Published: November 10, 2007 at 2:09 PMNo surprise here...although i did think that the Aquatica tickets would be more expensive. I am very happy with that price. The "Worlds of Discovery" name is appropriate, and I like it. Cant wait to go to Aquatica!!!!
Published: November 10, 2007 at 8:33 PMNot a bad price on Aquatica, any news on an Annual pass there?
If they have one I may go for that rather than the Disney Water Parks.
Published: November 11, 2007 at 5:28 AMAha! Point number two in the mystery of the move to Orlando. Do I smell spin off - and maybe IPO - of the Busch Entertainment brand? A shame really, bcause they could do so much more with the deep pockets of A-B, Inc., behind them. I hope I'm wrong, but if not, stand by to kiss the quality BGE/BGA/SW/SP experience good bye...I'm not sure they're self-sustaining in the long run.
Published: November 11, 2007 at 6:26 AMIt is much more of a value than Disney, IMO. Sea World takes more than one day to see it all, and to combine it with the other parks is a smart idea. I think it is a win win for AB.
Published: November 11, 2007 at 11:42 AMI like SW, but sadly I dont go there often as I just dont have enough days of vacation to hit WDW/USF and BGT and also hit SW.
Published: November 11, 2007 at 12:56 PMLarry,
I was thinking much the same thing, but didn't want to be the first to say it on the site.
The company could be spin off in a way that still allowed Busch significant management influence. (Sort of how Lego spun off Legoland to Merlin w/o much change at the top in the Legoland parks.)
Also, with the parks' increasing emphasis on the Sesame Street franchise, that's a obvious conflict with the (over-21) Busch brand. That doesn't mean one or the other needs to go... it's just always seemed, to me, at least, like there was a better balance point there to be found. Perhaps this is a step toward that, too.
Published: November 12, 2007 at 12:17 AMHmm! I hadn't considered the possibility of a spinoff or IPO. My own belief is that stockholder (public) ownership of any zoo or oceanarium would be a disaster waiting to happen, considering that care of the animals HAS to come first but providing such care would likely come at the expense of profits (which most shareholders would demand come first).
If that happens to Sea World, I would recommend prayers for the animal population.
Published: November 13, 2007 at 8:35 PMWell considering that Busch Entertainment brings in $1.3 Billion in Revenue a year, I doubt A-B would spin them off. The parks have always been thought of as a good public relations tool as well and have an excellent conservation record. Look at Here's to the Hero's. Plus the Sesame Alliance goes back 20+ years. It's a tool to attract families and that is who is spending the money in the park and driving revenue.