SeaWorld Park & Entertainment IPO

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
pandorazboxx said:
The company says the gains have been driven in large part by its three SeaWorld marine parks in Orlando, San Diego and San Antonio and Busch Gardens Williamsburg in Virginia.
Click to expand...

This is probably the most interesting bit that caught my attention. I actually never thought of BGW as major as any of the SeaWorld parks. If anything, I would expect BGT to be more major considering its in a tourist location and open year round.

Could this mean they may be looking to add a resort at BGW?
 
This IPO should be a win for this site as we'll get quarterly/yearly updates on financial stuff that we can geek over. ;)

Party Rocker said:
I actually never thought of BGW as major as any of the SeaWorld parks. If anything, I would expect BGT to be more major considering its in a tourist location and open year round.
Click to expand...

Well it does say the "gains," so I'm assuming they are talking about where the growth in profits is coming from. Makes sense, considering who the president is in BGW.

I know Tampa's has a reputation for their Halloween event, but there's so much stuff to do in Central Florida. They get a boost in attendance just by being there (4.2M visitors vs. BGW's 2.7M). Maybe the profits there are stagnant or slow growing?

Don't get me wrong, I like BGT, but I don't think it's better than BGW. It's location isn't nearly as nice as BGW. You can see the KFC outside of the park while walking the path by the Sesame Street area. And it all seems like the same theme to me, outside of the Australia-ish area.
 
pandorazboxx said:
This IPO should be a win for this site as we'll get quarterly/yearly updates on financial stuff that we can geek over. ;)

Well it does say the "gains," so I'm assuming they are talking about where the growth in profits is coming from. Makes sense, considering who the president is in BGW.

I know Tampa's has a reputation for their Halloween event, but there's so much stuff to do in Central Florida. They get a boost in attendance just by being there (4.2M visitors vs. BGW's 2.7M). Maybe the profits there are stagnant or slow growing?

Don't get me wrong, I like BGT, but I don't think it's better than BGW. It's location isn't nearly as nice as BGW. You can see the KFC outside of the park while walking the path by the Sesame Street area. And it all seems like the same theme to me, outside of the Australia-ish area.
Click to expand...

BGW with off season correction IS the second attendance leader under SWF for the company. SEAS views BGW as the crown jewel of the company and where the bulk of focus is turning. Spending would more than likely be #2 at BGW as well.
 
I was going to do a quick calculation/comparison of attendance / operating days, but can't find any operating days from their website prior to may...
 
Shane said:
I hope this is the case. I've always considered it the crown jewel, but I'm bias, I am an admin at a BGW website after all.
Click to expand...

Zachary would agree with the sentiments I posted. You should know this.

pandorazboxx said:
I was going to do a quick calculation/comparison of attendance / operating days, but can't find any operating days from their website prior to may...
Click to expand...

Google around and you can find the full for both. If not Zach would also have it. Finding out the average capacity for regular season, Illumi/SummerN, HoS, and CT would be needed for a more accurate number.
 
A press release was made available to all employees. One thing that caught special attention was it mentioning that they are in the review process with can take up to 7 months, they shortened their name from SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment to SeaWorld Entertainment, but the original name will still be used for marketing purposes and to save money. Finally one of the most interesting bits was it mentioned that employees should try not to discuss the company's affairs during this review process.

Anyways, just thought those little bits were interesting and wanted to share.
 
Atlantis said:
pandorazboxx said:
It's one way of going from a private company like they are now to a publicly owned company that trades shares of itself on the stock market.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_public_offering

Basically doing this lets them raise a lot of cash quick. But then they are subject to all the rules that publicly traded companies are subject to.

And we all knew Blackstone is an investment firm looking to make money off of the parks. This is a great way for them to do it too.

It appears that Merlin also planned to go public back in 2010, but the market apparently stunk so they sold a stake in the company privately.

Blackstone knows what they're doing here. I'm no stock expert but you would think they will offer up to 49% of the company in the IPO so they're still in charge.
Click to expand...

And here it is folks! Someone find me the clap .gif
Click to expand...
joker-clap.gif
 
I'm pretty sure San Antonio, San Diego, and Williamsburg all received a bump in attendance because they all added major new attractions (Aquatica, Manta, Verbolten). Otherwise I can't really think of any other reason why there would be a significant jump in attendance.

The parent company probably sees some more potential in the Williamsburg park. My guess is to wait and see what that potential will become. Hopefully this will translate to more big new attractions/fancier special events and less glow stands.

The chain should bring the Worlds of Discovery/Adventure Parks name back. Sea World Parks and Entertainment is a bit too long for my tastes. Worlds of Discovery sounds marketable at least.
 
Remember the name changed from SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment LLC to SeaWorld Entertainment Inc. So they did shorten it; however I think they put too much emphasis on SeaWorld rather than the other parks. I think the name should be more vague to include all the parks not just one particular branded park.
 
pandorazboxx said:
Sea World is easily the most recognizable brand.
Click to expand...

Obviously, SeaWorld is one of the most recognizable brands. But my point is, it's like they ignore the fact that Busch Gardens is a part of them just as much. I think they shouldn't single out one brand, and include more than just one park brand into the name. Worlds of Discovery was a very well thought of brand, and gave a good insight as to what all the parks focus is.
 
It was a cool name for the collection of parks, but as a brand, it sucked. They didn't market it very well or hold on to it for too long. When you tell someone Busch Gardens is a park that is part of Worlds of Discovery, the GP is thinking "What the heck is the worlds of discovery?" When you tell them it's part of SeaWorld Entertainment, people think "Ahh, SeaWorld! I love Shamu!" I don't think they are intentionally trying to ignore Busch Gardens. They're just trying to focus on their overall brand. They still pimp Busch Gardens all over the place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: netdvn and Ghost of Pretzel Kaiser
People should keep in mind that we aren't the target demographic for the parks. They want to make the brand recognizable to the GP for more money, not a bunch of internet nerds. Most people haven't heard of Busch Gardens and would not think of Sea World with "Worlds of Discovery".
 
I am sure if they spent the time and money they could change the name completely and the GP will flow with it still like now. The only reason why you still see SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment instead of SeaWorld Entertainment is based on the idea they can save $$$ and still market that name. I understand people haven't heard of Busch Gardens so they don't think of it immediately, but that is all the more reason to throw the name out there more. Bring more attention to it and make it popular.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad