From the vantage point of his role as dean of the University of Central Florida's Rosen College of Hospitality Management, Abraham Pizam has been following Orlando's tourism industry for more than 30 years. Senior Editor Michelle Baran spoke with Pizam last week about the recent controversies plaguing SeaWorld and whether it can survive the current crisis.
Q: Last week, SeaWorld revealed that the company is hurting. Is that directly attributable to the "Blackfish" documentary and the backlash from the negative media attention, or is there a larger challenge SeaWorld is facing beyond its killer whale shows?
A: Well, it's very difficult to disaggregate this effect from other things. The other parks are doing exceptionally well, and that may be cutting into SeaWorld's business. Especially Universal -- now they opened a new attraction, Diagon Alley, and it's doing very well. So there is a possibility that this it what happened here. Or, there is a possibility that there is a combined effect of that plus the media attention on "Blackfish." But how much was caused by one vs. the other one is very difficult [to know] unless you do a specific study to determine what people's opinions are, both those who are going to the park and those who are staying away from the park.
Q: Was the announcement of the Blue Water Project this week an attempt to save SeaWorld's image?
A: What SeaWorld is trying to do is to correct the image and reposition itself in a better way to the general public and in a way that more truly and better reflects their own philosophy.
Q: Is it going to work?
A: I personally think it will. Fortunately [for SeaWorld], people have short memories. And they are trained to be influenced by current events rather than long-term memory. ... I wouldn't write off SeaWorld under any circumstances because what they have here is a very unique product and a product that appeals to quite a few people. And if they manage to overcome this particular bump in the road, I think they will continue to be successful.
Q: How would you advise travelers and families who don't know if they should go to SeaWorld?
A: There are precedents to what happened here, and we can learn from past experience. If you remember during your childhood, if your parents took you to the zoo, the zoo of that period was entirely different than the zoo of today. Zoos have learned that you can no longer take animals and put them in cages for the pure entertainment of human beings and in the process damage them psychologically or physically. So what zoos did, they turned this entertainment into an educational and preservation activity. ... And the fact of the matter is that the participation and the visitation of zoos has increased, not decreased. So if [SeaWorld goes] in the same direction as the zoos go, they become more educational, they become more concerned with animal environments and try to create something more similar to their natural environment, and at the same time provide a form of education and entertainment, I think they will be successful.
Q: If SeaWorld shifts to an entirely education- and conservation-focused model, does it stand a chance against Disney and Universal?
A: I think it does. Because it has been for the last 30 years existing side by side with both Disney and Universal. It has its own niche. They still have their own market share of people who are more interested in the nature rather than man-made attractions.
Follow Michelle Baran on Twitter @mbtravelweekly.