Six Flags [FUN] Corporate Discussion Thread

[SFA Regular]

I saw somewhere that Six Flags is planning a park in Nigeria. Seems to me that they should get things in order here in North America before attempting to expand overseas again. That's part of what got them into trouble last time.

 

Eric

 

EXACTLY.

 

Why in the world are they thinking about building a park in another country, when the parks here in the U.S. still have a lot of improvement to do. When you come to think of it, it doesn't make the corporate management look good when they create this paradise park in another country, and still can't seem to get anything working for the parks in their home country. They did mention that the over seas parks would be put on hold until they get financially stable again. I thought having (La Ronde) and (Mexico) was enough.

 

Like I said before, I hope bringing back the old school Fright Fest is some where on their list because I can't see this family friendly versions of it lasting much longer. Halloween season is suppose to be scary, so how can you promise the general public a spooky park event when the monsters jobs are to offer a friendly welcome to you? They need to consider changing it the name to their Halloween event.

 

Sense it's not scary anymore, they should call it something like (Hallow Ghouls).

[CoasterGuy06]

Six Flags is NOT building a park in Nigeria...they are licensing their name for the park. It's pretty easy money for them.

[SFA Regular]

Another good idea I had in mind is seeking a new deal with a motion picture company. This way they can start making indoor rides, 4D shows, and possibly backlot tours for particular films. They don't seem to be doing much with WARNER BROS, these days so why not just drop them, and invest money in a motion picture company that you can work with.

 

If you really want to know what I think, I always thought (PARAMOUNTS) would be better. Now this is not an attempt to bring back Paramounts theme parks, but a lot of their films can be transformed into money making attractions. For example, think of the new STARK TREK FILM. That movie would work well for a huge 4D attraction.

[Six Flags Enthuseast]

Better yet, they should now focus on becoming more unique, which means stop building the same coasters. Build more rides that are unique and make the park more signature.

 

And again, I will say that certain parks need a new coaster, not another water slide.

 

Sadly I don't think SF will try to change the 'ununiquity' of their rides, because quite a few of those cookie cutter rides are major reasons SF has the Justic League and Looney Toons sponsorships.

 

I do agree that parks need more thrill rides and not as many new waterslides (except for parks where the waterpark needs expansion and has plenty of room for so). With this recent halt in operaton of SFKK, SF should take action to send those newly avaliable rides to parks that need them.

[SFA Regular]

But they really don't use theS Superman and Batman thing to the fullist. If not, thats all they ever use is just Superman and Batman. Sometimes I wish they had a deal with Marvel, instead of DC Comics. Your thinking a deal with Warner Bros would be monumental but Kings Dominion did more with PARAMOUNTS PICTURES. That's why I mentioned Six Flags dropping Warner and signing a deal with PARAMOUNTS.

 

Themes like the Stark Trek, Adam's Family, and of course OUTER LIMITS could be used to make new attractions. Just go on a wikipedia and look at their movie list. I would rather have themed attractions for their films rather than dragging Warner along and not getting much from them.

[Jew]

The company isn't magically fixed now just because they cleared out 1/2 their debt. Relax.

[themeparkman25]

Deleted by author

Edited January 20, 2011 by themeparkman25

[AnEscapeArtist]

^^Yeah, in the scope of things this event is rather insignificant. Yeah sure, on paper half the debt is gone, and its probably good to get the word out regarding the company image especially with all the bad press this financial stuff got in the past. But the company has a LONG way to go before everything is as it should be, before things like long-term park improvements (ones people will physically see) will come to fruition.

 

In fact, who's to say that will ever actually happen? Gonna have to hope for the best, and wait and see.

[Jew]

^^That $725 mil isn't for options. It's a done deal. As of today, those hedge funds already own $725 mil worth of stock in the new company. I'm sure news will be trickling out for the next few weeks about the exact ownership structure (I'm guessing that secured bond/debt/preferred stock holders/etc. are also getting a piece of the new company as well) once they get closer to re-listing the stock on the NYSE.

Edited May 4, 2010 by Jew

[themeparkman25]

Deleted by author

Edited January 20, 2011 by themeparkman25

[CardCraze]

But they really don't use theS Superman and Batman thing to the fullist. If not, thats all they ever use is just Superman and Batman. Sometimes I wish they had a deal with Marvel, instead of DC Comics. Your thinking a deal with Warner Bros would be monumental but Kings Dominion did more with PARAMOUNTS PICTURES. That's why I mentioned Six Flags dropping Warner and signing a deal with PARAMOUNTS.

 

Themes like the Stark Trek, Adam's Family, and of course OUTER LIMITS could be used to make new attractions. Just go on a wikipedia and look at their movie list. I would rather have themed attractions for their films rather than dragging Warner along and not getting much from them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Universal already have a deal with Marvel for their parks?

 

Also, the Looney Tunes theme works much better than something like "The Outer Limits" or "The Adams Family" ever would.

 

Finally, as was said before, just because they cleared half of their debt, doesn't mean they are in any position to go signing major deals with movie stuidos, and such.

[netdvn]

And I beg to differ...

 

And finally someone agrees with me. This is the best time for them to start improving things. Better yet, they should now focus on becoming more unique, which means stop building the same coasters. Build more rides that are unique and make the park more signature. Improve on Fright Fest and over all entertainment that is offered inside the park. I hope this did not change all the additions that the parks have been promised for 2011. And again, I will say that certain parks need a new coaster, not another water slide.

SF is already stepping in the right direction. The staff is friendlier, the parks are cleaner, and the rides are being run better than ever. SF has proven that they actually care about their older rides and attractions (Monster Plantation is a perfect example) and they're actually focusing more on theming, quality rides, and creating a great family experience over building the latest B&M/Intamin which was the reason why SF is in an insane amount of debt in the first place. While the changes are slow, they're happening at other Six Flags parks. On top of that, the SF parks have never been truly unique other than the themed lands and some of the rides they provided. SFOT, SFOG, and SFOMA were built with fairly similar rides (parachute drop, log flume, large wooden coaster, Arrow mine train, Schwarzkopf looper) and have a similar theme (six states). In fact I can't think of any corporate theme park chain that isn't completely 100% unique.

 

Another good idea I had in mind is seeking a new deal with a motion picture company. This way they can start making indoor rides, 4D shows, and possibly backlot tours for particular films. They don't seem to be doing much with WARNER BROS, these days so why not just drop them, and invest money in a motion picture company that you cacn work with.

Bizarro??? Dark Knight??? SF is already making deals to use other movie/TV franchises (Terminator, Thomas, Wiggles) and I get the feeling that those aren't gonna be the last ones.

 

If you really want to know what I think, I always thought (PARAMOUNTS) would be better. Now this is not an attempt to bring back Paramounts theme parks, but a lot of their films can be transformed into money making attractions. For example, think of the new STARK TREK FILM. That movie would work well for a huge 4D attraction

I don't see this happening anytime soon.

 

I do agree that parks need more thrill rides and not as many new waterslides (except for parks where the waterpark needs expansion and has plenty of room for so). With this recent halt in operaton of SFKK, SF should take action to send those newly avaliable rides to parks that need them.

SIX FLAGS IS NOT ATTRACTING THRILLSEEKERS, THEY'RE ATTRACTING FAMILIES!!!!!! Now that I've got that out of the way, Six Flags has tried attracting thrillseekers for 20 years and it only got them into debt. SF has seen the success of other family-style theme parks like Magic Kingdom and Dollywood and now they're trying to attract that audience that they abandoned in the late 80s-early 90s. Waterslides are a perfect family-style attraction that will help bring the parks the revenue they need.

 

The SF parks do not need new huge coasters or thrill rides. While a new coaster would be nice, that's not the direction SF is moving towards. I would love to see SF spending money to upgrade aging, maintenance heavy rides like Rattler and Whizzer or focusing more on building heavily themed, quality attractions on par with Terminator/Dark Knight or even Mystery Mine/Big Bad Wolf if they're willing to go the extra mile.

 

But they really don't use theS Superman and Batman thing to the fullist. If not, thats all they ever use is just Superman and Batman. Sometimes I wish they had a deal with Marvel, instead of DC Comics. Your thinking a deal with Warner Bros would be monumental but Kings Dominion did more with PARAMOUNTS PICTURES. That's why I mentioned Six Flags dropping Warner and signing a deal with PARAMOUNTS.

Aside from Stunt Track, FOF, and TR:TR KD didn't really have many Paramount-themed rides. Even then FOF dropped the Outer Limits theme after being in operation for a while.

 

On top of that, chances are even if SF had a deal with Marvel,what's to say that we're not only going to see rides themed to only Spiderman, Hulk, and Iron Man? Batman and Superman are highly recognizable, well-known characters and while there are other well-known DC heroes, Batman and Superman are the most recognizable even to people who aren't into

comic books (at least compared to other DC characters).

 

Like I said before, I hope bringing back the old school Fright Fest is some where on their list because I can't see this family friendly versions of it lasting much longer. Halloween season is suppose to be scary, so how can you promise the general public a spooky park event when the monsters jobs are to offer a friendly welcome to you? They need to consider changing it the name to their Halloween event.

Perhaps some SF parks should go after a "Mickey's Not-So-Scary Halloween Party" type celebration instead of a "Halloween Horror Nights"-type attraction.

[SFA Regular]

First of all, yea, Marvel still has the contract with Universal, but can't the same thing be applied for Nickelodion being used in both Universal and Kings Dominion? If you have the money, they would easily sign a deal with someone else as well. I'm pretty sure if someone else wanted to use Warner Bros, they would just go ahead and sign the deal with them. I just thought Paramounts would be better for Six Flags than Warner Bros. The company has never really used the Warner Bros theme to the fullist. All I really see from them are Loony Toons, Batman, and Superman. Other than that, no monumental theme has come from it. They don't even have a Loony Toons 4D show. I thought the parks would have received something like that a long time ago. Not only that but it's very hard getting approval for things like Batman and Superman. If you want to compare DC COMICS to MARVEL, I would say that Marvel is easier, given the fact that they have been doing more moves than DC Comics. DC Comics are still stuck on Superman and Batman and still can't get the second Superman movie in production. Not only that but I'm having major doubts about this Green Latern movie coming out on time.

 

Bottom line is, (Paramounts) puts out more franchises more frequently that can be used for both thrill rides, 4D Shows, and great family attractions. Just think for example, on whats going on now. A New Paramounts movie park is being built in Spain. It goes to show you which motion picture company is having more success.

[larrygator]

If you have the money, they would easily sign a deal with someone else as well.

 

I think this is what you still don't understand. No one has a money tree in their corporate backyard.

 

The old Six Flags didn't have the money and the new Six Flags doesn't have the money. They both have DEBT, albeit a little less than before. Throwing money at a problem doesn't necessarily solve it. They can't not make big capital improvements unless they results in greater revenue. No park deserves or is entitled to a new ride/attraction just because they have been waiting for a awhile.

 

As a whole Six Flags has come a long way in the past couple of years in the area of greatly improving the look of their parks. Seriously, the bathrooms at SFGAdv are consistently cleaner than those I have seen at any park in the past year. That might not be a big deal to the average enthusiast, but it is a huge deal in drawing in more people. Parks make more money by bringing in a family for a day versus selling a season pass to an enthusiast and there are a lot more families than enthusiasts. My best friends are not enthusiasts, the husband (who loves amusement park food) actually won't ride anything because of motion sickness and one of their daughters is in a wheelchair and unable to ride. This family of 4 bought season passes to SFGAdv the past two years, something they never would have considered 5 years ago with the state the park was in. The able bodied daughter brings friends with her, this results in even more revenue for the park. The friend's family now frequents the park. That is how to grow business.

 

Six Flags needs to continue what they have been doing for the past couple of years. Hopefully with a smaller debt load they can right the ship and address major capital improvements chainwide without falling back into unmanageable debt. But this may take time and as enthusiasts we need to be patient.

[Wes]

Did everyone on this page forget that Disney now owns Marvel? Islands of Adventure will get to keep their Marvel stuff because of the legalities of the contract for that specific park, but Disney isn't going to be signing any agreements with other parks.

[SFA Regular]

Did everyone on this page forget that Disney now owns Marvel? Islands of Adventure will get to keep their Marvel stuff because of the legalities of the contract for that specific park, but Disney isn't going to be signing any agreements with other parks.

 

That's right. I did forget about that. But I still say that (Paramounts) can be used.

[cgodsey]

^^Right. Universal owns the Marvel rights east of the MIssissippi river as long as Universal continues to renew the agreement that is. Disney owns the rights for anything west of the Mississippi and everywhere else in the World I believe.

[netdvn]

First of all, yea, Marvel still has the contract with Universal, but can't the same thing be applied for Nickelodion being used in both Universal and Kings Dominion? If you have the money, they would easily sign a deal with someone else as well. I'm pretty sure if someone else wanted to use Warner Bros, they would just go ahead and sign the deal with them. I just thought Paramounts would be better for Six Flags than Warner Bros. The company has never really used the Warner Bros theme to the fullist. All I really see from them are Loony Toons, Batman, and Superman. Other than that, no monumental theme has come from it. They don't even have a Loony Toons 4D show. I thought the parks would have received something like that a long time ago. Not only that but it's very hard getting approval for things like Batman and Superman. If you want to compare DC COMICS to MARVEL, I would say that Marvel is easier, given the fact that they have been doing more moves than DC Comics. DC Comics are still stuck on Superman and Batman and still can't get the second Superman movie in production. Not only that but I'm having major doubts about this Green Latern movie coming out on time.

 

1. Only the Universal parks and Nickelodeon Universe are using the Nick franchise right now (aside from a few foreign parks). All the former-Paramount parks have dropped the license because it was too expensive.

 

2) Just because SF doesn't utilize the Loony Tunes/DC franchise doesn't necessarily mean that the parks are gonna go all out on attractions/4D specials, etc. You can say the same about CF and their Peanuts license. I don't remember seeing CF parks installing a 4D Peanuts movie. I've just seen stage shows. Same with parks like Disney and Universal. They don't have E-Ticket attractions for all their biggest franchises.

 

3) Marvel has already been covered...

 

4) You missed my point regarding Batman/Superman. Both are instantly recognizable and even people who haven't been exposed to comic books can relate to them better. More movies doesn't automatically mean better franchise or more rides/attractions or IOA would have built a major Fantastic 4/Iron Man themed ride by now. In fact, IOA hasn't really

built any major E-Ticket Marvel-themed ride since Incredible Hulk/Spiderman/Dr. Doom in 1999. Does that mean that Universal isn't using the Marvel franchise to its fullest potential?

 

Bottom line is, (Paramounts) puts out more franchises more frequently that can be used for both thrill rides, 4D Shows, and great family attractions. Just think for example, on whats going on now. A New Paramounts movie park is being built in Spain. It goes to show you which motion picture company is having more success.

 

Paramount has been planning a park for a number of countries for quite some time now. That doesn't mean that Paramount will pull through though. The one in Spain has only been announced so far and I haven't seen any trace of construction/concept art yet. Just a press release. At this point all the future Paramount Parks are in the same state as Dubailand. Just a concept for now.

[jynx242]

I'm with Larry on this one (both the direction of the parks, and ownership of $0.00 stock .) Six Flags, as a company, is moving in the right direction and I hope they continue to do so. I know, I know, SFA hasn't received a roller coaster in a long time, and I have no idea whether they will receive one soon or not (I'm not a hedge fund or bondholder of any sort.) I just think that the company as a whole needs to keep improving in the basics (cleanliness, guest service, operations, etc...) before they start investing huge amounts of capital on new and expensive rides.

 

Shapiro and his gang are doing the right thing, and his interaction with enthusiasts is a refreshing change. I think/hope that there are good things to come, but we'll need to be patient. I've loved Six Flags since I worked at SFoG in the 80's - so even though I lost money on their stocks, I still want great things to happen for the chain and parks.

[SFA Regular]

I see what your saying. Pretty good point you make. But here is something I had on my mind. Was it a kick in the gut to everybody when (SNYDER) lost his seat? If I remember correctly, the bondholders decided to remove him. Whats to say they won't do the same thing to other members of the board, including (SHAPIRO)?

[Jew]

^Considering the reorganization plan that was approved specifically mentions him staying in his position (while at the same time calling for Synder's removal), I don't think that is going to happen anytime soon.

[SFA Regular]

I was just mentioning that it's a possibility. Now the company is being ran by bondholders. It's not like how it was back when (BURKE) was in there because he atleast went toe to toe with Dan Snyder, but lost. (SHAPIRO) does not know a huge steak in the company at all, so his removal could be put into effect if they wanted to. All depends on what the bondholders want.

[thrillgeek]

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10538953

 

Theme park operator Six Flags Inc emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Monday after wiping out more than a billion dollars in debt by turning the company's ownership over to bondholders.

 

The company, which operates 19 amusement parks in North America, enters its high season without the constraints of bankruptcy and with less than half the debt it had a year ago.

 

The company now has more financial flexibility to pursue a shift in strategy toward attracting more families to its amusement parks, an approach spearheaded by Mark Shapiro when he took over the top executive job in 2006.

 

The company exits bankruptcy 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.

 

That money, along with about $1.27 in new debt, was used to pay off creditors and finance the company as its main summer season nears. Six Flags entered bankruptcy with $2.7 billion in debt and obligations from redeemable securities.

 

The company's pre-bankruptcy shares were wiped out under the reorganization.

 

Six Flags said it will apply to list its new shares on the New York Stock Exchange.

 

The bankruptcy case is In re: Premier International Holdings Inc, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware, No. 09-12019.

 

 

Maybe it's just me but after reading this it seemed too easy to cut the debt. Why couldn't they do this sooner?

[SFA Regular]

Thats what I said.

[Jew]

^I'm starting to agree with Wes. You must be a robot because you obviously didn't read what I said. The Bondholders wanted Synder removed. They specifically asked for his removal, while also asking for Shapiro to stay.

 

Oh, and bankruptcy isn't that simple. You can't just say "I don't feel like paying my debt off anymore, lets go bankrupt."