SeaWorld Under Investigation Over Possible Violations of Securities Laws
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
I hope this doesn't hurt stock prices, again. Because they still haven't gotten out of the $18 range.
investor confidence will certainly take a hit. This week will be critical. If it dips below down to 13 I would not bet on a rebound.
Normally this wouldn't be a HUGE deal (happened to Facebook, Twitter, etc as of late). But when you consider this on top of everything else happening, it's sorta multiplies itself.
I doubt the stock will drop much further because of THIS, unless of course some bad news does come out of this. In which case.... RIP.
I doubt the stock will drop much further because of THIS, unless of course some bad news does come out of this. In which case.... RIP.
These sorts of investigations are usually conducted for two reasons:
1. The government is trying to punish a politically unpopular entity, or an entity that has somehow earned the disfavor of those in power.
2. Some of the shareholders are having a snit about the stock losing so much value, so they launch an investigation hoping that it will act as a sort of emetic that will cause current corporate to be vomited out and punished.
I'm guessing #2 in this case, though given the politics of "animal rights" and the current state of American government, there could be a little #1 in there as well.
1. The government is trying to punish a politically unpopular entity, or an entity that has somehow earned the disfavor of those in power.
2. Some of the shareholders are having a snit about the stock losing so much value, so they launch an investigation hoping that it will act as a sort of emetic that will cause current corporate to be vomited out and punished.
I'm guessing #2 in this case, though given the politics of "animal rights" and the current state of American government, there could be a little #1 in there as well.
"...regarding its business, its prospects and its operations were materially false and misleading at the time they were made." I said this from the very beginning. Many people were fired for this very reason for trying to "whistle blow". Unfortunately not all types of whistle blowing are protected by law. How much crap does it take before people realize maybe there is something not right here?
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/seaworld-hit-lawsuit-failure-advise-731846
I believe this fits here. They are finally getting hit with a lawsuit. The lawsuits is mainly about how SEAS blamed poor weather and that Easter was at an odd time of the year when in reality Blackfish had caused the attendance drops.
Honestly, I'm not sure how you can prove that Blackfish was the cause of lost attendance over poor weather and Easter at a different time of year, but reading through the article, things do not look all that great for SEAS.
I believe this fits here. They are finally getting hit with a lawsuit. The lawsuits is mainly about how SEAS blamed poor weather and that Easter was at an odd time of the year when in reality Blackfish had caused the attendance drops.
Honestly, I'm not sure how you can prove that Blackfish was the cause of lost attendance over poor weather and Easter at a different time of year, but reading through the article, things do not look all that great for SEAS.
The odd things is, they state that SEAS knew Blackfish had an impact on attendance, but they didn't share that with shareholders until the proposed laws in California.
Party Rocker said:
I mean, SEAS knows Blackfish is a thing.... and there's always the possibility it causes attendance issues. But there's literally no way to prove it.
It's not whether or not they can PROVE that Blackfish was a factor. You're right, of course you can't prove that. It's about whether or not SEAS withheld information purposefully. The shareholders clearly think that SEAS denied that Blackfish played a role at all when instead management had information that that was not the case.
When other companies pay attention to the backlash and when there are whole 'slander' campaigns against the one entity you can't really pretend it's a non-issue. Remember, SEAS isn't the only amusement company that takes care of animals. However the big thing apparently is trying to find evidence confirming Blackfish had a clearly visible impact, which is next to impossible. Easter week itself can set a major seasonal park an attendance figure above 200,000 alone, weather can turn potential 40,000+ days into 5,000 guest days. As much as I want to rag on SEAS for using Easter and weather as an excuse, they are legitimate reasons. Compare this to the Blackfish protests, where there is no acquirable data on how many potential customers were influenced by it. Same with something like Texas Giant for example, while it's a huge hit to a park's reputation there's no definitive proof that it has a major lasting impact on attendance figures.
But if anyone high-up-enough working for SEAS expressed their concern re: Blackfish and the bottom line, that counts. That's the same thing in legal terms. No one's looking for definitive proof, because it doesn't exist. What matters is if the park withheld information and/or straight-out lied to the shareholders.
TL;DR No one's looking for PROOF that Blackfish cut attendance, because there isn't any
TL;DR No one's looking for PROOF that Blackfish cut attendance, because there isn't any
They've been laundering money through the underground glitter market for years now.