Tiburon503

I wish George Lucas would give the original theatrical Star Wars negatives to charity. I want someone to release a HD print of the non "special edition" cuts of the original trilogy. Perhaps Disney will release them on Blu-Ray to pay for the acquisition. Heck, they might generate the $4 billion back on that initiative alone. Kudos to Bob Iger. He got the golden goose cheap! As for "Howard the Duck"? No...just no.

With all due respect to Universal Orlando's amazing production team, the bathroom at my local gas station is far more scary.

If only they could just bring back the "World of Motion".

I'd like to know how Disney is handling data encryption with their RFID initiative. It will be interesting to watch RFID tags be cloned and tickets counterfeited without having to present physical media for entry. Granted, Disney has done analysis of such scenarios. My fear is with the near ubiquitous nature of today's smartphones and their advancing processor power; RFID cloning may be simplified. How will Disney really be able to tell who's using the ticket? Are cameras recording faces triggered by the RFID tag? I know I may sound crazy here (and I'm scant with details), but this could happen. Crackers love a challenge, and Disney is looking to throw down the gauntlet.

Has Six Flags America actually proven they can draw big crowds? If the park was drawing large crowds/revenues, or was more profitable; I would imagine Six Flags would have continued large investments with this property. Six Flags America suffers from several factors I'd imagine. It's in a highly competitive market with Kings Dominion, Busch Gardens, and even Great Adventure within a 2-4 hour driving distance. All of those parks either draw greater, or receive major investments annually. Labor costs are another factor, as well as the culture of low morale amongst the "rank and file" which is seemingly unbreakable. Investors don't want to see major investments in properties that aren't going to provide an immediate and exponential return on investment. For most, a $15M attraction at a park like Great Adventure; is a safer bet than even at $10-$12M project at a small park. With proper management, and a near complete re-imagination; Six Flags America could be transformed into a legitimate competitor. This would require huge capital and investors with iron stomachs willing "to go long". Hard to accomplish in any corporate environment outside of Silicon Valley. I think you mean Frontier City in Oklahoma. Burke & Story's company is actually leasing the park from CNL Lifestyle Properties. Personally I hope Burke can build his way back up to reacquiring Six Flags outright. Hopefully they're a little wiser from his previous stewardship and focus on customer service as strongly as attractions.

I actually remember shareholders grumbling over Six Flags's investment in the smaller parks. Burke was accused of neglecting the big parks, specifically Great Adventure which provided the impetus to approve "Nitro" and "Superman Ultimate Flight". It's easy to get upset at Great Adventure, Great America, and Magic Mountain taking the lion's share of CapEx. These parks bring in 2/3 of all Six Flags's income however, with Great America being the most profitable at the time. While Six Flags doesn't break out individual park figures, analysts speculated how "flagging" impacted overall performance, and wanted Six Flags to abandon their vision. It's not feasible to expand each park into a property larger than its market will bare. For whatever reason, Six Flags America can't break through the ceiling of being ran as anything but a small park. I don't think that property will ever grow unless the Koch Family or Ed Hart runs the place. Six Flags invested big time in the former Adventure World initially. The park just didn't perform well enough to warrant further major investments.

One would have to imagine Cedar Fair is closely following Texas Giant's progress.

This photo made me nostalgic for the 1964 New York World's Fair Von Roll Gondolas once used at Six Flags Great Adventure. Sad to see them in such bad shape.

Six Flags Worlds of Adventure *might* have been profitable (or on the precipice thereof). The entire theme park industry was still feeling the "9/11" effects in 2004 however. Six Flags was looking to divest assets to cover shortfalls, and the former Ohio complex commanded what they felt was a premium price. Worlds of Adventure was a grand vision. Had Six Flags not faced 3 years of declining revenue, a credit crisis (banks stopped lending after "9/11" too), and not been in a market with 2 major competitors; Worlds of Adventure might have remained with the company. Magic Mountain is quite profitable (One of the company's top performing parks no less!), and Six Flags tried and failed to dump it too (Despite erroneous reporting at the time, Six Flags does own the property under the Valencia park according to their 2005 annual report.). Whatever your opinion of the Six Flags Stewardship, you must admit they did a better job than Cedar Fair. The animal exhibits made the guest experience unique for Worlds of Adventure. Cedar Fair demanded Six Flags remove them as part of their deal. To their own admittance, Cedar Fair completely underestimated the impact the animal exhibits contributed. Attendance declined as a result, and grew worse as rides were removed without replacement. The acquisition of Kings Island (and the Paramount Parks) was in my opinion the death knell for the Aurora park. To remain competitive with the two larger and established parks, Geagua Lake was going to require major capital. In that market, it made little sense to support 3 major parks. It's financially prudent to market Kings Island and Cedar Fair over pumping more money into Geagua Lake on paper. Don't forget, the company decided to build Wildwater Kingdom on the wrong side of the lake abandoning the barely 5 year old Hurricane Harbor in the process (STUPID). Why Cedar Fair was decried, had to due with their refusal to sell the complex. Demolishing it seemed a matter of ego. If the forecasting proved Geagua Lake couldn't compete with the two sister parks, why not sell it? It's better for the company and its shareholders to offload the property, versus incurring demolition costs and asset divestures for pennies on the dollar. Of course, if someone made a go of it profitably; it could make the Cedar Fair Executive Team look incompetent. Realistically, the debt from acquiring the Paramount Parks had to contribute too.

"The Great American Scream Machine" literally saved Six Flags Great Adventure in the late 1980s. The beleaguered park faced several deaths in that period and was on the cusp of losing its food license. Had that happened, Six Flags was going to shut the park down. "Shockwave", originally scheduled for Great Adventure went to Gurnee, Ill. as a part of this. Credit Ray Williams and his brilliant stewardship for saving the park and returning a safe atmosphere to it. Ray faced many battles with Great Adventure, and managed to execute his plan quite well. He also got corporate to bring the Arrow Megalooper originally intended for his park back on the table. Albeit in a slightly modified clone. "The Great American Scream" drew flies to honey and put the place back on the map. Unfortunately Mr. Williams left as Time Warner took ownership, but not before securing Great Adventure a clone of a successful prototype; "Batman The Ride". "The Great American Scream Machine" is like Raquel Welch. Some 21 years later, she's as gorgeous as ever. I enjoyed seeing her along the Great Adventure skyline, especially inside "The Golden Kingdom" and "Plaza de Carnivale". Sadly, up close she rode like the drunken, haggard looking Pamela Anderson of today. In 1989, ride ops would constantly check to make sure all earrings were removed. That ride boxed your head like Mike Tyson in his prime. It actually got a little better over time, but was completely unrideable in the back seat on my last 2008 visit. "The Great American Scream Machine" is easily my least favorite steel coaster in the park (I do *LOVE* it's first drop however). The B&Ms outclass the classic beauty, and don't leave me feeling like I've contracted something. It deserves a big sendoff, but in the end it should go. "Chang" will be welcomed certainly, but it seems superfluous in the New Jersey park. I think that area would be a better stage for expanding "The Golden Kingdom" with a "Jungala" modeled exhibit ala Busch Gardens Tampa. Lord knows, Great Adventure also needs flats more than another (albeit good) coaster. I hope, in an effort to secure a permanent position for himself; Al Weber doesn't become a marriage of Mark Shapiro's and Kieran Burke's worst qualities. But I digress.

If Six Flags owned "Chang", I'd doubt they would request permission from the Kentucky State Fair to remove the ride. They sure as heck wouldn't promise a major waterpark expansion in return! Even if the Six Flags lease agreement was similar to the City of Montreal's for La Ronde (where annual park improvements are a precept in the lease agreement), the termination of the lease wouldn't allow them to remove "Chang". They would have needed the express permission of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. If the Kentucky State Fair truly pursues this matter, this will be an interesting case. Six Flags could lose big, and they no longer have the bankruptcy court to protect them.

If Kentucky Kingdom was my business, I would not hesitate to sue Six Flags for the return of "Chang". It was a popular ride and it was removed under false pretenses. At the very least, I'd want the full value for the ride, and its assembly costs before moving on. Regarding Vekoma Coasters, I've yet to meet a design of theirs I like. You can keep them, as I wouldn't trust them to build a park bench.

Astroworld's closure and sale was announced at the time of RedZone's takeover proposal. Six Flags was "exploring strategic options", and Burke put the company up for sale. Astroworld sat upon extremely valuable real-estate (this was mid-2005, before the "bubble" bursted), and issues with parking with the neighboring Reliant Park made the property an easy target. Burke hoped a "quick flip" would help shore up the company's cash position, stave off a sale, and save his job. It was a stupid, impulsive move that was doomed to fail (RedZone sold the property for a song). The situation Six Flags faced with Red Zone in 2005 is quite analogous to Chrysler in 1997 (Iacocca and Kirk Kerkorian's attempted takeover ultimately forced the sale to Diamler). Daniel Snyder initially opposed the sale of Astroworld, but did nothing to stop it. Injunctions could have been sought considering the state of the company at the time. None were however, and the rest is history. Regarding the topic, I believe Six Flags and the Kentucky State Fair will settle the matter out of court. Considering "Chang" existed prior to Six Flags assuming the Kentucky Kingdom lease; I believe a compelling case can be made that Six Flags does not own the ride. Approval to remove "Chang" was contingent upon Six Flags investing in a water park expansion. They defaulted on that obligation. Despite the bankruptcy court canceling the lease, Six Flags lacks the explicit right to remove attractions from the property without approval of the landlord or court. Six Flags may have owned a majority of the land "Chang" existed on, but Kentucky State Fair remains the ultimate trustee of the park and ride. Ultimately, I think Six Flags will surrender all properties abutting Kentucly Kingdom (as well as some cash) to settle the matter. Returning "Chang" and being forced to pay punitive damages and reassembly costs (among legal fees and finding a new attraction for Great America), seem cost prohibitive. Six Flags is done with Louisville, so shedding the unwanted land and a small cash payment seem like a no-brainer to me.

Any original owner wishes they had kept their park before Six Flags bought it. Look at what happened to Six Flags New Orleans. The previous Six Flags management with Dan Snyder and Mark Shapiro fought tooth to nail to get out of their land lease deal, and the judge let them have their way. That place has the saddest history. If Dan Snyder had of never got the company, Six Flags New Orleans would have been rebuilt and we would still own the other three parks that Six Flags sold back in 2006. So yes, there are a lot of owners that wish they had never had anything to do with Six Flags. Mr. Ed will probably end up putting his hardest effort in reviving the place. At least now the park has someone with theme park experience, to manage it. Considering all the properties divested prior to the RedZone takeover; I seriously doubt Kieren Burke would have "saved" Six Flags New Orleans. The obvious reasons have been stated many times. There's simply too much damage, and a terribly small clientele base post "Katrina". Had RedZone never attempted a hostile takeover of Six Flags, I *do* believe Astroworld would still be in operation. The closure of Astroworld has everything to do with the takeover.

I thought the thread overall supported and lauded Theme Park Review's venture into the HD Blu-Ray space. The additional, associated production costs seem daunting; making this "labor of love" all the more more commendable. Unfortunately, my mention of a camera seemingly sullied this thread. I can understand the desire for HD content delivered via means other than Blu-Ray, but the cost must be outrageous. TPR might be able to overnight a disk via courier overnight cheaper. I love all things HDTV, and would leave any debate over format superiority to those at AVSForum.

I was addressing "Guy T. Koepp" initially regarding 1080p. When he mentioned it was shot in "1080p, which makes it 2 times better than 1080i.", I was interested in the camera used. It really had little do with my knowledge of them. The idea of HD coaster footage is exciting, and sparked my interest as a coaster fan and HD production enthusiast. Theme Park Review deserves kudos for producing such a product.

Blu-Rays are all output at 1080p resolution. The footage looks FANTASTIC. If that's not good enough for you, don't buy the Blu-Ray. I highly doubt your average person is going to be able to tell the difference anyway. Watch the samples on YouTube. The proof is in the pudding. --Robb Robb, that wasn't meant to be a criticism of any sort. Please don't take it that way. I was just stating that the footage would be 1080i technically if shot with a Sony FX-1 camera. I'm certain the footage looks great nonetheless, especially with the superior bit-rates unavailable with YouTube clips.

I thought Robb's camera was a Sony FX-1 (or variant thereof), which shoots 1080i. It at least resembled that model in the "Terminator Salvation: The Ride" trip reports I saw here.

Everything is better in HD! It's even better in 1080i! If my Sony KDL-46W4100 wasn't mounted on my wall, I'd hug it. Pathetic? Yes, but still true.

What resources? The company was so far in doubt it was beyond help. The existing doubt coupled with an economic downturn in the economy killed any chance of a turnaround. That's the whole point of the restructuring, to start over with minimal less debt AND TO NOT BUILD THE DEBT BACK UP AGAIN WITH HIGH PRICED INSTALLATIONS! Larrygator, with all due respect, I could make the case for Premier Parks based on that same premise. Debt is not an issue if being managed well and in some cases can be an asset! Debt becomes an issue when it encumbers you from securing further lines of credit (which Six Flags wasn't facing), being able to make interest payments (again, Six Flags was fine there under Burke), or not being able to repay guaranteed notes or dividends (bazinga!) The effects of the post "9/11" downturn posed far greater impacts to the entire theme park industry. Attendance fell sharply due to unprecedented, unforeseen atrocities committed on U.S. soil. Credit markets dried up after "9/11" also, and the risky model PKS constructed for success fell like a house of cards. Had "9/11" not occurred, PKS would have returned to profitability soon if it could simply maintain 1998 or 1999 figures (I don't recall 2000, but I believe they were solid to flat). As it was, the "flagging" projects were largely completed and represented the actual drain on the bottom line. Removing the cost of "flagging" Six Flags would have been profitable in 1998 and 1999 as I recall. What drove Six Flags to bankruptcy had everything do do with ignoring dividend payments and conversion of "PIERS" (Preferred Income Equity Redeemable Securities). "PIERS" is the biggest reason Six Flags filed for bankruptcy. They simply could not afford to convert them, nor was the company willing to make the required quarterly dividends. That squarely is Mark Shapiro's fault. Six Flags could not utilize existing lines of credit under current terms to repay "PIERS". August 2009 represented the timeframe where the conversion of "PIERS" would have converted automatically, and guaranteed holders $25/share. Considering "PIERS" ~ << $1, that would represent some windfall to an investor willing to put faith in an ability to convert. We need to let the "everything is Premier Parks fault" mentality die.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court effectively removed Daniel Snyder. The approved bankruptcy plan made Mr. Snyder ineligible for re-election to the Board of Directors without the consent of the junior bondholders. Why Mr. Shapiro was allowed to remain as CEO is something the judge would need to answer. The court (i.e. judge) has the ultimate authority, at its sole discretion, to appoint or remove directors. I don't believe the court testimony will state the reason either (but without access to read them, I have no idea). I do know Resilient Capital Management wanted ALL of the Six Flags directors fired, as well as an investigation into the Dick Clark Productions acquisition (http://tinyurl.com/25urgma) By the way, Mr. Shapiro has performed terribly as CEO since his installation, and has not shown a single indication of a financial turnaround. As I stated before, "Free Cashflow Positive" is a metric trumpeted to investors who have no idea what earnings are. It's B.S., because it's not linked to profitability. Truly, it's nothing more than a form of "arbitrage" (see "Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room"). I sure as heck wouldn't risk my money on "free cashflow positive". Remember, bondholders swapped debt for equity as a last resort. Mark Shapiro's performance almost sent Six Flags into an automatic "Chapter 7" liquidation, and bondholders took the debt for equity swap as it was the better deal in this soft real-estate market. In four years (financially), Mark did nothing to fix the bottom line, and his few attempts (divestures, in-park advertising) were dismal failures. Let's not forget the SIZEABLE loses Mark Shapiro was hiding that became public during the bankruptcy proceedings either. Upon receivership, the newly elected Board of Directors (approved by the bondholders) decided Mr. Shapiro didn't qualify to move the company forward. Six Flags has stated a desire to reenlist on the NYSE in the short term, and a change of CEO was imperative to appeal to investors. While Mr. Shapiro is treated as a god here by many at TPR; investors don't take kindly to people who eviscerate shareholder value. Again, the patient died on his watch, his 4 YEAR watch. That's the bottom line and that's how the bondholders see it. That's how potential new investors will see it. If Six Flags hopes to post a successful IPO, regime change was necessary. I'll stop short of reigniting the Mark Shapiro flame war. He's gone and we both know our opinions. According to Reuters, Six Flags has applied to list new shares on the NYSE http://tinyurl.com/298ov6x "The company exits bankruptcy as Six Flags Entertainment Corp and under the control of hedge funds such as Stark Investments, Pentwater Capital Management and Bay Harbour Management. The funds owned its bonds and invested $725 million to recapitalize the company." "The company's pre-bankruptcy shares were wiped out under the reorganization, and Six Flags has applied to list newly issued shares on the New York Stock Exchange." The original press release didn't give Mark Shapiro any well wishings either: http://tinyurl.com/2fyg7cr "The Company also today announced Mark Shapiro, the Company’s former President and Chief Executive Officer and a member of the Board of Directors, is no longer with the Company." They wouldn't even say he resigned. Ouch! Sounds like a firing to me. This is how it's done in upper management firings.

It's not strange at all if you look at the financial end of Mark Shapiro's tenure. He brought the company to bankruptcy and almost forced a liquidation. His revenue initiatives failed. Mark Shapiro presented no plan to turn around this troubled asset, nor has he accomplished such a feat in any sector prior to. Circumstances regardless, the patient died on his watch. That's the bottom line and that's how the bondholders see it. Mark Shapiro may have been the face of Six Flags to the enthusiast crowd, but I seriously doubt anyone in the G.P. knew him like they did Michael Eisner in his heyday or Steve Jobs. To reiterate:

Again, if it were an "F U Guys, I'm Audi 5000!", Mr. Shapiro would not have waited two weeks post bankruptcy to do this. It would have been immediately upon emergence where his $3M purported bonus would have kicked in. Why would you leave a company, when it's finally in a decent position to make moves (as he stated in his post bankruptcy Facebook message)? Again, in the corporate world, it's the way things are done. Same with Michael Eisner. Same with Gil Amelio when he "left" (fired from) Apple. It's obviously Mark spent his final two weeks at Six Flags trying to save his job. He did not want to lose it or quit. Mark knew Daniel Snyder was done weeks ago. If he left over Mr. Snyder's departure, he would have followed Six Flags Board Member and RedZone partner Dwight C. Schar (who departed immediately upon emergence).

Let's see, he left the company IMMEDIATELY without so much as a quote in the outgoing press release. Had he left on his terms, it would not be 2 weeks after emerging from the bankruptcy. Mr. Shapiro in his personal outgoing email expressed a sadness about leaving; while disclosing an "amicable" decision to depart with the Board of Directors. Amicable is corporate parlance for "firing". Do you think the decision would be "amicable" if Steve Jobs decided to leave Apple? I guarantee his outgoing press release would be heaping praise as well as the board's lament in his departure.

Had Red Zone presented their takeover case on that premise; Kieren Burke and Premier Parks would have remained in control. It would have been easier for the board to direct Mr. Burke and the company to shore up the company's in-park experience; over occurring the painful cost of a hostile takeover. Mark Shapiro's "top down" management proved no better than Kieren Burke's "bottom up" strategy in the end. The company went bankrupt. As a person who frequented Great Adventure in the late 1980's; I can state for the record Premier Parks never ran a park as badly as Wesray Capital did. Great Adventure truly was at its worst. The park was so dirty, it almost lost its food license. Had that occurred, it would have closed. That's why "Shockwave" went to Six Flags Great America. Ray Williams saved Great Adventure.