SeaWorld Orlando's Future Plans

[socaljoeyb]

What an understatement.


-Seaworld San Diego is the worst of all their parks- Whoever buys SW will try to either find someone to take it off their hands for nothing, or more likely- just shutter the doors and write it off. As for Aquatica San Diego- that actually could be sold off- but likely to someone local as there isn't another regional park close by.

So lets play the game that Universal bought Seaworld and what I would think would happen:
-San Diego is written off- animals shipped off to zoos/aquariums and the big ticket items to San Antonio. Aquatica is sold off locally.

I could see Uni or Disney wanting that property in SD with a change in the lease conditions. It would be a big rebuild though. I'm also not sure SD City would play along, although its not impossible.

 

[Mad Dog]

I could see Uni or Disney wanting that property in SD with a change in the lease conditions. It would be a big rebuild though. I'm also not sure SD City would play along, although its not impossible.

Welcome to the IU Forums. :thumbsup:

 

[socaljoeyb]

Welcome to the IU Forums. :thumbsup:

Thanks! Long time lurker. I love the dialogue here. Very knowledgeable members.

 

[GoUCFKnights]

To me it seems shocking that so many people could think anyone buying it would consider shuttering the doors of it. Sea World has a marketing and financial problem, but lets keep things in perspective here: They have the top 2 parks by attendance in North America that don't have Disney or Universal in their name, and its not really even close. They have good visitor spending in those parks. SeaWorld San Diego is still more attended by any park operated by anyone other then Disney, Universal, or Cedar Fair, and its only a few years removed from beating all Cedar Fair parks as well.

Outside of Universal, nobody would buy it willing to shut it down for any amount of time... and outside of Universal and Disney, the prospect of renaming it probably is too scary as well... these parks are very well attended. I personally believe that SeaWorld's biggest Blackfish problem is there own marketing of it. The documentary has come and gone, and while companies have dealt with PR nightmares like it before, they usually try to move it more out of sight, out of mind after the initial backlash and apology/this is what we're doing to make things right. SeaWorld's strategy has been to continue to respond to it for many, many years now, keeping the scandal fresh in people's minds. If they just moved on and tried to make impressive new shows, still with the animals, new rides, and focused on growing rather then responding to it, outside of the PETA folks, who were likely never going to SeaWorld and are never going to be recovered if they were, the whole thing would have been forgotten by now. Its time to stop blaming any problems on that film, and focus on why you're unable to maintain your attendance during a period of huge growth for the surrounding parks. The focus for SWO should be peeling away a day or 2 or 3 from all the folks Universal and Disney are bringing to Orlando. Not proving you treat the animals right.

 

[fryoj]

To me it seems shocking that so many people could think anyone buying it would consider shuttering the doors of it. Sea World has a marketing and financial problem, but lets keep things in perspective here: They have the top 2 parks by attendance in North America that don't have Disney or Universal in their name, and its not really even close.

While factual, their attendance numbers aren't that good when you factor in that they are open 365 days of the year when parks like Wonderland and CP are only open half the year. 4.7 million at 365 days vs CW 3.7 on less than 180 days isn't all that impressive.

 

[s8film40]

While factual, their attendance numbers aren't that good when you factor in that they are open 365 days of the year when parks like Wonderland and CP are only open half the year. 4.7 million at 365 days vs CW 3.7 on less than 180 days isn't all that impressive.

Perhaps Sea World could benefit from closing two days a week in the off season like Legoland does. They certainly don't have an attendance problem this time of year and especially on weekends.

 

[WAJAS]

Perhaps Sea World could benefit from closing two days a week in the off season like Legoland does. They certainly don't have an attendance problem this time of year and especially on weekends.

I don’t know if that would do the trick. They still get a lot of school / camp groups attending during the week.

 

[s8film40]

I don’t know if that would do the trick. They still get a lot of school / camp groups attending during the week.

2-3 days in the week would still allow for school groups. I do think it’s busy enough to justify keeping it open, but I could see how that could concentrate crowds a bit and decrease expenses.

Personally I think they could save a ton of money by scaling back the animals quite a bit. I know I’m a little biased because I don’t like animals, but to me if it’s not directly associated with a large show they could afford to lose it.

 

[GoUCFKnights]

While factual, their attendance numbers aren't that good when you factor in that they are open 365 days of the year when parks like Wonderland and CP are only open half the year. 4.7 million at 365 days vs CW 3.7 on less than 180 days isn't all that impressive.

Eh, Seaworld Orlando in 2009 had more visitors than Universal Hollywood. And you're comparing Seaworld to the very best attended seasonal park. The numbers are impressive... Its not like Disney and Universal are the only ones to operate an amusement park year round, and SeaWorld is the best of the rest. They've just been heading the wrong direction while everyone else is heading the right direction. Its hard to imagine that fixing up the leadership and financial situation, which are

And Seaworld in 09 was when it was sold to Blackstone group. Blackfish, what they're blaming all of this on, came out 4 years later.

 

[Mad Dog]

Eh, Seaworld Orlando in 2009 had more visitors than Universal Hollywood. And you're comparing Seaworld to the very best attended seasonal park. The numbers are impressive... Its not like Disney and Universal are the only ones to operate an amusement park year round, and SeaWorld is the best of the rest. They've just been heading the wrong direction while everyone else is heading the right direction. Its hard to imagine that fixing up the leadership and financial situation, which are

And Seaworld in 09 was when it was sold to Blackstone group. Blackfish, what they're blaming all of this on, came out 4 years later.

Yes, Blackstone has been a Theme Park Killer ownership group. They almost killed Universal too. And, I apologize since I keep harping on it, but Busch Gardens Williamsburg had absolutely no connection with the Blackfish documentary, and the park had been going downhill since Blackstone assumed control. BGW was a crown jewel when the Busch family owned the park. Fortunately, Blackstone is gone, but they did so much damage to the brand of "all" the parks (not just the Sea World parks), that it just may be too late.

 

[fryoj]

Eh, Seaworld Orlando in 2009 had more visitors than Universal Hollywood. And you're comparing Seaworld to the very best attended seasonal park. The numbers are impressive... Its not like Disney and Universal are the only ones to operate an amusement park year round, and SeaWorld is the best of the rest. They've just been heading the wrong direction while everyone else is heading the right direction. Its hard to imagine that fixing up the leadership and financial situation, which are

And Seaworld in 09 was when it was sold to Blackstone group. Blackfish, what they're blaming all of this on, came out 4 years later.

2009 is irrelevant to today's discussion. That's like saying Universal is in trouble because their numbers were bad in 2009.

And my point was that you said SW was the top 2 and it wasn't even close. Knott's will probably surpass BGT in next year's numbers, and, if the same increases and decreases from 2015 hold, they'll surpass SWO too. But when you factor seasonal parks into it and look at average number of guests per operating day, a lot of parks pass SWO and BGT up. I don't think they end up in the top 20 US if you use that as a guide. Now how that translates to profitability IDK. But I can't imagine that their overhead is cheaper, or even close to being the same as the seasonal parks. Caring for the animals certainly increases their costs.

 

[UNIrd]

I'm with @GoUCFKnights on this one. It's still in the Top 10 parks in the nation and Top 25 parks worldwide. I don't think selling it for parts is something we need to seriously be discussing.

 

[GoUCFKnights]

2009 is irrelevant to today's discussion. That's like saying Universal is in trouble because their numbers were bad in 2009.

And my point was that you said SW was the top 2 and it wasn't even close. Knott's will probably surpass BGT in next year's numbers, and, if the same increases and decreases from 2015 hold, they'll surpass SWO too. But when you factor seasonal parks into it and look at average number of guests per operating day, a lot of parks pass SWO and BGT up. I don't think they end up in the top 20 US if you use that as a guide. Now how that translates to profitability IDK. But I can't imagine that their overhead is cheaper, or even close to being the same as the seasonal parks. Caring for the animals certainly increases their costs.

I don't know the numbers on theme parks either, but its hard to imagine that these seasonal parks would get an extra million people a year to get to where SWO's numbers are today if they opened up the rest of the year. If you are looking at per day numbers, you'd have to look at the same time period, the peak season SeaWorld vs peak/operating season of your seasonal park comparisons. I'm not quite sure that they would surpass SeaWorld even by that metric. Obviously if you count the slow days of the year, that might change things, but they still have seasonal staff. Its hard for me to believe that SeaWorld cutting its operating days will improve its situation any... it will just further increase attendance declines.

And 2009 is hardly irrelevant... its not that long ago in the grand scheme of things, and in the case of Universal vs SeaWorld, we're literally comparing the same ownership group causing massive financial problems and associated attendance declines at the parks, just over different time periods. And from a name recognition stand point, I'm sure many, many more people know of SeaWorld then Knott's. Its literally the equivalent of saying Universal should have shut down, dropped their name, became Six Flags, etc, during their downturn (which many people did)

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I could see them closing on Tuesdays during non-peak season.

However, I don't think the issue is that people don't want to attend Sea World. Before Potter people were deciding whether to spend their extra Disney vacation day at Universal or at Sea World, now Universal has been taking away those guests from Sea World. Not too mention that another Uni dry park would end up hurting Sea World more. Also have to consider that park tickets for Disney/Universal are becoming more expensive and families decide to save money.

 

[fryoj]

I don't know the numbers on theme parks either, but its hard to imagine that these seasonal parks would get an extra million people a year to get to where SWO's numbers are today if they opened up the rest of the year. If you are looking at per day numbers, you'd have to look at the same time period, the peak season SeaWorld vs peak/operating season of your seasonal park comparisons. I'm not quite sure that they would surpass SeaWorld even by that metric. Obviously if you count the slow days of the year, that might change things, but they still have seasonal staff. Its hard for me to believe that SeaWorld cutting its operating days will improve its situation any... it will just further increase attendance declines.

And 2009 is hardly irrelevant... its not that long ago in the grand scheme of things, and in the case of Universal vs SeaWorld, we're literally comparing the same ownership group causing massive financial problems and associated attendance declines at the parks, just over different time periods. And from a name recognition stand point, I'm sure many, many more people know of SeaWorld then Knott's

CW does 3.7 million from May to October. For SW to beat that on a per day basis you'd have to say that they do less than 1 million from November to April. A period which includes the Holidays and Spring Break. I have trouble believing that.

I'm not the one arguing to cut their days. I'm just don't think their attendance is as strong as you suggest.

2009 was pre-Potter and Blackfish. It really doesn't matter why their business nosedived. It happened. Whether its salvageable or not is another issue completely.

 

[GAcoaster]

2009 was also still free beer samples, lots of shows, the clydesdales, and all the other things that Busch Entertainment did so well. We are talking about a profoundly changed company due to Blackstone and now due to stock holders. There still could be great things for the company in the future if they can get out from the constant pressure of the stock price. That could happen if they go private or get absorbed by a larger company.

While there is a lot of gloom and doom out there about SWP&E, they still are managing per caps that are twice their regional competition in Six Flags and Cedar Fair.

 

[GoUCFKnights]

Before Potter people were deciding whether to spend their extra Disney vacation day at Universal or at Sea World, now Universal has been taking away those guests from Sea World. Not too mention that another Uni dry park would end up hurting Sea World more. Also have to consider that park tickets for Disney/Universal are becoming more expensive and families decide to save money.

Except... thats not quite true. Universal's growth has just led to more people visiting Orlando instead of other destinations. Universal has much reduced its strategy of peeling off a day or 2 from Disney and is now a destination (as demonstrated by their massive investment in new hotel rooms without struggling to fill them up). Even if people aren't interested in Disney, they go to see Potter, and experience the rest of Universal which is generally seen as a bit more designed for a little higher age group. They've created their own market. Now Sea World has the opportunity to try to take a day from both Universal and Disney's visitors, rather then just Disney before, of which there is more then ever before for both of them. They just aren't doing it, and others are able to take that extra day, as demonstrated by the huge growth of the smaller I-Drive attractions, and Legoland Florida, despite its absolutely terrible location. It remains to be seen what the effect of a 3rd Universal gate is, but I'd predict it further makes Universal into its own destination and further reduces people trying to split time with Disney, but instead try to take an extra vacation to Orlando, or split it alternating which they visit each year, or otherwise just increase Orlando tourism in general. And if it does that, if Seaworld can get their act together, they can drive further growth off of Universal's marketing efforts to get people to their third park.

2009 was also still free beer samples, lots of shows, the clydesdales, and all the other things that Busch Entertainment did so well.

Exactly this. Losing that is what is causing the attendance decline, not Blackfish. Thats why the Busch Gardens parks are also declining while nearly every other company is doing well right now. Most don't associate Busch Gardens with Blackfish and the Seaworld troubles... but Busch Gardens without the beer sampling... it cost them.

 

[zg44]

What in the past 8 years has shown that SeaWorld can regularly take a day or two off of the Disney or Universal vacationers? SeaWorld Orlando's attendance has basically gone down 8 straight years... I'm sure it'll bottom out at some point, but if/when Universal builds a 3rd park next door, that will further cut down on the "I'll spend 2-3 days at Universal and maybe an extra at another park"-crowd.

I think Hogwarts Express (and Volcano Bay) showed the route that these things are going; Universal will want to keep all its vacationers in its ecosystem (just as Disney does).

I don't know what the future holds for the SeaWorld chain, but they're in the most competitive markets and Disney/Universal are spending heavily to build out their IP-related attractions there. That is only going to be detrimental to SeaWorld Orlando and SD as it concentrates attendance among the Disney/Universal parks.

Yes, the overall pie is growing, but a larger % of that growing pie is going to Disney/Universal... the game is somewhat "zero sum" for non-Disney/Universal attractions, they're fighting for the small remaining fraction of guest spending leftover...

 

[Mad Dog]

I can see BGW, BGT, and Sea World San Antonio, surviving, even thriving, if sold to a company with strong finances & willing to spend for upgrades, more entertainment etc. But I think that Sea World Orlando (they lost their high spending demographic & doubtful they'll return) & Sea World San Diego are in serious trouble.

 

[s8film40]

I think Sea World has primarily become a local and regional park. It’s easy to justify going if you’re nearby and already had your fill of Disney and Universal. If you’re vacationing it’s really hard to justify spending a day there. Obviously there are a few exceptions, especially for people who plan longer trips.