Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Posts
Pothole Dome (Tuolumne Meadows, Yosemite National Park)

The Moon is Waning Crescent (16% of Full)


Advanced

Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.

All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 04, 2016 07:52AM
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 04, 2016 12:34PM
After reading that, all trademarked names need to be given to the NPS. Then they really need to change all contracts to read that names of places are to be licensed for use by the concessionaires only during the period of time that they have the contract. Otherwise, companies are using names to force the NPS to extend or renew contracts. The NPS didn't keep up with the times and dropped the ball and concessionaires took advantage of that. I don't understand why DNC would just not dropped the whole thing or take the amount that the NPS agrees to. The names mean nothing outside of the park and people are still going to go to Yosemite even if the names are different. All this has gotten DNC is ill feelings from the public, which they deserve.

I certainly hope that the names will not change because the ones the NPS picked are not that great. At least Wawona does mean Big Trees. I am really having a issue with Majestic Yosemite Hotel. BTW is the NPS aware that there is a high end hotel chain called The Majestic Hotel (Los Angeles, South Beach, Barcelona and so on)? This was the first thing I thought of when I heard about the name changes.
avatar Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 04, 2016 07:52PM
Quote
parklover
After reading that, all trademarked names need to be given to the NPS. Then they really need to change all contracts to read that names of places are to be licensed for use by the concessionaires only during the period of time that they have the contract. Otherwise, companies are using names to force the NPS to extend or renew contracts. The NPS didn't keep up with the times and dropped the ball and concessionaires took advantage of that. I don't understand why DNC would just not dropped the whole thing or take the amount that the NPS agrees to. The names mean nothing outside of the park and people are still going to go to Yosemite even if the names are different. All this has gotten DNC is ill feelings from the public, which they deserve.

Personally I think Delaware North is tone deaf. They keep on saying that this is about about standing up for their contract rights, but they're totally oblivious to the perception and the effect on their bottom line. So they could conceivably get what they want, but in the end would it be worth all the ill will and bad publicity? The fact is that as a result of this, every new NPS concession contact will require any trademarks be relinquished to NPS at the end of the term if they are in private ownership. As it stands I've heard that the new Yosemite contract includes such a requirement.

NPS has been trying for years to make contract biddings be on an equal footing for new or existing bidders. Granted it's reasonable for physical property such as vehicles and furniture to be a cost for new entrants, but it's obvious that Delaware North wanted the trademark issue to create an "incumbent advantage" that would make it less appealing to other bidders.
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 05, 2016 04:05PM
I agree. DNC was so sure that they were going to get the contract that they spent all that money the past several years on completely remodeling rooms, the stores, etc even when they were working under a temporary contract while the Merced River Plan was being finalized. As I see it, trademarking more names behind the NPS's back was done with lots of forethought about how they could get an advantage with the bidding and if they lost the contract they could make the transition difficult.

I have read on several sites where people are saying that they are boycotting DNC but I do wish that they would make sure that they are boycotting the right places. There have been people that have cancelled reservations in Yosemite that are after March 1st not understanding that DNC will only have Tenaya Lodge at that point. I have also seen where people have been saying about boycotting Yellowstone and Grand Canyon not understanding that DNC does not run everything in those parks. I would hate to see other concessionaires suffer or people cancel their vacations because they didn't do their research on who is running what.
avatar Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 05, 2016 06:22PM
Quote
parklover
DNC will only have Tenaya Lodge at that point.

Then let's boycott Tenaya Lodge.
avatar Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 05, 2016 11:12PM
Quote
eeek

Then let's boycott Tenaya Lodge.


On March 1st, the name of the Tenaya Lodge will be changed to The Ahwahnee.

Grinning Devil
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 06, 2016 03:50PM
Quote
plawrence
Quote
eeek

Then let's boycott Tenaya Lodge.


On March 1st, the name of the Tenaya Lodge will be changed to The Ahwahnee.

Grinning Devil

They wouldn't dare, or would they?
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 06, 2016 03:49PM
Quote
eeek
Quote
parklover
DNC will only have Tenaya Lodge at that point.

Then let's boycott Tenaya Lodge.

Sounds like a plan to me. I wonder what is going to happen with Tenaya Lodge since every time we drive past they always have vacancies. Is it profitable for them to keep?
avatar Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 05, 2016 06:47PM
Quote
parklover
I agree. DNC was so sure that they were going to get the contract that they spent all that money the past several years on completely remodeling rooms, the stores, etc even when they were working under a temporary contract while the Merced River Plan was being finalized. As I see it, trademarking more names behind the NPS's back was done with lots of forethought about how they could get an advantage with the bidding and if they lost the contract they could make the transition difficult.

I have read on several sites where people are saying that they are boycotting DNC but I do wish that they would make sure that they are boycotting the right places. There have been people that have cancelled reservations in Yosemite that are after March 1st not understanding that DNC will only have Tenaya Lodge at that point. I have also seen where people have been saying about boycotting Yellowstone and Grand Canyon not understanding that DNC does not run everything in those parks. I would hate to see other concessionaires suffer or people cancel their vacations because they didn't do their research on who is running what.

They've been trying to get reimbursed for the capital costs of any "improvements" even though the contract doesn't allow for it. Certain other concessionaires tried and then backed off of registering national park trademarks now that NPS is paying more attention.

Certainly it's not easy to figure out exactly where Delaware North is operating. They only recently got the contract for Yavapai Lodge at Grand Canyon. They have no lodging at Yellowstone, but do operate Yellowstone Stores. Certainly over at Yellowstone they have some interesting arrangements. In 2006 I stayed at the Canyon area, where Xanterra operated the lodging and restaurants, but Delaware North had the soda fountain and market. Who operated what was't terribly apparent since they shared the same parking lot. They're also taking over some of the concessions at Olympic National Park, which were ironically operated by Aramark before.

If anything is going to hit Delaware North in the pocketbook, it's going to be their stadium/arena/performing arts concessions.
avatar Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 05, 2016 07:02PM
I found one interesting trademark registration. It looks like a concessionaire registered the trademark for LeConte Lodge at Great Smoky Mountains NP. Apparently this was done with the OK of NPS, and the registration was assigned to NPS. NPS then licenses it to the concessionaire for $200/year.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/local/trademark-trouble-at-national-parks-2ae0266b-c295-12d8-e053-0100007f35a6-367692141.html
https://trademarks.justia.com/786/50/leconte-lodge-78650479.html
https://trademarks.justia.com/786/50/leconte-lodge-78650499.html

So I'm not quite sure how broad reaching this is, since it sounds so similar to LeConte Memorial Lodge. Heck - I remember taking classes at LeConte Hall at UC Berkeley.
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 06, 2016 03:53PM
Quote
y_p_w
I found one interesting trademark registration. It looks like a concessionaire registered the trademark for LeConte Lodge at Great Smoky Mountains NP. Apparently this was done with the OK of NPS, and the registration was assigned to NPS. NPS then licenses it to the concessionaire for $200/year.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/local/trademark-trouble-at-national-parks-2ae0266b-c295-12d8-e053-0100007f35a6-367692141.html
https://trademarks.justia.com/786/50/leconte-lodge-78650479.html
https://trademarks.justia.com/786/50/leconte-lodge-78650499.html

So I'm not quite sure how broad reaching this is, since it sounds so similar to LeConte Memorial Lodge. Heck - I remember taking classes at LeConte Hall at UC Berkeley.

There are a lot of things named after LeConte like LeConte Bay in Alaska and LeConte Road near UCLA. I found this about a school near Berkeley that is changing it's name. http://www.dailycal.org/2015/10/19/berkeley-residents-raise-concerns-about-name-of-leconte-elementary-school/
Re: Yosemite trademark debate raises more questions.
February 07, 2016 06:15AM
Still, more questions... The NPS trademarks the name "LeConte Lodge" in Great Smokey Mountain NP. The lodge’s concessionaire, Stokely Hospitality Enterprises, pays a $200 yearly fee to use the name for marketing and for sale of merchandise. http://tinyurl.com/zb27t2g
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login