News Sesame Workshop Sues to Terminate IP License

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Presumably the bad blood can't help, but realistically both parties are probably locked in enough where it won't blow the whole thing up...? At least that has to be United Parks' read, right? Otherwise this would have been a MONUMENTALLY stupid play to attempt. Lets hope their analysis was right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MysticClay, Coasternerd, DE_Creative and 2 others
Le Moose said:
Don't forget about Sesame Place Philadelphia and Sesame Place San Diego.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Universal would buy the rights, since they have them in Universal Studios Japan and Singapore? Maybe also be interested in acquiring the Sesame Place parks - after all, they're using that model for Universal Kids Frisco and Comcast's home turf is in Philly. The San Diego park is 3-ish hours away from USH but I could see some crossover appeal.

Universal Destinations and Experiences could put those characters in the parks right away and start making some serious money. Something to chew on, but I think it wouldn't be impossible.

Just to clarify, either things go "back to normal" with United Parks (debts paid, contract renewed, etc) or Sesame takes their ball and goes home. I don't think those characters are going to stay out of US parks very long - they're worth a lot and are instantly recognizable as a valuable brand. There's a short list of actual industry players that could keep up with it (Universal, maybe Herschend or Merlin, etc) while others are not likely for their own reasons, mostly cost (Six Flags, Palace?) and conflicts with other brands (Disney). And I think the real danger would be that the contract is bought up by another party and the Sesame Place properties get lost in the shuffle.

That's why I go back to Universal - if they are willing to build parks for kids/families, then maybe that's a positive sign. Since Universal Studios Florida had the rights to Barney, the Universal parks really haven't had a "toddler" IP - the Dreamworks/Illuminations ones come close, but I think they skew largely for an older audience. In terms of corporate partnerships, I'm not sure I see a better fit.
 
Last edited:
The Sesame rights aren’t going anywhere— this is just a glitch which money will smooth over.
 
I seem to recall that the deal that SEAS had with Sesame back in the day obligated SEAS adding new Sesame themed areas, and potentially new Sesame Gates as well. This is why we saw pitches for breaking out Forest of Fun into it's own park etc. I don't know what to wording of these agreements are, but it really seems to me with what is going on at SWSA that there is a very potential future that has the companies going separate ways. I imagine there are other brands that are willing to pay for the IP that would actually pay for them, as opposed to crying "poor me" and refusing to pay for whatever ever reason they make up.

Certainly I will be interested to see what happens with the kid's area at SWO and the whole of Sesame Place. I think the path forward for the other parks; however, is quite clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MysticClay, Coasternerd and Python_Survivor
GoHokies87 said:
I don't know what to wording of these agreements are, but it really seems to me with what is going on at SWSA that there is a very potential future that has the companies going separate ways. I imagine there are other brands that are willing to pay for the IP that would actually pay for them, as opposed to crying "poor me" and refusing to pay for whatever ever reason they make up.
Click to expand...

Don't think it'll happen, but why not just hire a creative team and do their own thing, create their own IPs?

Outside of the standalone gates, are guests really attracted to the Sesame Street areas of any park because they're Sesame Street, or because they cater to younger kids that may be too small or immature for the other areas of the park?

And for those standalones - would they stand to lose revenue by becoming a bit more generic without a specific 3rd party IP attached to them?

I just can't understand why there's an absolute need for 3rd party IPs in these parks - is there any hard unbiased data out there suggesting that's the best path to feed the monkey?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MysticClay, Coasternerd and Python_Survivor
Seems like United Parks is in the wrong. It'll be interesting to see what happens. They don't seem to have a replacement lined up to fill that well known IP/ family brand void.

Bring back Puck?🤣😭
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mwe BGW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad