Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Zimmy said:
acrossdapark said:
It's been suggested in several articles that

A. The parks change their name and re brand and go in a different direction animal wise. (I don't see this working because of their balance sheets don't support such a massive capital undertaking)

B. Begin the process of selling the company in part or in whole. It's cropped back up again that Merlin the second largest theme park and attractions operator in the world with around 65M visitors a year should be the first prospect in this transitional phase. They just can no longer compete and survive alone.

Which ever path they take, they cannot get out of the shadows of Blackfish on their own. Even PETA has bought the minimum required shares in SEAS to introduce board/shareholder resolutions.

Do you happen to have a reference for the PETA data?  I am rather curious...

"PETA is also a SeaWorld shareholder. PETA spokesman David Perle confirmed to CNN that the organization owns 339 shares, which he said is the minimum to file shareholder resolutions.

"SeaWorld is underwater," said PETA executive vice president Tracy Reiman in a statement. She said PETA filed a resolution offering the "abusement" park a way to boost earnings and attendance: End all its breeding programs, release orcas into seaside sanctuaries and "stop imprisoning animals altogether."

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/27/news/companies/seaworld-ceo-joel-manby-steps-down/index.html
 
PETA interest in SEAS has never been to increase shareholder value and/or increase revenues. It's primary goal is just as they state in calling it an "abusement" park and to pressure other shareholders to force the park to some success in ridding the breeding program, theatrical programs and to totally rid the parks of animals.

The funny thing is, PETA doesn't and rarely ever goes after DIS and Animal Kingdom.. After all they are also in captivity and breeding actively.
 
This whole situation is bittersweet. Did I agree with all the policies that Manby instituted during his administration? No, everybody has their own style of leadership. Manby certainly attempted to turn SeaWorld around in rebranding their image as one of the most popular marine life theme parks in North America. However, it is safe to say that bringing in a new CEO is certainly a breath of fresh air. While SEAS is certainly not out of the woods, we can all agree that we wish John Reilly the best of luck as he steers the SeaWorld/Busch train.
 
CastleOSullivan said:
While I think it would be unfair to blame any individual person for SeaWorld's current dilemma; I sadly still see Joel Manby's critical decisions as the main cause of the companies recent problems, especially as far as fans are concerned. He was an outsider to the company with little prior knowledge of zoos or aquariums, and he allowed the loudest protesters to win as if they stood for what the majority of people truly think about the company.

It is hard to know whether or not he made the right decision on discontinuing the breeding of killer whales and theatrical dolphin shows, but I don't know any fans or potential buyers that prefer that outcome. The way I see it, the loudest protesters were mostly uninterested parties. Their job was to complain until SeaWorld gave in, but those same people would never have visited the park anyway. I can't see those changes helping in the long-run.

Look at the "new model" shows versus the former
"theatrical" shows. The latter can be quite boring, varying by performance. I can see how Orca Encounter can survive short-term.
Dolphin Days, on the other hand, just looks like a very lazy,
last-minute attempt at following through with their new promises.

I don't think anyone already employed by SeaWorld would have done what Joel Manby did. I just wonder if it would have been better to prioritize the people that actually do/will visit the parks, versus pandering to an audience that, by their very nature, would never visit the parks. Overall, I hope Joel Manby finds another, better calling, and that we find more positive results soon.

As far as these shows are concerned, frankly I am personally in favor of what is best for the animal and conservation of the species. I could give a shit about what Joe-I'm-From-The-Middle thinks about the issue. Seas still maintains that conservation is a core value.

If breeding is good for the survival of the Orcas then great, if canx-ing dolphin shows is good for the dolphins, by all means shit can the shows. (no loss IMHO)


acrossdapark said:
"SeaWorld is underwater," said PETA executive vice president Tracy Reiman in a statement. She said PETA filed a resolution offering the "abusement" park a way to boost earnings and attendance: End all its breeding programs, release orcas into seaside sanctuaries and "stop imprisoning animals altogether."

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/27/news/companies/seaworld-ceo-joel-manby-steps-down/index.html

Thank you for the reference. I will go check that out. Having said that, being able to open resolutions and being able to do something with those resolutions are two entirely different things. But I applaud the folks over at PETA for this particular tack it is quite the capitalist move!
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad