SFGAmWorld.com
Untitled Document
Park Information
Latest News
Great America
Roller Coasters
Rides
Hurricane Harbor
Water Slides
Water Attractions
Advertisement

Six Flags puts up 6 parks for sale

Talk about anything that has to do with the amusement park industry here.
Postby Bob O on August 21st, 2006, 12:04 pm
Magic Mountain Owner Seeks Package Sale
By Roger Vincent
Times Staff Writer

August 19, 2006

Six Flags Inc. on Friday sent potential buyers detailed financial information on six of its amusement parks, including Magic Mountain in Valencia, after signaling its intention to sell the properties in a single transaction.

When the New York-based company announced in June that it might sell the parks to reduce its $2.1-billion debt, it listed options including selling one or more to theme park operators or dismantling the attractions and unloading the properties to real estate developers.

But on Thursday, Six Flags Chief Executive Mark Shapiro said that he would like to sell all six parks as a package, reducing the likelihood that Magic Mountain and neighboring Hurricane Harbor water park would be picked off by a local builder eager to blanket the land with homes.

In an interview with Bloomberg News after ringing the closing bell on the New York Stock Exchange to mark a change in the company's ticker symbol from PKS to SIX, Shapiro said Six Flags might keep the parks if it didn't get a good enough price.

"The real estate angle might be overrated," said Dave Omel, vice president of operations for Palace Entertainment Inc., a Newport Beach holding company for Raging Waters, Boomers and other entertainment centers. "If they did some work, these would be very viable theme parks."

For example, Magic Mountain could benefit from improved marketing and operations that would "make it nicer and more family friendly," such as implementing a dress code, Omel said.

Magic Mountain has a reputation for security problems and attracting rowdy teens. Shapiro has said he would like to make it and the company's 29 other parks more attractive to families.

In addition to Magic Mountain, Six Flags hopes to sell properties in Buffalo, N.Y.; Denver; Seattle; Houston; and Concord, Calif. Keeping them bundled would ensure that the less desirable parks are sold. The buyer could operate some and resell others for real estate development.

Development makes the most sense to another industry expert.

"There's very valuable dirt under some of these parks," said Carl Winston, director of the hospitality and tourism management program at San Diego State University. "Certainly that's the case at Magic Mountain."

The land in Buffalo and Houston might have little potential for development, but the four other parks are in thriving real estate markets, Winston said.

Local developers have expressed interest in creating a mixed-used project on the 250-acre Magic Mountain site with housing, retail and perhaps office space.

Parcels near the Valencia site sell for $750,000 to $1 million an acre, making the land on that property alone worth $200 million or more.

Shapiro has said that when evaluating which parks to sell he considered whether they were on valuable real estate. He also has said that the combined sale price would have to top $500 million to be worthwhile.

Six Flags' stock price fell more than 50% in the last six months but ticked up recently on Wall Street's assumption that the properties looked good to builders, Winston said.

"My speculation is that some real estate developer is thinking, 'Wow,' " he said.

Shares of Six Flags fell 6 cents to $4.99 on Friday.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are your thoughts about this???
Bob O

 
Posts: 945
Joined: January 20th, 2003, 10:28 pm
Location: Milwaukee Wis.

Postby Galvan on August 21st, 2006, 1:37 pm
I think its nothing that we really didnt already know. Shapiro means business when he says he wants to turn around the company.
Image
Galvan
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 3639
Joined: June 30th, 2003, 1:23 am
Location: Montgomery,IL

Postby FRD714 on August 21st, 2006, 2:16 pm
Well, now he will be able to focus on fewer parks which is good.
Frank
FRD714

User avatar
 
Posts: 3547
Joined: October 26th, 2005, 4:46 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby RBull4life on August 21st, 2006, 3:27 pm
And in a few posts, the "Shaprio has no clue as to what he is doing," crowd should be arriving.
If it walks like socialist, quacks like socialist, smells like a socialist, .... it's a socialist. Hope, and change we can believe in.
RBull4life

User avatar
 
Posts: 934
Joined: February 27th, 2004, 12:08 pm
Location: Living in a van down by the river.

Postby Ilovthevu' on August 21st, 2006, 3:34 pm
Magic Mountain wasn't the problem. :x Six Flags is going for bankruptcy pretty soon. We have a complete dummy running the company. On top of it, who's going to want to buy all of them at once. No one is going to want to keep the other parks going except for Magic Mountain.

I imagine amusement business today saying Six Flags Magic Mountain has a 10% increase of attendance from last year going high above Six Flags Great America, Six Flags Great Adventure, Six Flags Over Georgia, and Six Flags Over Texas while the other parks have lost 50% of people due to high prices, and bad ride selection. :lol:

This is Shapiro's next thought. Let's sell SFGAm, SFGAdv, SFOG, and SFOT. I say we keep SFKK, Great Escape, La Ronde, Mexico, SFStL, SFNE, SFFT, and SFA.
"I've been staring at the world, waiting. All the trouble and all the pain we're facing. Too much light to be livin' in the dark. Why waste time? We only got one life. Together we can be the CHANGE. So go and let your heart burn bright"
Ilovthevu'

 
Posts: 4398
Images: 0
Joined: June 4th, 2004, 7:54 pm

Postby ragingbullchick on August 21st, 2006, 3:44 pm
I think Shapiro made a good descision by doing this. Now, he'll have fewer parks to worry about.
"And that farm girl walked off with slippers off a dead woman? She must have been raised in a barn!" ~Wicked, an excellent musical
ragingbullchick

User avatar
 
Posts: 650
Joined: September 26th, 2005, 6:00 pm
Location: Woodfield Mall

Postby Galvan on August 21st, 2006, 3:57 pm
Ilovthevu' wrote:I imagine amusement business today saying Six Flags Magic Mountain has a 10% increase of attendance from last year going high above Six Flags Great America, Six Flags Great Adventure, Six Flags Over Georgia, and Six Flags Over Texas while the other parks have lost 50% of people due to high prices, and bad ride selection. :lol:


Ever hear of putting a band-aid on a broken leg? The same can be true for Magic Mountain.

For the love of Jesus PLEASE quit saying that Six Flags' problems are due to bad ride selection that is the most assinine and unfounded comment anyone could say.

The fact is, if people trash the park, and make it uninviting for people, they are not going to spend there time and money in that place.

Think about it, if you invite people over to your house for dinner and your house is a mess and there 5 broken down cars on blocks in your front yard, people arent going to want to stay or come back. But you have a kickass dvd collection on your 50 inch plasma screen tv. Still, people arent going to come back regardless of what "ride selection" SFMM has.
Image
Galvan
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 3639
Joined: June 30th, 2003, 1:23 am
Location: Montgomery,IL

Postby CoastsToCoasters on August 21st, 2006, 4:10 pm
its funny though, if one of the parks selling were SFGAm, wed quickly set in panic mode and try to save it...think of how the people who frequently visit those parks feel.

i have a friend who lives in Cali & goes to SFMM alot and this is what he told me off myspace.....im lame agreed :wink: .....
"six flags (the original) jk haha might close to become some company park or something. it has to do with that the land is too valuable...?"

may not be a good sentence..i had alot of spellin errors to fix :lol: but he also told me theyre tryin to save it, yet the land is worth so much there....
CoastsToCoasters

User avatar
 
Posts: 2352
Joined: September 5th, 2005, 12:41 am
Location: Chicago, IL.

Postby Bob O on August 21st, 2006, 4:19 pm
I dont think ride selection is the whole problem, but it is definitely part of the problem.
For SFMM when every new ride you put in for years is a thrill coaster with a 54" height limit you arent be inviting at all too families with small kids. You arent going to be a family friendly place if alot of the attractions arent suited to kids or scare them due to there intensity. And then call your park the x-treme park that is inly going to attract kids who buy cheap season passes and then run wild in the park.
Luckily SFGMA hasnt been as bad as SFMM in that direction but it also needs to change the ride mix to be more family friendly/or re do the 2 awful kids area's the park has.
Bob O

 
Posts: 945
Joined: January 20th, 2003, 10:28 pm
Location: Milwaukee Wis.

Postby Director_Guy on August 21st, 2006, 4:31 pm
They say they're trying to be more like Disney... why don't they have more rides the whole family can enjoy?
Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the part that isn't thinking, isn't thinking of.
Director_Guy

User avatar
 
Posts: 1694
Joined: October 4th, 2004, 8:51 am
Location: Sherman Oaks, California

Postby RBull4life on August 21st, 2006, 5:21 pm
Ilovthevu' wrote:Magic Mountain wasn't the problem. :x Six Flags is going for bankruptcy pretty soon. We have a complete dummy running the company. On top of it, who's going to want to buy all of them at once. No one is going to want to keep the other parks going except for Magic Mountain.

I imagine amusement business today saying Six Flags Magic Mountain has a 10% increase of attendance from last year going high above Six Flags Great America, Six Flags Great Adventure, Six Flags Over Georgia, and Six Flags Over Texas while the other parks have lost 50% of people due to high prices, and bad ride selection. :lol:

This is Shapiro's next thought. Let's sell SFGAm, SFGAdv, SFOG, and SFOT. I say we keep SFKK, Great Escape, La Ronde, Mexico, SFStL, SFNE, SFFT, and SFA.


Wow, I thought it would take longer.


The fact of the matter is this. Six Flags has NO money. I beleive that Shaprio is realizing just how bad the previous bunch of numb-nuts, meaning Burke & Co put the company in.
If it walks like socialist, quacks like socialist, smells like a socialist, .... it's a socialist. Hope, and change we can believe in.
RBull4life

User avatar
 
Posts: 934
Joined: February 27th, 2004, 12:08 pm
Location: Living in a van down by the river.

Postby rb1 on August 21st, 2006, 6:12 pm
He could sell the parks to anybody yet the company will still be on debt. Its to save the company cut its operating costs and not make it loose more money. So whatever decissions he make for the sake of saving the company and some of its parks is a good move.
rb1

 
Posts: 360
Joined: November 13th, 2005, 8:18 pm
Location: IL

Postby Ilovthevu' on August 21st, 2006, 9:01 pm
Bring GL's rides over here, and let them have ours. You would sure see how ride selection means a whole lot more than you are putting on. Attendance might be the lowest of the chain too as GL is!!!
"I've been staring at the world, waiting. All the trouble and all the pain we're facing. Too much light to be livin' in the dark. Why waste time? We only got one life. Together we can be the CHANGE. So go and let your heart burn bright"
Ilovthevu'

 
Posts: 4398
Images: 0
Joined: June 4th, 2004, 7:54 pm

Postby rct2wizard360 on August 21st, 2006, 9:19 pm
^ Rides aren't the most important thing.

Look, the only reason you would need big name rides, is to bring in people from outside of your general area.

Take a look at SFStl. Their main goal isn't get people from, let's say, Michigan to go to their park. They just want to keep the population around them happy.

SFMM was trying to be a BIG name park, but it never really made it to the heart of the General Public.
rct2wizard360

User avatar
 
Posts: 2996
Joined: December 4th, 2003, 11:23 pm
Location: Mason, Ohio

Postby Trailblazer Tony on August 21st, 2006, 9:38 pm
Okay, here comes the rant!

If he feels the need to sell 6 parks, then that's fine, and selling them as a group is a VERY good idea because it significantly raises the chances that the parks will all stay in existance and not bite the dust like Six Flags Astroworld. Out of all the parks to sell, Six Flags Magic Mountain is quite possibly the best bet because it is the exact opposite of what Shapiro wants with the parks! So i'm definitely a fan of this idea, to a certain extent.

Now, if any of these parks gets demolished, that is where i start to get angry. In the event that it was our homepark that was being demolished, can you even begin to imagine that? I would never be able to take my kids on their first roller coasters at Great America and i would never be able to take a day off and have fun at the park again. It would be a large hole in the hearts of the thousands who travel to Great America every year. Just because the park "isn't good" in terms of other parks, it still has a place in a lot of people's lives and i think it would be inconsiderate and disgraceful if any one of these six parks end up scrapped by this decision.

It will also eventually reach a point where you run out of parks to sell and they will still have money issues because there are certain aspects of his plan that aren't logical. As much as you trashed the previous operators, they still did some things right. They understood that people are in love with amusement parks and although they weren't on the greatest economic grounds, they still provided rather cheap prices for those who may not have the largest income, ample numbers of parks so people in all areas can enjoy them, and variety in their target audience which allowed people of all ages and personalities to have at least some things they loved at each park. His plan now is only targeting a set group, out of that group, only those with a steady income can enjoy and even then, with them selling parks left and right, now even that small group of people might not be included if their local park was on the cutting block. Once Shapiro realizes these three aspects and starts applying them to his own economic plans, the parks will see better days, but until then, things are only gonna get worse!
RIP: Trailblazer and Deja Vu...heck, even Alien Encounter :(

Fangs Up Cobra Style!!!

Chitown's finest resident here!!!!!
Trailblazer Tony

User avatar
 
Posts: 3022
Joined: August 29th, 2005, 2:50 pm
Location: you should know....

Postby Ilovthevu' on August 21st, 2006, 10:23 pm
I think the old managment was just as bad as the new management is. If a park doesn't make enough money, what can you do?? I would just love to see how many people have come to these parks last year except Magic Mountain because I know. If the company is going to survive, they have to do something. In my opinion, there are a lot more parks that are worse than Magic Mountain.

When they figure in attendance, they don't figure in Hurricane Harbor. It's a separate admission. In essence, when it's in the 25 most attended parks, they don't count how many people get in next door. When our Hurricane Harbor opened, we had a 24% increase. Imagine how many more people go to that park a year because of the waterpark that they don't count even though it's on the same property. Six Flags Great Adventure is the same way.
"I've been staring at the world, waiting. All the trouble and all the pain we're facing. Too much light to be livin' in the dark. Why waste time? We only got one life. Together we can be the CHANGE. So go and let your heart burn bright"
Ilovthevu'

 
Posts: 4398
Images: 0
Joined: June 4th, 2004, 7:54 pm

Postby FRD714 on August 21st, 2006, 10:35 pm
SFGAm being sold and demolished would be sad. Where else is there to go really thats close.

SFMM on the other hand being demolished isnt that bad becuase California has so many great theme parks you can visit.
Frank
FRD714

User avatar
 
Posts: 3547
Joined: October 26th, 2005, 4:46 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby Jackluver18 on August 21st, 2006, 10:50 pm
FRD714 wrote:SFGAm being sold and demolished would be sad. Where else is there to go really thats close.

SFMM on the other hand being demolished isnt that bad becuase California has so many great theme parks you can visit.



SFGAm is non touchable so they can't demolish it
SF trips 09 = 15
SF trips 10= 11
SF trips 11 =7
Jackluver18

User avatar
 
Posts: 2776
Joined: October 16th, 2005, 12:54 am
Location: Moved from X-Flight's station to Bull.

Postby FRD714 on August 21st, 2006, 11:07 pm
I know, its a no touch park.
Frank
FRD714

User avatar
 
Posts: 3547
Joined: October 26th, 2005, 4:46 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby RBull4life on August 22nd, 2006, 6:49 am
Alot of people thought Riverview would never go anywhere, and then, poof, the next year it was gone, razed into an empty lot. Santa's Village, a place that I once held dear to my heart when I was a kid, now looks like it is gone. Kiddielands future is up in the air. Great America looks like it could be the last surviving amusement park in Illinois.
If I should ever hear the news that Great America would be closing its doors for good, I would go to a country bar, listen to some Willie Nelson, and cry in my beer.

The thing about Magic Mountain is that it sounds kind of like the before mentioned Riverview. Sure Riverview was drawing in the crowds, and making money, but the land at which the park sat on was worth more than the park itself. Plus, add on the maintenece costs on its aging rides, the price of insurance on the park going up, installing a ride (I can't remember the name, but it was like the Delta Flyer) that was losing money, the owners knew that it wouldn't be long, so they opted to sell the land, and pocket some extra cash.

No need to worry, I think Shaprio looks at Great America as the role model as to what the rest of the parks in the chain should be, so under Shaprio's rein, Great America is untouchable.
If it walks like socialist, quacks like socialist, smells like a socialist, .... it's a socialist. Hope, and change we can believe in.
RBull4life

User avatar
 
Posts: 934
Joined: February 27th, 2004, 12:08 pm
Location: Living in a van down by the river.

Postby CoasterDude12-2 on August 22nd, 2006, 9:20 am
I'm glad that these are up for sale. But with the whole package deal thing, it doesn't look like SFMM will be getting the wrecking ball..o well. :(
CoasterDude12-2

User avatar
 
Posts: 3027
Images: 10
Joined: November 28th, 2004, 7:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby rct2wizard360 on August 22nd, 2006, 10:58 am
So you WANT SFMM to get the wrecking ball?

In my opinion...I don't think SFMM will be plowed.
In fact, I don't even think they will be able to sell it.
rct2wizard360

User avatar
 
Posts: 2996
Joined: December 4th, 2003, 11:23 pm
Location: Mason, Ohio

Postby Chitown on August 22nd, 2006, 3:10 pm
Even if SFGAm were on the selling block, Dick Kinzel already made it clear in a conversation with Jeff Putz over at Coasterbuzz that he would buy this park in a heartbeat. However, as long as Six Flags as a company exists, they won't unload this park.

SFGAm will always be an amusement park.

At least Shapiro made it clear he wants to unload these parks as a package to avoid potential buyers from bulldozing the parks. Even as a business man, he seems to have a heart when it comes to this.

To bad Cedar Fair purchased the Paramount parks, if that didn't take place, you might be seeing CF picking up 6 SF parks right now. Oh well.
I finally retired the Sarah Palin signature because she is now 100% irrelevant.
Chitown

User avatar
 
Posts: 2563
Joined: December 31st, 2002, 12:27 am
Location: Gotham City

Postby mrsarcastic on August 22nd, 2006, 3:59 pm
FRD714 wrote:SFGAm being sold and demolished would be sad. Where else is there to go really thats close.

SFMM on the other hand being demolished isnt that bad becuase California has so many great theme parks you can visit.


Are you kiding!? The other parks in California don't even begin to compare to the greatness that is SFMM. Universal sucks... Knotts is OKAY... Disney isn't the same at all - so there is no comparison there.

Many of the coasters at SFMM are ahead of their time and much more ground-breaking than anything else you would find in Cali... or the entire WEST. SFMM is a coaster destination for the whole west coast... not just for people who live in the Cali area. I don't think it will be demolished... but it's VERY shocking to read others saying it wouldn't matter if it were.
mrsarcastic

 
Posts: 3
Joined: August 22nd, 2006, 3:54 pm

Postby CoasterDude12-2 on August 22nd, 2006, 5:21 pm
rct2wizard360 wrote:So you WANT SFMM to get the wrecking ball?

In my opinion...I don't think SFMM will be plowed.
In fact, I don't even think they will be able to sell it.




Yes I want SFMM to be plowed. I've been there and I've never seen such a horrible park. I've only ridden 10 coasters there because of operations and lines. Yes, I don't think it's going to be plowed but if it was, I'd want to operate the wrecking ball. But I doubt SF will not be able to sell it.
CoasterDude12-2

User avatar
 
Posts: 3027
Images: 10
Joined: November 28th, 2004, 7:02 pm
Location: Chicago

Next

Return to General Coaster Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Privacy Policy About Us Copyright Disclaimer E-Mail SFGAmWorld
COPYRIGHT - SFGAmWorld.com
All content and images on this site are Copyright 2001 - SFGAmWorld.com and may not be used without permission.
This is NOT the official site of Six Flags Great America, SFGAmWorld.com is not affilated or endorsed by Six Flags Great America.
SFGAmWorld.com does not make any guarantee on the accuracy of the information on this website and cannot be held responsible by the use of this information.
SIX FLAGS and all related indicia are trademarks of Six Flags Theme Parks Inc. ®, TM and © . The official Six Flags site can be found at SixFlags.com
BATMAN, SUPERMAN and all related characters and elements are trademarks of © DC Comics.
LOONEY TUNES and all related characters and elements are trademarks of and © Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.©
The Wiggles Pty Ltd. SCOOBY-DOO and all related characters and elements are trademarks of and © Hanna-Barbera.