Almost certainly what he is talking about. Also was par for the course with how United opperated during the pandemic as many businesses small and large can testify to.
News Sesame Workshop Sues to Terminate IP License
- Thread starter Python_Survivor
- Start date
OK, This is actually really interesting and fairly nuanced. Sesame came in demanding 2 new gates for the renewal as well as investing within the other parks. SWO did an amazing job with the area they have and SWPE went forward with opening one new gate. The new gate was a disaster and lost the company money hand over fist. Instead of acting in good faith, Sesame doubled down on the contract. To be clear, Sesame Street, not marvel, not PBS kds, Sesame street wanted 3 gates. Not lands, not parks with presence, gates. Adding 2 gates is absurd. No other chain would ever commit to that. They saw that SWPE couldn't take another hit and they capitalized. Then, when San Diego went sideways and the chain needed to cut hours to prevent more cash bleed, AKA acted in the best interest of the chain AND by extension the contract itself, Sesame gets upset because their IP doesn't actually add that much value to the chain. So now they're trying to sue them over losses and breach of contract which to be fair, United has been stiffing them. Ultimately, I see this whole situation as United kicking the can to recover from the Blackfish, Covid, and leadership chaos so they can weather the loss of sesame at a later date. It didn't work out. They probably knew it wouldn't when these deals were made. And now we get to see how everything unravels at the end.
It's possible no one at the Sesame Workshop understood that new theme parks are really rare in this century in the US. Or to put it another way: It's easy to look at the success of Sesame Place Philadelphia and say, "Make more of that." Ignoring that it basically opened as an FEC, and grew into the park it is today over decades of investment. At a time when regional park chains are more about acquisitions rather than building new.
Ultimately, I put the blame on United for both agreeing to build more parks in the first place, and then cutting off lines of communication when the San Diego park ran into issues.
To be fair based on what I found looking into the broadcast rights for Sesame Street it appears that Sesame currently has a problem understanding and working with big businesses. HBO did not renew based on arguments over where they would air Sesame Street and how much free content they would allow streamed through YouTube. Sesame seems to have been more then willing to walk away without trying to compromise only to rnd up with Netflix and a tighter contract when no but else wanted to take the deal either.
this is what will happen if Sesame Street removed from seaworld:
seaworld will replace Sesame Street areas with rescue jr (like in San Antonio)
sesame place San Diego will be rebranded back to aquatica san diego
Sesame Street safari of fun will be rebranded back to land of dragons
Sesame Street forest of fun at Busch gardens Williamsburg will get replaced by a new ride with some rides remaining (maybe the long awaited Spain area?)
I don't know what to do with Sesame place pa, rebrand it as seaworld pa and make it a tiny park like seaworld Ohio or remove the park for future expansion of the mall area (I hope not) or sesame workshop takes over the park
seaworld will replace Sesame Street areas with rescue jr (like in San Antonio)
sesame place San Diego will be rebranded back to aquatica san diego
Sesame Street safari of fun will be rebranded back to land of dragons
Sesame Street forest of fun at Busch gardens Williamsburg will get replaced by a new ride with some rides remaining (maybe the long awaited Spain area?)
I don't know what to do with Sesame place pa, rebrand it as seaworld pa and make it a tiny park like seaworld Ohio or remove the park for future expansion of the mall area (I hope not) or sesame workshop takes over the park
That's what you think will happen, not what will happen.
There's a not insignificant chance that both Sesame Places straight-up die—especially CA's.
The theoretical Sesame -> Rescue Jr conversion in Orlando is far more costly and complicated than what was seen in SWSA. Still probably what would happen long-term, but short-term, we could legitimately just see a dethemed Sesame area dubbed "SeaWorld's Kidsville" or something hyper generic and cringe like that. Depends a lot on timelines. SWO can't simply go without their only kiddie area.
In Tampa, I doubt the dragons would return. Seems like a lot of cost with zero return. I think stripping the area of Sesame characters and having just a generic kiddie area named "Safari of Fun" is a lot more likely in the short-term.
Much the same thought with Williamsburg. Longer-term I have dreams of a proper fix for this land, but short-term, I suspect a simple detheme is more likely.
Part of the issue is that, depending on exactly how this lawsuit goes down, United could lose the rights in one fell swoop and have to put out all of these fires at once. I think the most likely outcome is that SPSD just dies. The park is an absolute mess, it's a financial disaster, it was a middling success as an Aquatica but so much cash would need to be poured into a property with such a low ceiling that I really think United will just call it quits on the property. Meanwhile, I think United is likely to rush to spend money developing significant fixes for both Orlando and Pennsylvania—this could be a new IP, this could be a more generic direction—I don't know, but I think United will work the hardest to try to shield these parks from the worst of the fallout. I think this likely pushes fixes at the two Busch parks—whose Sesame areas can be simply dethemed pretty easily—to the bottom of the priority list.
There's a not insignificant chance that both Sesame Places straight-up die—especially CA's.
The theoretical Sesame -> Rescue Jr conversion in Orlando is far more costly and complicated than what was seen in SWSA. Still probably what would happen long-term, but short-term, we could legitimately just see a dethemed Sesame area dubbed "SeaWorld's Kidsville" or something hyper generic and cringe like that. Depends a lot on timelines. SWO can't simply go without their only kiddie area.
In Tampa, I doubt the dragons would return. Seems like a lot of cost with zero return. I think stripping the area of Sesame characters and having just a generic kiddie area named "Safari of Fun" is a lot more likely in the short-term.
Much the same thought with Williamsburg. Longer-term I have dreams of a proper fix for this land, but short-term, I suspect a simple detheme is more likely.
Part of the issue is that, depending on exactly how this lawsuit goes down, United could lose the rights in one fell swoop and have to put out all of these fires at once. I think the most likely outcome is that SPSD just dies. The park is an absolute mess, it's a financial disaster, it was a middling success as an Aquatica but so much cash would need to be poured into a property with such a low ceiling that I really think United will just call it quits on the property. Meanwhile, I think United is likely to rush to spend money developing significant fixes for both Orlando and Pennsylvania—this could be a new IP, this could be a more generic direction—I don't know, but I think United will work the hardest to try to shield these parks from the worst of the fallout. I think this likely pushes fixes at the two Busch parks—whose Sesame areas can be simply dethemed pretty easily—to the bottom of the priority list.
Last edited:
I apologize if this was already brought up but I seem to recall Busch Gardens Tampa if not United as a whole talking about integrating new externals IPs into the park. I wonder if this was being explored because the company already knew the relationship with Sesame Workshop was souring. If this is the case it could indicate an eventual shift in IP for these lands.
TheCoasterNerd
Previously known as @coasters_bgw
That's one way to deal with losing the licensing agreement, I guess. Personally, I'd just take a sledgehammer to anything that contained the offending IP to still be able to offer rides to kids, but you do you, United Parks.
Looks like some updates in the case reported here:
Facebook
www.facebook.com
Looks like United is trying to point fingers at Sesame
www.facebook.com
Looks like United is trying to point fingers at Sesame
Attachments
PDF is attached below.
I'm not a lawyer, but this defense seems comically weak. The unfair competition rebuttal may be perfectly valid, but for what we care about (the future of this licensing agreement—a question that hinges on the claim that United Parks violated the agreement), United hardly even addresses the complaint. Their defense literally seems to me to be "the deal was with SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment—we're United Parks now—we're not a party to the agreement."
There's no way in hell this defense has legs, right?
I'm not a lawyer, but this defense seems comically weak. The unfair competition rebuttal may be perfectly valid, but for what we care about (the future of this licensing agreement—a question that hinges on the claim that United Parks violated the agreement), United hardly even addresses the complaint. Their defense literally seems to me to be "the deal was with SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment—we're United Parks now—we're not a party to the agreement."
There's no way in hell this defense has legs, right?
Last edited:
someone panicked and asked ChatGPT for a response and they got this mess
Rankin Bass Rudolph but idk how much past the Holiday season they are using it. And fun fact Universal owns it.
... except one side was clearly cheating and not contributing any money to the household...?
If you read the complaint and, unless you just think Sesame is lying about everything, there is clearly fault here.
Her take wasn’t Sesame was lying, rather some of their complaints were trying to throw stuff against the wall (like SPSD’s hours issues) to strengthen the case. Like I said, her feeling is both sides want out, UP chose the non-payment route, Sesame might be trying to take more than the non-payments with other additional complaints.
But it's not only financial (though even if it were, United is crystal clearly still the aggressor). Sesame lays out multiple other ways United was not only in breach of the contract, but also utilizing their IP in entirely unapproved ways while evading the contract-required coordination with Sesame.
I obviously can't argue against your lawyer friend since she's not here, I don't know what she has or hasn't read, etc, but it seems like an aggressive oversimplification of the case to basically say "well everyone is in the wrong here so
."
I obviously can't argue against your lawyer friend since she's not here, I don't know what she has or hasn't read, etc, but it seems like an aggressive oversimplification of the case to basically say "well everyone is in the wrong here so
."