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

Well, here we go. Kentucky sues Six Flags to keep rides.

Talk about anything that has to do with the amusement park industry here.
Postby Chitown on February 22nd, 2010, 8:09 pm
Let the games begin.

I feel SF will win this based on the Lassiter accident and the fact they were paying taxes on these rides.

Kentucky Kingdom rides
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 onyxhotel08 on February 22nd, 2010, 8:16 pm
April 14th? pre trial? No way the park will reopen this summer. They will still be fighting over the rides come the summer.
13 Years with SFGAm World!
onyxhotel08

User avatar
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: March 6th, 2008, 2:59 pm

Postby david on February 22nd, 2010, 8:17 pm
A suit like this will end relatively shortly, and SF could get some flats out to parks by mid-spring.
Image
Hah.
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby Cole on February 22nd, 2010, 8:56 pm
^^^(Kentucky) You want rides, but we want money.
Top 5: 1) El Toro. 2) Maverick. 3) Millenium Force. 4) Diamondback. 5) X2.
Coaster Count: 167 (41 Wood, 125 Steel)
@Coaster_Cole on Twitter
Cole

 
Posts: 1224
Joined: January 7th, 2010, 4:00 pm
Location: Milwaukee

Postby david on February 22nd, 2010, 9:04 pm
BUT
Image
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby onyxhotel08 on February 22nd, 2010, 10:39 pm
I hope so. There is not that much good stuff left (see u soon Chang)so it is not THAT big of a deal.
13 Years with SFGAm World!
onyxhotel08

User avatar
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: March 6th, 2008, 2:59 pm

Postby david on February 22nd, 2010, 11:59 pm
So you don't want Six Flags to win? I wouldn't mind a new flat. Really, as much as I dislike T2, I wouldn't mind it either. Giving that it receives a new painting and such.
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby monsterfan99 on February 23rd, 2010, 10:08 am
^Paint will not stop the pain the ride causes.
monsterfan99

User avatar
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: September 23rd, 2008, 4:48 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby w00dland on February 23rd, 2010, 3:12 pm
I'll reiterate what I said previously, if the state wins this suit I lose trust in the judicial system.

If Six Flags PAID for the rides, they own the rides. Doesn't matter where you put them. If you lease land you are able to use it, and when the lease runs up you pack up your stuff and leave, that's how it works.

That's not to say they can take all the rides, because they didn't pay for all of them in the first place...
Top 5 wood-5-Goliath 4-Ravine Flyer II 3-Phoenix 2-Voyage 1-El Toro
Top 5 Steel- 5-Velocicoaster 4- Maverick 3- Fury 325 2-Steel Vengeance 1-X2
Coaster Count: 444
w00dland
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 4630
Joined: January 29th, 2004, 2:36 pm
Location: Winter Haven, FL

Postby Cole on February 23rd, 2010, 4:09 pm
david wrote: Really, as much as I dislike T2, I wouldn't mind it either. Giving that it receives a new painting and such.

I'd rather have Chang, heck even roller-skater.
Top 5: 1) El Toro. 2) Maverick. 3) Millenium Force. 4) Diamondback. 5) X2.
Coaster Count: 167 (41 Wood, 125 Steel)
@Coaster_Cole on Twitter
Cole

 
Posts: 1224
Joined: January 7th, 2010, 4:00 pm
Location: Milwaukee

Postby david on February 23rd, 2010, 5:19 pm
We would never get the Roller Skater, unless SIx Flags has no where else to put it.
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby Cole on February 23rd, 2010, 6:23 pm
Yes ik, it was an point to I dont want T2.. at all.
Top 5: 1) El Toro. 2) Maverick. 3) Millenium Force. 4) Diamondback. 5) X2.
Coaster Count: 167 (41 Wood, 125 Steel)
@Coaster_Cole on Twitter
Cole

 
Posts: 1224
Joined: January 7th, 2010, 4:00 pm
Location: Milwaukee

Postby david on February 23rd, 2010, 7:46 pm
Oh open up! It'll lessen the lines for B:TR. Maybe. They gave la Ronde Astroworld's old SLC, why shouldn't we be able to get T2?
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby Chitown on February 23rd, 2010, 7:56 pm
^Lessen the line for Batman?

As soon as people would ride that piece of crap known as T2 just one time, they will be heading back to Batman.

That's exactly what is going to happen at La Ronde.
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 david on February 23rd, 2010, 8:00 pm
I personally think that the La Ronde SLC is going to be yet another overused name. Goliath, anything of that nature. How are they going to theme that though?
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby onyxhotel08 on February 23rd, 2010, 8:53 pm
When G opened in Texas in what was it 2008 I was like Goliath? Really? That name should be retired.
13 Years with SFGAm World!
onyxhotel08

User avatar
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: March 6th, 2008, 2:59 pm

Postby monsterfan99 on February 24th, 2010, 9:14 am
w00dland wrote:I'll reiterate what I said previously, if the state wins this suit I lose trust in the judicial system.

If Six Flags PAID for the rides, they own the rides. Doesn't matter where you put them. If you lease land you are able to use it, and when the lease runs up you pack up your stuff and leave, that's how it works.

That's not to say they can take all the rides, because they didn't pay for all of them in the first place...

Does Six Flags have the money to return the property to it's original state? With any lease, you must do that if you add something and then remove it. If they remove Chang and do not repair the property, they can be sued for either the ride and/or complete cost of restoring the area before the ride was there.

I am really intrigued to see if the lawsuit over Chang plays out. I tend to agree with the fair board that Six Flags made fake water park plans to get Chang and everything was planned well in advance.
monsterfan99

User avatar
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: September 23rd, 2008, 4:48 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby onyxhotel08 on February 24th, 2010, 12:51 pm
They presented layouts/some sort of plans for Bonzai Beach. They can't prove a thing. I can see them saying they need to replace Chang with something (especially since Chang was not bought by Six Flags). Didn't though Shapiro make it seem like Chang was the previous Six Flags owners property when he said Chang was what was wrong with the previous management? He didn't know why they put it in SFKK with no theme and the Chang name was a bad one?
13 Years with SFGAm World!
onyxhotel08

User avatar
 
Posts: 2836
Joined: March 6th, 2008, 2:59 pm

Postby david on February 24th, 2010, 4:37 pm
He meant why the previous Six Flags Managment under Burke would put in such a great ride, and give it such a terrible, name that had nothing to do with the park's theme.
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby Chitown on February 24th, 2010, 10:02 pm
^Burke had nothing to do with the installation of Chang.
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 david on February 24th, 2010, 11:40 pm
I know he didn't. But I'm talking naming, theming, all of that. Anything Shapiro won't answer, he pushes off to "the previous management"
david

 
Posts: 1546
Joined: September 27th, 2009, 11:29 am
Location: Northwest Suburbs

Postby monsterfan99 on February 25th, 2010, 9:48 am
^Chang had a theme :?:
monsterfan99

User avatar
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: September 23rd, 2008, 4:48 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby w00dland on February 25th, 2010, 3:45 pm
monsterfan99 wrote:
w00dland wrote:I'll reiterate what I said previously, if the state wins this suit I lose trust in the judicial system.

That's not to say they can take all the rides, because they didn't pay for all of them in the first place...

Does Six Flags have the money to return the property to it's original state? With any lease, you must do that if you add something and then remove it. If they remove Chang and do not repair the property, they can be sued for either the ride and/or complete cost of restoring the area before the ride was there.

I am really intrigued to see if the lawsuit over Chang plays out. I tend to agree with the fair board that Six Flags made fake water park plans to get Chang and everything was planned well in advance.


I'll agree with the fact that Six Flags probably screwed the Fair Board royally. I'll agree that the court could easily rule that Six Flags return the land to the previous standards, because Six Flags could do that.

The fact is Six Flags had the legal right to leave the lease, and nothing is going to force them or their property back into Kentucky. I think there will probably end up being some sort of agreement between the two parties before this reaches court, but Six Flags won't be going back there.
Top 5 wood-5-Goliath 4-Ravine Flyer II 3-Phoenix 2-Voyage 1-El Toro
Top 5 Steel- 5-Velocicoaster 4- Maverick 3- Fury 325 2-Steel Vengeance 1-X2
Coaster Count: 444
w00dland
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 4630
Joined: January 29th, 2004, 2:36 pm
Location: Winter Haven, FL

Postby monsterfan99 on February 25th, 2010, 8:28 pm
^I agree Six Flags is never coming back. What really bothers me is the fact that going bankrupt allows them to leave the lease. Then again, US bankruptcy laws reward people for being stupid and allow people to buy stuff pennies on the dollar, unlike the rest of the world.
monsterfan99

User avatar
 
Posts: 1693
Joined: September 23rd, 2008, 4:48 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby rizash on February 26th, 2010, 7:27 pm
If the lease was like the state says, I pity sf for signing it. First they buy all the rides from previous owners, then they pay property taxes on all rides, then they don't get to keep them. Oh, an the most cost effective income source in the park (parking) you get no revenue from! No-one with a high school education would agree to that! Oh and! Ten days each year sf got no revenue from!

Also bankruptcy laws make perfect sense in this case. It forced negotiations for new lease terms, and Kentucky didn't care enough to keep a park there, so they let them leave. Bankruptcy laws all but force you to shed expenses that have no roi. Sf proposed a no lease for profit share agreement, and the state was too greedy or didn't want to give up guaranteed money for possible money. They care more about cash than jobs or the city.

As far as the water park went, anyone who says they made up bisiness plans to steal chang is oblivious to how business works. It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to draw up a business proposal like that, and they were still locked into the lease (technically they still are until a ruling comes down). If sf had or does get stuck with kk, they at least have business plans, and courts will decide who owns what. Worst case scenario is sf loses ownership of the rides on state land but gets compensated. Plus the state will have to pay the back property tax that sf had paid for them, and sf will still have what is on it's property. Plus bankruptcy courts can force ammendments to leases, so who knows.....

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]
rizash

 
Posts: 137
Joined: February 8th, 2010, 10:10 pm

Next

Return to General Coaster Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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.