denning Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 all depends on the deal, no one should buy hard rock park's corporation and assume all liabilities and contracts. In bankruptcy the Trustee's obligation is to sell the assets so that the creditors can get some of their money back. In this case, the best offer may be a "bulk sale" where you buy all the assets but hopefully none of the debt or other obligations. You would have to set up new agreements though for employees, royalties, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gisco Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Interesting, the article says it's an Asset Purchase Agreement. That usually means that they are purchasing assets only and not the debt. The question now becomes, What did HRP actually own? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
televisedconfession Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^An asset is something that usually is unique to the name of the operation. For example. If you sell a bar called the Old Jute Box, because you had an old famous Jute Box, that would be your personal asset. Everything else that is fixed to the ground becomes the property (the bar, the walls, ect.) So I think in this case, the company just bought all the assets to the park. The rides, the operations, ect. Not their debt. It seems to me, that they'll be working to just keep things going, not paying back. I could be wrong, but that's what I've come to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gisco Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^An asset is something that usually is unique to the name of the operation. For example. If you sell a bar called the Old Jute Box, because you had an old famous Jute Box, that would be your personal asset. Everything else that is fixed to the ground becomes the property (the bar, the walls, ect.) So I think in this case, the company just bought all the assets to the park. The rides, the operations, ect. Not their debt. It seems to me, that they'll be working to just keep things going, not paying back. I could be wrong, but that's what I've come to understand. Your explanation is not very clear. Assets are goods that are worth money is a down and dirty definition. The question remains, What did they own? A lot of the rides could be leased or ownership never transferred due to non-payment. Same for the land the park sits on. We will just have to wait for further details. In the end it is good news if they can pull this off. Bob "I'm an accountant" Hoffman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speeddeamon128 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Lets hope that if the deal is made that the new owners can last more that a season. I'm assuming the name & theme of Hard Rock would change as will the ride names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
televisedconfession Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^^ I was talking about the deal in more of a legal sense. What I was trying to get at was what they were buying. The property and the assets (or fixtures) are two separate things. Because it seems that they're buying off the "real property" including the fixtures. They're purchasing everything that makes the Hard Rock Park unique, aka the park. They're buying the property as it is. I'm assuming then, what the HRP actually owned were those fixtures, like Led Zeppelin: The Ride, Eagles: Life in the Fast Lane, Moody Blues the Trip, ect. Sorry if I was unclear in my explanation, and again, I'm no expert in this field. This is just my understanding from the article. Neil "Still just a student" Curiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I'm assuming the name & theme of Hard Rock would change as will the ride names. That seems like a safe assumption, since Hard Rock itself now regards the park as a black eye on its reputation (to badly mix metaphors). Still, there's no reason new owners couldn't keep a generic musical theme. Hard Rock certainly doesn't hold a copyright on "the 60's" or "Country Music." They'd just have to rename the coasters (assuming they couldn't get permission from the individual artists). /Musicland? Music World? Er...Musicwood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^Maybe they should take a tip from from This Is Spinal Tap and call it "Themeland." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrillerman1 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^^ I like the idea of keeping the music theme and broadening it to be more appealing to all family members ala Opryland. I think to give it some local ties, the name should include Myrtle Beach. I am going to go ahead and call it now...Myrtle Beach Music World. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeemerBoy Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I'm not predicting anything until the identity of the possible new owners is revealed. Until then, I'll consider it Countdown to Failure 2.0. And we all know what the theme song should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupremeClientele Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Interesting, the article says it's an Asset Purchase Agreement. That usually means that they are purchasing assets only and not the debt. The question now becomes, What did HRP actually own? The park, the offices, probably a couple intellectual properties, etc. That the assets went for far less than $400 million is meaningless. That's merely what the market value is now for the assets based on economic conditions. A coaster that costs $10 million dollars to build is by no means worth $10 million dollars on the used rides market. Same goes for everything else. That's why I said earlier that it being doled out piecemeal was hardly a given; There's tons of used coasters and flats on the market right now to choose from in all sizes and shapes due to all the other park failures of the last 24 months. As for them buying up the debt, no one buys up debt in Chapter 7 bankruptcies. That's the whole point of a Chapter 7: Total Liquidation of assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalize Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Glad to hear it may live to see another season. Hopefully they can fix all the broken aspects and be successful. Hopefully this means that Led Zep gets a new theme and no longer has that pre-show. After 2 rides I was thoroughly annoyed at having to wait through that, I like led zeppelin as much as the next guy, but that was a bit much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airtime&Gravity Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 If the buyer is Russian like rumored, then I'm guessing it is Roman Abramovich as well, it just seems like something he would do. This is great news for the park, and hopefully the new owners will run it properly. Even without the Hard Rock name, the park can be a success if properly run. If ticket prices are lowered and the park advertises/ does promotion deals, then it might last. A few new rides might also be needed, but those will have to wait until 2010 at the earliest, but the park can probably add some new shows and festivals for 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedimaster1227 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Does anyone else see this as the next Southern Star Amusement Group-style attempt to revive a dead park? I really am hopeful that the park gets a second chance so I can at least visit once, but I seriously doubt that these investors know what exactly they're getting themselves into. I can't imagine the park ever holding a successful footing in Myrtle Beach... Now if these investors were to announce that the park would be relocated to Orlando, I could see the place having a chance, but not in Myrtle Beach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speeddeamon128 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I'm assuming the name & theme of Hard Rock would change as will the ride names. That seems like a safe assumption, since Hard Rock itself now regards the park as a black eye on its reputation (to badly mix metaphors). Still, there's no reason new owners couldn't keep a generic musical theme. Hard Rock certainly doesn't hold a copyright on "the 60's" or "Country Music." They'd just have to rename the coasters (assuming they couldn't get permission from the individual artists). /Musicland? Music World? Er...Musicwood? I think they should keep it a music theme. Why not Guitarland since they have the giant Hard Rock Guitar & just get rid of the Hard Rock sign on it? Lets just hope they don't team up with the CF marketing to help them come up with names like Flight Deck for Led Zeppelin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electerik Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I can't imagine the park ever holding a successful footing in Myrtle Beach... Now if these investors were to announce that the park would be relocated to Orlando, I could see the place having a chance, but not in Myrtle Beach. Of course Myrtle Beach can sustain a park--just not (apparently) an expensive one. But the Pavillion did okay. So, logically, if a new owner buys the park for much less than it cost to build, they don't need to charge as much and/or have as many visitors to make a profit. /This might actually be the only way for Myrtle Beach to sustain a park that big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarmor Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I brought it... So all the local folks at the beach can proudly say "I can see russia (well a russian own theme park) from my house!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccoasterfan Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I can't imagine the park ever holding a successful footing in Myrtle Beach... Now if these investors were to announce that the park would be relocated to Orlando, I could see the place having a chance, but not in Myrtle Beach. Of course Myrtle Beach can sustain a park--just not (apparently) an expensive one. But the Pavillion did okay. So, logically, if a new owner buys the park for much less than it cost to build, they don't need to charge as much and/or have as many visitors to make a profit. /This might actually be the only way for Myrtle Beach to sustain a park that big. Living down here for the last 3 years I completely agree. I love the park just because it is my home park. But if they dont have low prices then they wont get any business. And when i worked at family kingdom and at some hotels nobody had even heard of the park and I would tell them about it. It needs to be better advertised like on all the signs for hard rock park put where it is. I mean if you are on 95 going north you see hard rock park signs but it never said where it was. So tourists didnt know where to look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holyblakbelt Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Hey, if they keep the music theme, they can make a Dragonforce themed ride with fire! OK, my mind is wandering, but if the guys who bought the park gave the place more potential, this can be an awesome place to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalize Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I can't imagine the park ever holding a successful footing in Myrtle Beach... Now if these investors were to announce that the park would be relocated to Orlando, I could see the place having a chance, but not in Myrtle Beach. Of course Myrtle Beach can sustain a park--just not (apparently) an expensive one. But the Pavillion did okay. So, logically, if a new owner buys the park for much less than it cost to build, they don't need to charge as much and/or have as many visitors to make a profit. /This might actually be the only way for Myrtle Beach to sustain a park that big. There really was no justification in charging as much as they did for admission. If it were around $30, then I could see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterdude5 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 Hopefully this will be give the park a second chance, I always had a feeling somebody would buy it. It's too neat of a package to pass up. Somebody's smart enough to shape it (and its image) up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ETapley0687 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 I hope this works too, but I don't think they should rush to open it this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speeddeamon128 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^ I agree. They should plan a new theme & maybe add a new coaster so the public would get interested in it again. Also they should do a lot more advertising for 2010 & maybe that park will get those big crowds they anticipated last season but didn't get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carolinacaniac Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 If they could do just one thing the same, keep Nights in White Satin as is, I will be thrilled! They could make any other changes they want I suppose that means that this discredits the ideas of a HRP coaster going to SFA or Carowinds -Gary T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speeddeamon128 Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 ^ I was thinking the same thing. No HRP credits for those parks I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now