-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney may have interest in Sea World
- Thread starter Disney MDACK
- Start date
comics101
Well-Known Member
Ah. Thanks for clearing that up.
jmicro59
Member
Who says they don't want these things?
WDWRLD
Active Member
I personally dont see why Disney would have any intrest in Seaworld as close as it is to WDW. Didnt they set up the whole magic your way ticket to be cheaper the longer you stay to keep people from going off the property? Also what about ME...another way to keep the guests on property because they didnt need a rental so they would be more likely to not take their money anywhere off property. I also dont see it effichent to run busses all the way there either. If people are there what keep them from running over to.......whats the name of that other place.....anyhow, I hope Disney keeps away from the fishes.
scottnj1966
Well-Known Member
InBev is in it to make money.
They will sell all or pieces of the theme parks as long as they get money.
I can see Six Flags buying Busch Gardens.
I do not see Disney buying any of the parks including Sea World unless they bought it for next to nothing and that wont happen.
Disney is not worried who buys anything around them. Not enough anyway to have to buy out anyone.
They will sell all or pieces of the theme parks as long as they get money.
I can see Six Flags buying Busch Gardens.
I do not see Disney buying any of the parks including Sea World unless they bought it for next to nothing and that wont happen.
Disney is not worried who buys anything around them. Not enough anyway to have to buy out anyone.
Montyboy
New Member
No point in arguing with logic like this!
krankenstein
Well-Known Member
Robert Iger did......
Both Iger and Jay Rasolu have said these things. Thats why they were so proud to announce that Disney resort there building in Hawaii.
BillsFanGabe
New Member
I dont really think that Disney would but Sea World. I would actually be very disapointed if they did because Disney is not known for purchasing other peoples parks. Disney builds their own parks and thats what makes them different from other companies. So I dont see this deal happening.
If they see a real value in the product then they will buy it.
Teachr4Disney
Member
I don't see Disney buying Sea World, but it sure would be nice to be able to get easy/cheap transportation to SW from a Disney resort!! I like them both, with Disney coming in first of course!!
kingslyZISSOU
New Member
I don't think they would brand it with the disney name, even if they did buy any of them.
You would be surprised at how many things the disney company owns, but doesn't put their name on.
You would be surprised at how many things the disney company owns, but doesn't put their name on.
ChrisFL
Premium Member
Have you kept up with Six Flags lately? They're getting rid of a lot of parks and have serious cash issues, they won't be anywhere able to buy the Busch parks.
Disney owning Sea World? Bad idea I think and especially bad if they bought Busch and had 2 zoo parks so close to each other, one of them would suffer.
I don't know if Disney actually would operate the parks any better than Blackstone would, I mean Disney's had its share of upkeep issues already with 4 parks, can't see how having a 5th or more will make that any easier
The Oggmonster
New Member
Well I don't know if that will happen because it is outside of the Disney World gate. Is like 2 miles away from Disney World?
wickedfan07
Member
I still think this isn't such a bad idea for a few reasons:
- It puts Disney entertainment into nw markets. These include Texas (SeaWorld), Virginia (Busch Gardens Europe) and Pennsylvania (Sesame Place). It also expands their presence in Central Florida and Southern Califoria with the other two Seaworld parks as well as Busch Gardens Africa. Expanding their potential audience is not a bad thing, especially since the company is exploring regional-based entertainment opportunities.
- Disney does not need to immediately rebrand any of the Busch parks they purchase, nor do they need to bring them up to Imagineering standards immediately. A transition in name and design can happen over time, if it ever happens at all. these parks are already successful as they are currently designed. To rip everything out and start over (inluding the name) is unnecessary. Upgrades can be made over time with a new Disney design being blended in with the old A-B design. Busch Gardens doesn't need to be renamed Disney Gardens the day they change ownership.
- It gives Disney a stronger hold on the market. If Blackstone, and therefore Universal, took ownership of SeaWorld, things could get very interesting for WDW. As consumrs, we would probably benefit from this new competition, but Disney may want to bcut them off at the pass so to speak and take ownership rather than be on the defensive.
- Busch Gardens Africa's close proximit to WDW (and DAK, of course) throws a kink into this idea. however, nothing is saying that Disney would not turn around and try to sell that park off individually. As for SeaWorld, admission to that park does not need to be a part of the MYW base ticket. As someone said earlier, it could easily be an add-on option in addition to a single day admission.
These are just a few thoughts though. All of that said, there are still many logistical ssues to be worked out, such as the possibility of transportation from the WDW resorts to the SeaWorld parks (including Discovery Cove and Aquatica). The bes option for the Busch parks is for the Busch Entertaiment Company to simply be spun off of InBev. However, if InBev is determined to sell to the highest bidder, I think Disney could make a go of it.
- It puts Disney entertainment into nw markets. These include Texas (SeaWorld), Virginia (Busch Gardens Europe) and Pennsylvania (Sesame Place). It also expands their presence in Central Florida and Southern Califoria with the other two Seaworld parks as well as Busch Gardens Africa. Expanding their potential audience is not a bad thing, especially since the company is exploring regional-based entertainment opportunities.
- Disney does not need to immediately rebrand any of the Busch parks they purchase, nor do they need to bring them up to Imagineering standards immediately. A transition in name and design can happen over time, if it ever happens at all. these parks are already successful as they are currently designed. To rip everything out and start over (inluding the name) is unnecessary. Upgrades can be made over time with a new Disney design being blended in with the old A-B design. Busch Gardens doesn't need to be renamed Disney Gardens the day they change ownership.
- It gives Disney a stronger hold on the market. If Blackstone, and therefore Universal, took ownership of SeaWorld, things could get very interesting for WDW. As consumrs, we would probably benefit from this new competition, but Disney may want to bcut them off at the pass so to speak and take ownership rather than be on the defensive.
- Busch Gardens Africa's close proximit to WDW (and DAK, of course) throws a kink into this idea. however, nothing is saying that Disney would not turn around and try to sell that park off individually. As for SeaWorld, admission to that park does not need to be a part of the MYW base ticket. As someone said earlier, it could easily be an add-on option in addition to a single day admission.
These are just a few thoughts though. All of that said, there are still many logistical ssues to be worked out, such as the possibility of transportation from the WDW resorts to the SeaWorld parks (including Discovery Cove and Aquatica). The bes option for the Busch parks is for the Busch Entertaiment Company to simply be spun off of InBev. However, if InBev is determined to sell to the highest bidder, I think Disney could make a go of it.