Report: Disney Bidding on Sea World & Busch Gardens

[wannabef]

READ HERE

 

[gymnastgirlflips]

So does this mean someone actually is going to buy them? When they first announced that it had a new owner, it didn't seem like anyone wanted to buy it. I hope that they keep the parks open, I love Sea World.

 

[Jason71]

So does this mean someone actually is going to buy them? When they first announced that it had a new owner, it didn't seem like anyone wanted to buy it. I hope that they keep the parks open, I love Sea World.

Someone? Yes, assuming another can get the money together. InBev, the new owner, has made it pretty clear they don't want to be in the theme park business. Rumor is if nobody can afford the parks, they may be spun off into a separate company.

Will Disney buy them? Doubtful. If you read the Financial Times article, they are identified only as a possible "strategic" bidder. They may try to get the price up, and will definitely get a copy of all the information for the bid (information on the AB parks that up until now has been confidential), but I seriously doubt they will be buying the AB parks.

 

[wannabef]

While I can see the strategic advantage of buying up one's competition, such a purchase would signal a sea-change in Disney's theme park strategy. Though it would put them in certain regions they've eyed over the years (Disney's America, anyone?), the result could be a similar devaluing of the brand to that created in Disney animation by the preponderance of straight-to-video sequels over the years.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

This would be a great move for Disney. All these parks are top shelf, quality wise and lets face it "Disney quality" is little more than branding these days anyway.

All of the Parks could be "disneyfied" easily to whatever degree they would choose to do it.

I agree that it's highly unlikely that this would happen but a poor economy is certainly the time to solidify the future. It would take insight, saavy and daring to pull off ... Not qualities current Disney management is known for, however.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

The article by Jason Cochran that the OP linked to is speculation by one writer. It's a good article, but I'm surprised by what's not in the article.

The article does not mention Merlin Entertainment Grouo ( http://www.merlinentertainments.biz/ ) as a potential bidder. Merlin is a huge, international theme park operator.

The article does not discuss the possibility of breaking up Busch Entertainment Corporation, with different pieces going to different buyers. Busch Entertainment Corporation, which has ten parks, could be worth more in pieces than as a whole.

For example, Busch's three park in Orlando (Sea World, Discovery Cove, and Aquatica) would be a valuable addition to Universal Studios Florida -- and would be more affordable than buying all ten parks.

Jason71 made an excellent point that by participating in the bidding, Disney gains all sorts of detailed financial information about the Busch Entertainment Corporation parks. So, even if Disney has no intention of buying, it makes sense to participate in the process.

 

[GrumpyFan]

I guess I'm a little clueless, because I don't understand why Disney would be interested in the Busch Parks financials. Can somebody explain?

 

[Jason71]

I guess I'm a little clueless, because I don't understand why Disney would be interested in the Busch Parks financials. Can somebody explain?

Off the top of my head, detailed attendance numbers. Exactly how many people go off-site to SW any given day? Which days are busier? How do those numbers compare with AK on any given Thursday? Do more APs go to SW or MK on the weekends? What effect does the free Halloween event have? The various concerts?

Or, performance of shops and restaurants. If SW shops are making more than MK shops, than clearly Disney needs to learn a few lessons.

A lot of this competitive information is played close to the vest--keep in mind, the attendance numbers released every year are just estimates, and last year Busch claimed they were off. No one, not even the Mouse, really knows how Sea World and the other parks have been doing.

 

[GrumpyFan]

Off the top of my head, detailed attendance numbers. Exactly how many people go off-site to SW any given day? Which days are busier? How do those numbers compare with AK on any given Thursday? Do more APs go to SW or MK on the weekends? What effect does the free Halloween event have? The various concerts?

Or, performance of shops and restaurants. If SW shops are making more than MK shops, than clearly Disney needs to learn a few lessons.

A lot of this competitive information is played close to the vest--keep in mind, the attendance numbers released every year are just estimates, and last year Busch claimed they were off. No one, not even the Mouse, really knows how Sea World and the other parks have been doing.

I find it hard to believe that they would disclose all of that. I would expect, simple, summarized financial and attendance numbers, but not the details of which days are busier, when APs are more likely to attend, etc. But then, I've never seen one of these packets, so maybe you're right.

 

[Condorman]

I find it hard to believe that they would disclose all of that. I would expect, simple, summarized financial and attendance numbers, but not the details of which days are busier, when APs are more likely to attend, etc. But then, I've never seen one of these packets, so maybe you're right.

Since InBev is looking to dump the Busch parks altogether and anyway, full disclosure is in their best interest. Whether it's Disney or another corporate entity to buy those parks, InBev WILL sell and someone WILL buy. They no longer care about hiding the facts and figures from their closest competition. In most cases of M&A, it's the seller's legal obligation to unveil all the data required by the purchaser. If they withheld any information that might affect the sale, the price, or the quality of the product, the transaction could be nullified immediately and a lawsuit could result. InBev simply wants the highest bidder and they want them now.

 

[DannyDisneyFreak]

I previously heard that PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals ) was interested in buying Sea World and that if they did Shamu and his friends would be released back into the wild, replaced by animatronics, and the park would have an educational lean about animal cruelity...

 

[randomDisneyFan3000]

they do understand that that would kill all the animals? every animal there was breed in captivity.

 

[KYMickey]

PETA doesn't really care a bit about animals! All they really care about is their image and making headlines. By far the biggest majority of complaints they have involve animals that are raised for the purpose PETA complains about so if that purpose went away so would the animals! If all the so called bad things being done to animals stopped tomorrow they'd just go and find another cause to complain about.

Besides the real translational of their acronym is People Eating Tasty Animals.

 

[YoHo]

This would be a great move for Disney. All these parks are top shelf, quality wise and lets face it "Disney quality" is little more than branding these days anyway.

All of the Parks could be "disneyfied" easily to whatever degree they would choose to do it.

I agree that it's highly unlikely that this would happen but a poor economy is certainly the time to solidify the future. It would take insight, saavy and daring to pull off ... Not qualities current Disney management is known for, however.

Ignoring the bulk of your last paragraph, which is quite true. I'd argue that given the current slump in construction and the associated lower costs, it would be in Disney's best interests to build their way to expansion rather than to buy up existing infrastructure. They will get more bang for their buck building attractions in existing parks on existing land with existing tax bases et al.

That's actually the only reason I can see that they actually finally started work on Carsland. It became cheaper to do so.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Ignoring the bulk of your last paragraph, which is quite true. I'd argue that given the current slump in construction and the associated lower costs, it would be in Disney's best interests to build their way to expansion rather than to buy up existing infrastructure. They will get more bang for their buck building attractions in existing parks on existing land with existing tax bases et al.

That's actually the only reason I can see that they actually finally started work on Carsland. It became cheaper to do so.

You very well may be correct, but the fact that the economy is so severely affecting InBev and the fact that they do not want the parks, leads me to believe bargains are there for the taking ... Still I'm not disputing your scenario either.

 

[seashoreCM]

For a long time there has been speculation about a "fifth gate" (fifth theme park) at WDW. Perhaps if the price is right, Sea World might become it, and appropriate theming added using Disney Sea in Tokyo as a pattern.

Guest transportation to the resorts would have to be worked out of course. Another speculation going around for awhile a few years ago was a public monorail or something similar linking Disney to Orlando Airport via Orlando Convention Center. The route from Disney to Sea World approximates the southern half of this.

 

[YoHo]

It's also probably worth pointing out that Sea World has a spotty record with animal rights activists.

I'm not gonna turn this political or pick a side on that, but it may be in Disney's best interests to just turn away.


Also, Disney's been covitous of a Mission Bay location for their destination Disney mini-resorts, so they may be more interested in Sea World San Diego to the exclusion of the other 2.