray that things turn around. GM going out of business is just not good for America is general (IMO).
Julie:mickey:

[DryCreek]

I have absolutely NO problem with GM quality. My last truck (1994 C3500 Crew Cab, Dually, 454/5spd/4:10) would pull anything I put behind it. I finally sold it when it was about to turn 200K miles. I still see it around the area, heading up Chalk Mountain hauling a bigger tractor than I ever had behind it, and with with a load of hay to boot!

Of course, that old Chevy truck doesn't compare to either of our two Dodge/Cummins trucks when it comes to efficiency.

We bought a new Saturn in '94 too. Most reliable vehicle we ever owned, better fit and finish than our Tercel or any Nissan we owned.

I am not ashamed to buy American. A vehicle is a tool to me, not an extension of my personality or some sort of status symbol.

[GrumpyFan]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but can we get back on topic? The quality of GMs vehicles is a matter that's debatable based on everybody's opinion and their own experience with the product. But, I think we were originally talking about GMs continuing sponsorship of TestTrack.

[Polynesian Dweller]

I agree to a point, but I still maintain that the only thing that should determine whether or not they continue the sponsorship of TT is do they make money off it or don't they?

Actually, on that point I think we are in complete agreement. If its a good investment for the business then they should stay. If it isn't then they shouldn't. I don't know how they measure that or if they even do but it should be their deciding factor.

Of course, part of that decision has to be based on just how much you have to invest in advertising and thus where you can expect the greatest return. With GM teetering on bankruptcy I just wonder if this makes something like TT viable for them. I guess we'll all find out in the next few months.

[Ian]

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but can we get back on topic? The quality of GMs vehicles is a matter that's debatable based on everybody's opinion and their own experience with the product. But, I think we were originally talking about GMs continuing sponsorship of TestTrack.Well, I sorta think that conversation is linked to the OT.

I mean as a natural off-shoot of this discussion, you're going to talk about GM's viability to continue as a profitable enterprise.

And a natural off-shoot of that is to discuss their product.

[lockedoutlogic]

Let me clarify:

I don't think anyone who wasn't already thinking about purchasing a GM product has ever been convinced by that showroom....

Sure people have seen things they probably liked.....but I don't believe anyone was thinking Nissan or Honda and was "wooed" by a cobalt in that showroom....

How's that sound?

[azcavalier]

Have they put a new Camaro in that showroom? I haven't been there in a year. Just curious, because that could push us over the edge to get one. My DW loves her Candy Apple Red Mustang GT, though...

[GrumpyFan]

Well, I sorta think that conversation is linked to the OT.

I mean as a natural off-shoot of this discussion, you're going to talk about GM's viability to continue as a profitable enterprise.

And a natural off-shoot of that is to discuss their product.

You're right, it kinda is linked to the OT. But, much of the discussions turn to the quality of their products, which is highly subjective based on one's own experience or opinion of the product. It doesn't really have much to do with whether GM will continue in their contract with Disney.

I know it's human nature to want to discuss the company and their products. I believe earlier in the discussion I too related my own experiences. So, I'm just as guilty. I was just hoping to try and steer it back though.

[Ian]

Let me clarify:

I don't think anyone who wasn't already thinking about purchasing a GM product has ever been convinced by that showroom....

Sure people have seen things they probably liked.....but I don't believe anyone was thinking Nissan or Honda and was "wooed" by a cobalt in that showroom....

How's that sound?Again, gonna have to shoot you down there ...

I had fully planned on buying another BMW to replace my '03 3-Series. But when I saw the Saab 9-3 at the TT showroom, I decided I liked it enough to buy it.

Now admittedly, I worked for GM at the time and was partially wooed by the fact that I could have a sports sedan while still getting my GM discount.

But my friend's wife also had no intention at all of buying anything other than another Chrysler until she saw the Saturn and checked it out.

And look I'm not trying to say this is the norm ... I'm quite certain it's not. But it can and does definitely happen.

[GrumpyFan]

I don't think anyone who wasn't already thinking about purchasing a GM product has ever been convinced by that showroom....

Sure people have seen things they probably liked.....but I don't believe anyone was thinking Nissan or Honda and was "wooed" by a cobalt in that showroom....


Not that I don't agree with you, but that's kinda hard to prove isn't it? I'm not in marketing, but from everything I've read, the psychology behind any buying decision usually involves many factors. There's past experience, familiarity, appeal, and many others. The point though, is that the showroom may influence one of those factors just enough to tip the scale. It hasn't ever for me, because my personal experience with their products has been pretty bad. But, for others, I can see very easily where it might influence their decision.

Dang, there I go getting off-topic, or did I? ;)

[drummerboy]

Dang, there I go getting off-topic, or did I? ;)
Wellll, the topic is whether GM will pull their TT sponsorship, and the question of whether that sponsorship is doing them any good is germain to the subject, and the question of whether people might decide to buy a car based on seeing it in the TT showroom is germain to whether the sponsorship is doing any good, so, No, you didn't go off topic. Now off your rocker is another subject... :D

[lockedoutlogic]

Not that I don't agree with you, but that's kinda hard to prove isn't it? I'm not in marketing, but from everything I've read, the psychology behind any buying decision usually involves many factors. There's past experience, familiarity, appeal, and many others. The point though, is that the showroom may influence one of those factors just enough to tip the scale. It hasn't ever for me, because my personal experience with their products has been pretty bad. But, for others, I can see very easily where it might influence their decision.

Dang, there I go getting off-topic, or did I? ;)

well....it's just my hunch....can't prove it to a mathematical certainty....

But i still can't believe that that show room does any good when it comes to product sales....

who looks for cars are WDW? Ian...apparently...but it sounds like he made the kinda impulsive purchase that is usually limited to a sweatshirt in mousegear in the "aura" of the mouse.....

Anyway....Does anyone think the CASUAL traveler to WDW ever picked out a car in test track? Seriously?

The hard core nuts will buy anything they see at Disney....all hail the mouse!!!

[lockedoutlogic]

Again, gonna have to shoot you down there ...

I had fully planned on buying another BMW to replace my '03 3-Series. But when I saw the Saab 9-3 at the TT showroom, I decided I liked it enough to buy it.

Now admittedly, I worked for GM at the time and was partially wooed by the fact that I could have a sports sedan while still getting my GM discount.

But my friend's wife also had no intention at all of buying anything other than another Chrysler until she saw the Saturn and checked it out.

And look I'm not trying to say this is the norm ... I'm quite certain it's not. But it can and does definitely happen.

I agree with your points (In bold):thumbsup:

[Scott C]

well....it's just my hunch....can't prove it to a mathematical certainty....

But i still can't believe that that show room does any good when it comes to product sales....

who looks for cars are WDW? Ian...apparently...but it sounds like he made the kinda impulsive purchase that is usually limited to a sweatshirt in mousegear in the "aura" of the mouse.....

Anyway....Does anyone think the CASUAL traveler to WDW ever picked out a car in test track? Seriously?

The hard core nuts will buy anything they see at Disney....all hail the mouse!!!

Sorry again -- but there is no way that we would have ever bought an avalanche if my wife would not have been sitting in one at TT

Thanks
Scott C

[GrumpyFan]

The hard core nuts will buy anything they see at Disney....all hail the mouse!!!

Hmm... I wonder if GM ever considered a Disney-Themed vehicle just for Epcot/TestTrack. It would be something like the Warner Bros themed mini-van that Chevy offered a few years ago. Now, see, something like that might possibly influence me.

[lockedoutlogic]

Sorry again -- but there is no way that we would have ever bought an avalanche if my wife would not have been sitting in one at TT

Thanks
Scott C

I stand corrected.....

so they have a couple of million (like...5 or 6) go through that showroom a year.....

LET'S CHECK THE BIG BOARD, JOHNNY......

2

[SteveL]

Thanks Locked - best laugh I've had all day.

[EPCOT84]

Interesting discussion this has turned into.

GM can easily justify this expense on the books. It's called marketing and advertising, which is necessary for a major corporation of this size. The return is rather hard to quantify though, and some might even argue irrelevant. In the end, it's about brand awareness and getting their name into the consumer's mind.

Regardless of whether GM continues as a sponsor or not, I don't see this attraction going anywhere. It's one of 3 attractions at Epcot that actually help draw a consistent crowd.

..Good comments but Epcot reality is...


Sure they will! They would never let a whole building go dark because they couldn't find a sponsor...Oh, wait...:(

And the way Disney interjects the characters every where its no surprise if..


**cough cough** cars overlay **cough cough**

In all seriousness, GM will be out as a sponsor. And honestly, I can understand why. I cannot understand how a company crying poverty, begging for government bailouts, saying they won't have enough cash to last another 3 months, and laying off workers can justify 10 million bucks to sponsor a theme park ride. Maybe Toyota can come in and take over sponsorship.

..or whichever company still has enough marketing dollars to change what some perceive as ...


You missed the guts of that....

it is mechanically a bad ride system....all moving parts are replaced regularly.....the computer systems scram all the time....and Goodyear was brought in to design special tires....

and they still replace them every week.

it's a completely unsustainable ride...and i don't think disney would hesitate to pull the plug if there was no sponsorship dollars....

they've shown no qualms about leaving ride locations closed and dormant for extended periods of time......the list is growing long


And i contest the notion that Test Track is that popular....
WDW ride systems used to be designed almost exclusively with volume in mind.....it is the reason for the omnimovers....the reason there are 2 space mountains mirrored....the reason almost all of epcots attractions were people mover type rides....the disportionate number of boat systems and tram rides...etc

Their parks are much larger than an average park....so volume can create distortion..

In this case....the fastpass system along with the 3 rider rows creates and artificial balloon in the quene line. Fastpass has had similar effect on peter pan's flight....notably...but other shows as well. Soarin' doesn't have enough screens to handle the normal volume of EPCOT....so we wait 90 minutes.

I think test track....while not unpopular....is really only an average at best draw at WDW

All very interesting, perhaps enlightening observations and theories about the ride's feasilbility. Mainly I just want to help get this thread back on track about the ride and not a commentary on GM, the bailout, and the economy.

Soo, with that said, who's ready for a 'save Test Track' contingency plan?

[WDWDale]

Maybe TT operators can ask Obama for a bailout too if it takes sponsor money to keep it going. :p

At least when I went to Disney (we're talking at least six years ago) TT was a popular ride. Maybe the popularity has waned since then, but I can't see the ride being shut down because a lot of people seem to enjoy it. If they can't get a car company to come in and sponsor it (sorry but Hyundai Test Track sounds like a bad joke :D) Disney will probably revamp how the ride is marketed.

[Crow]

i asked a CM at TT after ridin last wk who will b the sponsor. of course he said GM wont let it get away

[DizneyRox]

i asked a CM at TT after ridin last wk who will b the sponsor. of course he said GM wont let it get away
And there you have it folks! Right from an Attractions CM's mouth!
:D

[GrumpyFan]

And there you have it folks! Right from an Attractions CM's mouth!
:D

Riiiight! ;)
Good one... :funny:

[TheRustyScupper]

And there you have it folks! Right from an Attractions CM's mouth!
:D

1) I don't know.
2) A bus driver gave me a different answer.

[BMan62]

And there you have it folks! Right from an Attractions CM's mouth!
:D


1) I don't know.
2) A bus driver gave me a different answer.

Both of these have to be better than Jim Hill Media, don't they???

[mudpuppysmom]

I thought that whatever the bus drivers said was the absolute and complete truth, no doubt!:D

[TheRustyScupper]

I thought that whatever the bus drivers said was the absolute and complete truth, no doubt!:D

1) You mean they don't ???????????
2) What is this world coming to?
3) When bus drivers are not the first in-the-info-loop?
4) My. My. My.

[Mrs Bus Driver]

Just came across this thread is there any news? Is GM pulling out?

[GrumpyFan]

Just came across this thread is there any news? Is GM pulling out?

Nothing's been said about it in the news that I've seen. I wouldn't expect to see anything unless Disney actually signs a new sponsor, or GM declares bankruptcy.

[Mrs Bus Driver]

Just thought I'd bring this thread back up. Has anyone heard anything new? :mickey:

[lockedoutlogic]

Just thought I'd bring this thread back up. Has anyone heard anything new? :mickey:

no....but it is almost a certaintly...

there is large question as to whether GM will survive at all....let alone any sponsorship

[GrumpyFan]

no....but it is almost a certaintly...

there is large question as to whether GM will survive at all....let alone any sponsorship

Don't worry, they'll survive, but they'll be re-named "CM" by their new owners - China Motors... :razz:

Okay, that's almost funny... except for the fact that it's a somewhat real possibility. Then wouldn't that be ironic, the company they out-sourced the jobs too in order to save money, but really just killed their product, turns around and buys them, then fires everybody, well at least the executives. Okay, maybe it's not funny... it's almost scary... maybe poetic? Hmmm

[lockedoutlogic]

Don't worry, they'll survive, but they'll be re-named "CM" by their new owners - China Motors... :razz:

Okay, that's almost funny... except for the fact that it's a somewhat real possibility. Then wouldn't that be ironic, the company they out-sourced the jobs too in order to save money, but really just killed their product, turns around and buys them, then fires everybody, well at least the executives. Okay, maybe it's not funny... it's almost scary... maybe poetic? Hmmm

i get you

i personally think that whatever profitable that is left will eventually be sold off to foreign companies and GM will no longet exist

live by the internal combustion engine....die by it


sign of the times