What if???

Aaron084 · by **Aaron084** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:29 pm

I'm sure STT was planned years ahead of 1977, so the timing does make sense. I would also think that Mariott would have to give somewhat of a 2/3/5-year plan to Gurnee before building the park in which the city would have to approve of future expansions and additons. We truly do not need anything higher than STT. Just over 300 feet is more than enough wiggle room.

demonbulleagle · by **demonbulleagle** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:38 pm

you seem right with that, and true we dont need anything higher than STT

FParker185 · by **FParker185** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:03 pm

pretty sure 330 feet is the max height of anything that can be built in SFGAm's location due to airspace restrictions set by Waukegan Airport

demonbulleagle · by **demonbulleagle** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:54 pm

that seems pretty acurate

LAFFfan4lyfe · by **LAFFfan4lyfe** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:23 pm

I think if anyone was going to be buy the parks, I would want either Disney or Busch to buy the park. I would die if Cedar Fair did. Good-bye theming.

demonbulleagle · by **demonbulleagle** on Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:41 pm

and you think the themeing would stay with disney?!?!?!?!?!

jm2775 · by **jm2775** on Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:40 am

LAFFfan4lyfe wrote:I think if anyone was going to be buy the parks, I would want either Disney or Busch to buy the park. I would die if Cedar Fair did. Good-bye theming.

Disney does not buy parks. They create them from scratch. That will not happen.

w00dland · by **w00dland** on Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:08 pm

jm2775 wrote:
LAFFfan4lyfe wrote:I think if anyone was going to be buy the parks, I would want either Disney or Busch to buy the park. I would die if Cedar Fair did. Good-bye theming.

Disney does not buy parks. They create them from scratch. That will not happen.

And Busch is no longer a company, sorry Ally looks like you're out of luck. Go buy some Six Flags stock and try to save the company a little!

demonbulleagle · by **demonbulleagle** on Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:28 pm

no theres an idea everybody on SFGAmwoels buy some stock to see if we could help (although how much of an impact would we really have?)

tp41190 · by **tp41190** on Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:00 pm

I hope Cedar Fair buys it because I think they would preserve what we have left more then Six Flags has done.

Also, I could get a better value out of my Cedar Fair pass. I visit more Cedar Fair parks in the year then Six Flags...maybe wont even have a need to get a Six Flags pass. Save some money.

Danhockey04 · by **Danhockey04** on Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:30 pm

Disney was looking to buy SFGAm back in the 90s, and they want to buy Discovery Cove from Busch, so, yes they do look to buy parks that they know that would be of value to them. Though they have not done it, it has been tossed around.

Busch parks still does exist, I still see SWO and BGT standing. Though InBev doesn't want them, who says the Busch family won't keep the parks as a family owned operation?

If SFI goes under, I don't see Disney wanting the park anymore, but I say some overseas company will buy it. Cedar Fair will unlikely pick it up as they have their asses too far in debt too.

tp41190 · by **tp41190** on Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:48 am

^But because of the parks "non competition/2 major cities" area, they might see it as a gold mine...maybe?

FParker185 · by **FParker185** on Sun Jul 27, 2008 2:29 am

Problem with SFGAm in Disney's eyes would be deteriorating infrastructure and general lack of themeing, at least by disney standards though over the past decade the park has deteriorated to the point where compared to other similar parks, our themeing is nothing special. And while it sounds nice, I don't think most people here would want to see SFGAm in Disneys hands. To many posts about wanting thrill rides. Thrill rides and Disney parks just don't go together. Last real thrill ride Disney Built in the US would probably be Tower of Terror at DCA, and before that was probably other rides at DCA back when they opened, and while I haven't ridden it, Expedition Everest sounds more like a family coaster, not that there's anything wrong with that. Disneys main goal is extreme high quality guest experience, not making a quick buck off a "gold mine"

City of Gurnee wouldn't be the greatest either, government has enough to deal with without managing a theme park. Especially a fast growing city like Gurnee, they don't have the time or the excess $$ to run a theme park. Plus even if the Village of Gurnee bought the park, they'd almost definately bring in another company to manage the park like say Cedar Fair or ITP, at which point Gurnee looses all control of the park, they'd just provide $$ to do what the management needs. I can think of a few government owned parks in the US, but only one is managed by the government body, that being Rye Playland which is owned and operated by Westchester County, and it hemorrhages cash badly, though it is an awesome and well kept park as I saw a few weeks ago.

Cedar Fair is in no position to buy any more parks, their current debt rivals Six Flags, only difference is historically they are profitable.

If SF went completely under and parks had to be sold, SFGAm's best bet would be Parques Reunidos or a private investment group of some sort.

Danhockey04 · by **Danhockey04** on Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:09 am

But one thing with Disney is that they don't need to build thrill rides to make great rides. Two of my favorite rides I have ever been on are at Disney with Soarin and Toy Story Mania, both of which are family friendly.

Also, that is why I doubt Disney would want SFGAm now with the theming dwindling over the years and the greater amount of coasters being built, which is really not Disney's forte. But I did hear that Disney is still looking for that thrill park that they want to build, obtain, which is why I think they are making DHS that park in FL. Only reason I see them coming here to pick up this park is that Chicago is the number one tourist area that goes to WDW, which then they'd have a park in their top region and somehow create a package or deal for the two areas and get more people to come down to WDW.

Other than that, SFI must go under before anyone starts worrying about who will obtain this park, cause this park should be kept until the end in the company as it is among their top parks in profit and operations.

JForceFC014 · by **JForceFC014** on Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:00 pm

demonbulleagle wrote:no theres an idea everybody on SFGAmwoels buy some stock to see if we could help (although how much of an impact would we really have?)

I just bought 300 shares, so I did my part (I wanted to buy before this was said anyway). Even if every user here bought say 100 shares (at current price, that's about $115 plus broker fees), it wouldn't do much to the stock price. It would cause it to go up, but again, not by much.

Coaster Justin · by **Coaster Justin** on Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:57 pm

FParker You said:

Cedar Fair or ITP

What is ITP?

I'd want PARC Management to buy the park. I haven't read many bad reviews of their ownership and I think some of their Top Management used to Work at SFGAm.

JForceFC014 · by **JForceFC014** on Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:38 pm

Gravedig, but ok.

There seems to be some common blood between old SF and Parc Management. I think their CEO used to be the GM or some other high ranking position at SFAW. Seems a little like a parent selling their car their car to one of their children.

FParker185 · by **FParker185** on Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:11 pm

I meant ITPS. International Theme Park Services. They are out of Cincinatti and they offer a variety of services for Amusement Parks, including management. I believe they are involved in the operation of one or more of the new Parks in Dubai.

What if???

Who is online