From what I recall, in my own research, limited as it may be, this is not unlike DiscWelder, which was developed by a Minnetoka group in MN. DiscWelder was one of the "Pro" editions to author and encode DVD-Audio, which unfortunately has not caught on as I'd hoped. It didn't keep up with the competition, but companies who invest in their products get better work and better support. Sequoia falls into this category as well, IMO.
There's also functionality that is likely built-in to Sequoia that is centric to specific needs of a Major-label studio, such as certain types of encoding, maybe DDP, or DTS, for example, which Cakewalk doesn't have. This is analogous to Photoshop vs. Photoshop Elements from Adobe. Photoshop offers the ability to "soft-proof" for color accuracy when going to print on an exact paper, with an exact print color gamut, and for a specific printer. If your monitor is calibrated, then you can essentially, and quite accurately mimic the paper print on the screen before wasting paper and ink. This also benefits shops that have multiple computers, all of which can handle the same calibration.
Sequoia also, likely has a more elite market that will only pay for the best. That's not a good marketing ploy, but it works. In this case, they price it high enough to cover the expense of extra work, but the sales volume is low enough that they can give attention to individual users, especially those in major studios.
My result is that Sequoia is for the expert. If you're charging full studio pricing for your work, and have the clients that need this level of expertise, stability, and support, then it may be worth the cost. For most of us, it's not really worth it.
FootNote: I wouldn't buy Cakewalk that costs $3,200, but I certainly would pay $799 for a more heavily power and flex-tested version with a long list of "qualified" hardware and Windows OS versions, then routine updates vs. a,b,c,d "Service Packs".