Sea World name change?

[New display name]

SeaWorld in America has faced an 84% drop in net second-quarter income, from $37.4 million in 2014 to $5.8 million in 2015, in the second quarter. Revenue fell from $405.1 million to $391.6 million, a drop of 3%, in the second quarter of 2015 when compared to 2014. 

Consumers are still turning their backs on SeaWorld. The embattled marine life theme park company reported steep drops in profits and attendance and on Thursday, marking more loss in the wake of the damning documentary Blackfish.

The company has been struggling to maintain consumer interest in SeaWorld in the wake of Blackfish, which offered a grim look at life in captivity for Orca whales, and has launched a series of campaigns discounts to keep visitors interested.

I have seen a lot of reviews of Sea World Gold Coast where people are confusing Sea World with SeaWorld and are ripping it apart.

I believe when Sea World first opened up it was smart to use Sea World as there name.  I did read somewhere once that when Sea World found out the name was not registered in Australia they rushed to take the name so people would think SeaWorld was Sea World.

Now that SeaWorld in America is having a lot of problems and Sea World in Australia is all grown up would it be wise for Sea World to change its name?

[BNErider]

Not a bad idea, but I do also feel that people will probably get over the Blackfish thing. Some won't, but the majority will.

One thing I'd love for our Sea World to do is create a larger sense of "adventure". Think of the original IoA but with animals.

[Ashley]

Well sometimes it not the name what's the problem it can be some of the things they have to offer to do, see or ride.

Like there's tons of wet n wilds around the Wet n wild gold coast, Wet n wild Sydney, Wet n wild Orlando and there all doing fine.

[pushbutton]

Whenever I look at the Sea World Facebook page, it is filled with nasty comments accusing Sea World of animal cruelty (when in fact what they do is save animals that are in danger and provide outstanding care for all their animals).

Obviously the people making such comments are assuming that our Sea World is connected to Sea World in America, where there apparently have been allegations of animals being poorly treated. 

Probably most of the people who post such comments mean well and just genuinely care about animal welfare. It's also apparent that some of them are just trolls who've found an easy target at which to aim their hate. 

I had no idea their numbers had dropped so much. Where did that information come from? I'll regard it as just a rumour for now until I see confirmation. 

Nevertheless, in view of all the negative comments on social media, I was actually thinking only a few days ago that a partial solution would be for SW to change its name (what a coincidence)!

Let's see if we can suggest some alternative names:

- One that springs to mind for me is the name of a small indoor dolphinarium that used to be in Adelaide where I lived until recently. 

It closed in 1991 if I recall correctly, and strangely enough I do know that the dolphins from Adelaide were sent to Sea World!

Anyway the place in SA was called MARINELAND.  How about that as a new name for SW?

Well sometimes it not the name what's the problem it can be some of the things they have to offer to do, see or ride.

Like there's tons of wet n wilds around the Wet n wild gold coast, Wet n wild Sydney, Wet n wild Orlando and there all doing fine.

I agree with that. Aside from the animal welfare Facebook trolls (which I am sure have a negligible impact) Sea World has removed their most exciting attraction (Bermuda Triangle) and replaced it with something pretty bland by comparison (Storm Coaster). On top of that, they've also removed their most impressive thrill ride (Sea Viper) and replaced it with nothing whatsoever!

Yes, they have recently opened Creatures of the deep, and they are investing in a new kids area, but despite these I have to say there's not much to keep me personally going back as often as I visit the other Gold Coast parks, and even my nephews and nieces say it's a bit boring compared to the other parks.

Clearly more investment in fun and entertaining things to do is still needed. 

Edited September 23, 2015 by pushbutton

[New display name]

 

Just type in "seaworld profit drops" you will find pages and pages of information.  If you also look up seas on the New York Stock Exchange you will see share prices have halved.

Most of the people would not even know where Australia was and I would think none of them would know where the Gold Coast is located.  Sea World has always tried to distant itself from SeaWorld in regarding to having whales in captivity and if you look it up there is a few articles where Sea World say they would never do it.

I also read an article yesterday where a manager said Sea World had handed its license back 20 years ago and could not take or buy dolphins from the wild and the only time they keep a dolphin now is when it can’t be released back to the wild after they have cared for it.

Not to many people around the world would ever travel to Australia to go to SW but what I’m more concerned about is what happen if major shareholders in village road show start selling their shares because the name sea world has been tarnished and they don’t want their business to be associated with the name.

I was going to ask what would you call it but truthfully I have no idea myself what I would change it too.

 

Edited September 23, 2015 by skeetafly

[pushbutton]

They could also call it 

- Ocean Island (Sea World is almost an island)

Or

- Ocean Gardens

I think I still like the name Marineland best though. 

 

Just type in "seaworld profit drops" you will find pages and pages of information.  If you also look up seas on the New York Stock Exchange you will see share prices have halved.

 

I have done that, and as far as I can tell all the results refer to Sea World USA. 

Nothing to do with our Sea World.!

I still think a name change to distance themselves from that controversy is worth considering. 

[New display name]

Sorry to have confused you but I was talking about USA Seawordl's profits being hit and because a lot of people are thinking that Sea World is SeaWorld  it could damage Sea World. I'm even getting confused now to which SW I am typing.

Edited September 23, 2015 by skeetafly

[pushbutton]

Lol. I did think at first that you were saying Sea World Australia had problems. I have worked it out now though!

[BigKev]

The horse has well and truly bolted re the name. They could change it whatever they like and people will still call it Sea World well after blackfish has been forgotten. 

They would be far better served getting on the front foot and letting people know the facts about what they do and don't do with a strong advertising campaign. 

The number of people who think they have whales is extraordinary. 

[Brad2912]

They could also call it 

- Ocean Island (Sea World is almost an island)

Or

- Ocean Gardens

I think I still like the name Marineland best though. 

I have done that, and as far as I can tell all the results refer to Sea World USA. 

Nothing to do with our Sea World.!

I still think a name change to distance themselves from that controversy is worth considering. 

it's clear he is talking about SW in the USA

do you really think our SW here rakes in $300m??

[New display name]

That's the problem Brad2912.   My first words are "SeaWorld in America" but it’s very easy for you brain to override your eyes.

If you look at some of the comments about the post, people are telling them they are not the same but they have already made their minds up.

I do it all the time.

[djmcbell]

Whilst I know that Sea World in the Gold Coast and SeaWorld elsewhere (I think they talked about a park in Dubai at one point) are different things, the majority of people don't - and that majority is going to take to Facebook, TripAdvisor and whatnot and try to make their opinions heard.

(as an aside, when I eventually get round to writing trip reports of the Aussie parks - got Paris to finish off first - I'll probably still find myself calling it SeaWorld)

It probably is far too late to change the name, as BigKev said. People know. Even if the name had been changed as soon as Blackfish came out, people would still know. Basically, just about all marine parks are damaged by, well, being marine parks. People will see that Sea World has dolphins, turtles, sharks etc and say "well what about them?".

It's an odd one - SWGC definitely came across as being more animal-friendly than SWUS (let's face it, the main draw of SWUS is a killer whale show in which, in order to show that killer whales are magnificent creatures who should be free in the clean oceans of the world, unfettered by humans, they bring out a killer whale to do tricks for fish in a small pool - kinda ironic really), but I would hope they'd push the animal conservation angle more.

(and no, I can't think of a name - but as BigKev said, I doubt it'd make a difference now)

In regards to SWUS, I think they could help themselves if only they could be bothered. In Florida's case, look into opening a separate facility dedicated to the rescue and rehabilitation of injured whales, dolphins etc. near Tampa. When it's done, send the existing stock of whales there. Open it to tourists (with Busch Gardens nearby, and SeaWorld itself operating buses to Busch Gardens from their Orlando park, it shouldn't be difficult) and encourage the science community to become involved. This would effectively create a fourth SeaWorld park, and save them a lot of face. Keep the existing SeaWorld (and Aquatica and Discovery Cove), but put more exhibits and rides at the existing SeaWorld in order to replace the stock that has left.

EDIT - just had a look at this article, pretty interesting take on SWGC following Blackfish (though it is just an interview with the owner, attach to that whatever bias you will...).

As a quick aside, SWGC say they release their animals back into the wild when they are fit. I'm unsure if this happens at the moment, but perhaps they should highlight this by holding a mini-party or carnival or event day or something when an animal is to leave? Sort of a send-off party or something to highlight it. Perhaps, if the animal is being released nearby, they could use the cruise liner they've got to accompany the release so people could watch.

Edited September 23, 2015 by djmcbell

[Santa07]

- Ocean Gardens

That would be the best name for the US Sea Worlds, since the same company owns Busch Gardens

[pushbutton]

That's the problem Brad2912.   My first words are "SeaWorld in America" but it’s very easy for you brain to override your eyes.

If you look at some of the comments about the post, people are telling them they are not the same but they have already made their minds up.

I do it all the time.

 

That's exactly what I did!

[XxMrYoshixX]

On top of that, they've also removed their most impressive thrill ride (Sea Viper) and replaced it with nothing whatsoever!

Nothing just yet. They might add a thrill ride in the next few years!

[Richard]

If Village Roadshow wanted to distance themselves from the USA SeaWorld parks and the negative publicity associated, the first thing they should probably do is not enter in a partnership with SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment to develop theme parks in China, SE Asia, India and Russia.

It kind of undermines the whole "But we're not them!" argument when you're quietly in a partnership with them to develop marine animal oriented properties in parts of the world where environmental regulations are minimal and the specifics of how they'll source marine creatures are unclear at best.

As for changing names, the whole saga -- 40-odd years in the making -- is a really good branding lesson. It probably made perfect sense at the time to borrow the well-known SeaWorld name while it was unclaimed in Australia. That same goodwill that they capitalised on is one in the same as the negative publicity they're now distancing themselves from.

Questionable international deals aside, all Sea World needs to do is keep doing what they're doing. The're an important pro-environment and pro-animal voice in Australia, and with time the Blackfish furor will ease.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Richard

[djmcbell]

If Village Roadshow wanted to distance themselves from the USA SeaWorld parks and the negative publicity associated, the first thing they should probably do is not enter in a partnership with SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment to develop theme parks in China, SE Asia, India and Russia.

It kind of undermines the whole "But we're not them!" argument when you're quietly in a partnership with them to develop marine animal oriented properties in parts of the world where environmental regulations are minimal and the specifics of how they'll source marine creatures are unclear at best.

I guess one thing that will come from it is that SWGC really are the best people to advise and be in a partnership with. If SWUS couldn't get them, then they'd probably choose someone who won't insist (we hope) on decent treatment for the animals.

[rappa]

At the end of the day "hate on Seaworld" is the current 'in' thing to do and if it's one thing the on mass US public love is a good bandwagon to jump on. 

Soon enough they will get 'shocked and horrified' at something else that has been right in front of them for years and move on and forget about hating Seaworld and start going to see the "cool whale show" again. 

[pushbutton]

Not renowned for their high intellectual capacity, those yanks!

They did give us McDonald's though (which we now do far better than they do)!

[DisneyDoll]

They did give us McDonald's though (which we now do far better than they do)!

LOL...Yes, I had some when I was there recently & it was beyond gross

Edited September 24, 2015 by DisneyDoll

[New display name]

If Village Roadshow wanted to distance themselves from the USA SeaWorld parks and the negative publicity associated, the first thing they should probably do is not enter in a partnership with SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment to develop theme parks in China, SE Asia, India and Russia.

It kind of undermines the whole "But we're not them!" argument when you're quietly in a partnership with them to develop marine animal oriented properties in parts of the world where environmental regulations are minimal and the specifics of how they'll source marine creatures are unclear at best.

As for changing names, the whole saga -- 40-odd years in the making -- is a really good branding lesson. It probably made perfect sense at the time to borrow the well-known SeaWorld name while it was unclaimed in Australia. That same goodwill that they capitalised on is one in the same as the negative publicity they're now distancing themselves from.

Questionable international deals aside, all Sea World needs to do is keep doing what they're doing. The're an important pro-environment and pro-animal voice in Australia, and with time the Blackfish furor will ease.

It could be our parks are slow learners.

I total understanding a park wanting to associate itself with a successful company but I also think it’s been stopping our parks from being something different and truly successful.

 

Showing my age here but I remember when Dreamworld was full of tourist. 

 

Financial Year International Visitors              Interstate visitor’s       intrastate visitors

2009                            18%                                         36%                             46%

2008                            18%                                         37%                             45%

2007                            20%                                         39%                             41%

2006                            20%                                         39%                             41%

2005                            22%                                         37%                             41%

2004                            22%                                         39%                             39%

2003                            21%                                         39%                             40%

2002                            26%                                         37%                             37%

2001                            31%                                         32%                             37%

2000                            30%                                         35%                             35%

1999                            30%                                         34%                             36%

1998                            31%                                         32%                             37%

 

The percentage of international visitors to the Gold Coast theme parks has declined from approx. 30% in 2000 to approx. 20% in 2009. This appears to be associated with the development of newer theme parks in Asia, particularly those with international brand names.

 

The last time I was at DW I went to the sheep show.  I had never been before but thought it was time to check it out.  The first think that came to my attention was I was the only Aussie in the audience, the show even had a translator.  The rest of the day I thought where had all the Asian gone too.  The whole area around the show was packed with the Asian tourist but as quick as they came they were gone. 

I can’t believe it.  Dreamworld have done all the hard work and got them in the gate but then they let them go.  Why are they not staying around to check DW out?

These are my thoughts but as per normal will be totally misguided but they are just my thoughts.

It was great for MW and DW when people couldn’t afford to travel over to the USA but boy have times changed.  I now go to the USA every second year and I don’t have to save for a life time to make the trip. So back in the day it made sense to borrow the Sea World Name or build a mini Disneyland.

Now that I don’t even have to travel to the USA but I can travel even closer makes it easier for me to go to Disneyland or Universal.

So this is what gets my undies in a knot.

Even thou I give credit to DW for the improving there park of lately and before everyone jumps up and down and says DW has always had the globe. What is the purpose of coping universal’s idea.  My theory-

I go to the USA and get a great photo in front of the sign.  I stick my photo on Facebook and tell or my buddies I’m a legend and while you’re at work I get to stand in front of a sign.  Straight away all of my friends know where I am and wish they could also stand in front of a sign.

 Turn that around.

Tourist from Japan goes to DW and stands in front of sign and puts photo on facebook.  Friends of Japan man thinks is that not Universal studios.  We have one up the road.  Why did you travel all that way when I’m going there on Saturday for the cost of a bus ticket?  I would have seen the opera house while I was in Australia, we don’t have one of them.

Tourist to Australia increase every year so why are the numbers in the parks decreasing?

I do see a fair few Asian at Sea World but what happens once Japan gets a new SeaWorld. 

Do they come to the Gold Coast and stop going to Sea World because they think they are the same thing.

 

Yes Richard Sea World is a important pro-environment and pro-animal voice in Australia.  And that's the direction I would like Sea World put.

It need to run though the whole park but and not just parts of it.

 

Bam “our name says we rescue animals" Bam "jump on a Jet Ski and help us rescue that animal”

BAM Buy some of our shit because it helps us rescue the dolphins.

(So in my crazy fucked up mind I want to go to Sea World because I’m saving the world.  (Even thou technically the same as SeaWorld USA) but it’s a point of difference that make me feel like I did something.

 

Same a DW why are tourist going there for half an hour and leaving.  (My crazy fucked up mined is saying) they have seen it all before and want to see something else.

 

 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I think the point is - theme parks in Australia don't offer a point of difference to parks elsewhere in the world. Sure our tourism may be up (this depends on the dollar and nothing else to be honest), people come here for the AUSTRALIAN things they can do.

Just look at Richard and Megan's trip at the start of the year - sure it was filled with parks, but they killed themselves to get those 'classic aussie' moments in.

When our parks don't rank better, the international crowd may just decide their limited time in our country is better spent on things that are uniquely australian.

[Brad2912]

Trips to the US are getting less likely with our dollar continuing to slide lower and lower. 

[joz]

I think another thing that's telling is many of the people complaining on Sea World GC's Facebook page are from overseas, and anyone in Australia who has seen Blackfish already had a 'free the Dolphins' bias anyway.  I don't think it's had much traction with the majority of people, and even in the U.S. I suspect that the downturn in profitability has more to do with a lack of compelling new attractions.  Sea World is a huge brand, and they'd be mad to change based on being the subject of last week's poorly placed moral outrage

[New display name]

I think the point is - theme parks in Australia don't offer a point of difference to parks elsewhere in the world. Sure our tourism may be up (this depends on the dollar and nothing else to be honest), people come here for the AUSTRALIAN things they can do.

Just look at Richard and Megan's trip at the start of the year - sure it was filled with parks, but they killed themselves to get those 'classic aussie' moments in.

When our parks don't rank better, the international crowd may just decide their limited time in our country is better spent on things that are uniquely australian.

 

In all my ramble you always know what I'm mean.  “Uniquely Australian” is the point I was getting at.  2 examples where I see this works with tourist.

Outback Spectacular

When I drive past at night the carpark is always full of buses.

Australia Zoo

Zoos are all over the world but what makes a must for international visitors.

Let’s face it, when I go overseas I have no problems spending money but when it comes to buying lunch at DW my pockets always tighten up.

Also I seem to try more different types of food when I’m on holidays.

I think our parks have got the locals covered and I think someone on holidays might be more willing to buy lunch or but a gift.

Whenever I look at a parks end of year reports, I always see expenditure per person. (So it must be pretty important to them)

It would be interesting to see this for a local against a tourist.

To reduce my ramblings here (Alex help)

If a park like DW could get that 13% of tourist back into the park by making DW a “uniquely Australian experience”, then DW could finally get me a Woodie.

 

What’s a Uniquely Australian”? It’s not my job to know but if you scarped one of the food shops and had the Great Aussie BBQ as an option it could be the start of something and it wouldn’t be a huge outlay. The problem is I don’t think DW knows what it is.

 

I do agree Joz. 

It just makes a man think if aligning or pretending to align yourself with a company and then denning any aliment to a company when it suits you has a use bye date.  When does it do more harm than good.

 

Edited September 24, 2015 by skeetafly