Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Kentucky Kingdom (SFKK, KK) Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

^They are a little slow in Kentucky.

 

You're hilarious. Anyways, the expo center should just let this die and forget about the park. And if they do want to keep the park, they should STFU about SF and find a new buyer. By the way, I never cared for SFKK;it was dirty, and the staff was always rude. There are other parks to go to, but I guess they never realized that and gave up on pleasing guests.

 

If they let it go their will be no more Kentucky Kingdom. Kentucky Kingdom use to be fun and not dirty until Six Flags took over. Every park isn't clean anyways, they all are about the same.

 

I still don't get Six Flags, When I worked their in 2008, they told everyone that the park was going to reopen Twisted Twins in 2009 and Mile High Falls too. The park was also going to have a Thomas Town Tank engine attraction in the North West Territory of the park that year, but 2009 came and nothing was there! Then in the middle of the summer of last year twisted twins trains were sent off to SFSL! What the freak is Six Flags problem? It seems they thought this all out last year! They never gave this park a chance!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well being not too far from SFKK, I think you know my view upon this. I would love to have Chang back because I don't see the reason why not to have any tall roller coaster in your park. There are plenty of other parks that are almost like Kentucky Kingdom in some kind of way (people don't pay too much attention to it, not much liked, etc.). Six Flags Darien Lake soon went to just Darien Lake, Six Flags America needs to become a major amusement park with new rides (Get rid of the waterpark), and my view of a major amusement park in Six Flags are SFMM, SFGAdv, SFGAm, and maybe even SFOG. What happened to Astro World? Six Flags buys an S&S Sky Swatter, just to have the park close a little while after. What I really want to say to some people outside of Kentucky who hate the park is to mind their own business, you're view isn't helping us or anything at all.

 

What I'm curious about is if one of the four park operators is Paramount ! (I doubt it! )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus, the only additions Six Flags made simply replaced other attraction of similar value that they removed.

 

Not only that, but they also removed multiple attractions that they did not replace...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with midgetman! Also Ed Hart's investments might have already been paid for before the park was sold to Premier! (Twisted Twins trains come to mind) just carried out over a period of time! Also I do believe that Twisted Twins was being designed during 1997 before the sale! (Feel free to correct me)

 

I believe the real issue here is that SF only reaps profits from running the park but doesn't own much of it which would explain why they only wanted to pay a portion of the profits to the fair board instead of a fixed amount! Anytime SF removed a ride, It was replaced by SOMETHING if not another ride. Chang, KK's flagship attraction was never replaced with anything and even though its not mentioned, Twisted Twins trains were not replaced either. I believe the lawsuit is a way to try and get money that will HOPEFULLY be put to good use for the good of the park (Maybe not). The space that Chang occupied can be replaced by a another large coaster thats less than 180 ft (Intamin mega???), Twisted Twins can get trains that are not G-Trains, and another train and transfer track for Thunder Run would also be a much needed improvement along with other countless other improvements that could be financed using the settlement money!

 

I do realize that i'm jumping the gun BIG TIME, but "I HAVE A DREAM!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree, things looked better for Darien Lake after it was sold. They added a new ride (first one since shipwreck falls I'm pretty sure) and they made the park nicer. Even did track work on Predator. Even when RoS was having problems and only had one train even on the tracks last year they ran the ride very well and kept the lines moving. After six flags left, the wait time for RoS went WAY down. I think we could see simular stories if we saw a new operator fo KK. Maybe PARC is one of those operators?

Edited by darienlakerules
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to say something else. When the Knotts Berry Farm Xcelorator roller coaster's cable snapped, some coaster enthusiasts started hating Intamin for using Cable wires so much. They re-stated the incidents they had with all of the cable wires in different places.

 

The point in that is that we are starting to go into a phase in which we are soon going to hate Six Flags a little for reasons being they might be selfish or just buisness. PLEASE DON'T START THAT! I love Six Flag's parks because they do supply thrills around the country (soon internationally too ). They might be corporate-chain-ran amusement parks, but you have to admit their parks are great when it comes to rides. Lets not diss them out... yo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ SF does WONDERS with the parks that they "Like" (SFMM,SFGam,SFGadv, SFoGA,etc...), However, they got a hold of KK and turned it into a septic tank!!! If CF gets a hold of it, they will probably Geauga the park so everybody comes to KI, just like they killed Geauga lake so that everybody would come to Cedar Point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ SF does WONDERS with the parks that they "Like" (SFMM,SFGam,SFGadv, SFoGA,etc...), However, they got a hold of KK and turned it into a septic tank!!! If CF gets a hold of it, they will probably Geauga the park so everybody comes to KI, just like they killed Geauga lake so that everybody would come to Cedar Point!

Here's the thing, I've always wanted to go to Wildwater Kingdom .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Six Flags paid $64 million dollars for KK back in 1997. That's a lot of money to pay to ONLY manage a park, because remember that price only included what, 20 out of 58 acres? I was able to skim through the motion filed by the KSFB against Six Flags, and granted I am not a lawyer, but all it did was cite previous property cases in Kentucky when a landlord was able to maintain materials left after a lease had been broken. It did mention there were clauses in the lease that prevented Six Flags from removing rides/equipment, but it did not actually cite any specific clause in the lease.

 

Granted I was only quickly reading it between classes earlier today so I could be wrong, but that was the gist of it as I remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Six Flags paid $64 million dollars for KK back in 1997. That's a lot of money to pay to ONLY manage a park,

 

This was a Premier decision! Premier made a lot of strange unintelligent decisions, like buying so many parks in the first place!

 

While I would normally agree, Premier was originally a real estate company and at the time they were buying up parks many of the executives were still from the real estate business. One would think they would be well aware of real estate laws/contracts. That is a catastrophic mistake to pay that much and be left empty handed when the lease is up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if premier made up the contracts to purchase chang, Six Flags would have most likely inheareted in the debt and therefore the ownership of the attraction when they took over the lease. When parks purchase a ride they do not exactly pay up front in cash for the ride. It is kinda like a car or house. They have a few years in loans to opperate and make back the money they invested and or loaned out to purchase the ride. I think whether it was Premier Parks or Six Flags that purchased the ride is irrelevant as the debt would have transfered.

 

Of course this is all speculation as no one here in these forums has access to the actual contracts as well as the wording they contain. In all likelyhood Chang will not miraculously show up and get rebuilt. If anything six flags would have to pay them the market value of the ride as it stands in 2010. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. I wish i was a lawyer making the money from both sides here!!!! hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me understand this. Which ownership group grew from a single theme park operator, to the 4th largest and almost snatched Six Flags over Texas out of Time Warner's hands? Which group in 4 years nearly destroyed one of their top properties by basically ripping it in the press, and putting it up for sale? Which one saw shareholder value completely dissipate on their watch, and has offered no solutions other than excuses? As it is, current management is relying on "previous management's" buyout clause with Time Warner for loan guarantees to line up credit (thanks mainly go to the Six Flags over Georgia Limited Partnership and their $400M win over TWX for this). Kentucky Kingdom may have never been worthy of a "Six Flags" park, but Ed Hart was the person responsible for most of this property's debt. I'd argue with the low acquisition cost and already established capital improvements (as well as included land), it was a decent gamble for the then cash rich Premier Parks. Hindsight being 20/20, it didn't work.

 

Being that Chang and Twisted Twins were built prior to Premier's assumption of the lease, and that Six Flags requested permission to move Chang with the promise of a water park (which they clearly reneged on); I'd say the KSFB may have a legit claim on the former ride. We'll see what the courts decide, but the current bankruptcy proceeding will most likely NOT protect the re-emerged Six Flags from this suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under KRS (Kentucky Revised Statutes) a fixture that is permanently attached to the land is part of the real estate, not personal property. Permanent attachment would be in force since bolting a fixture to the ground would constitute permanent attachment under KRS. So in this case, Chang is property of the Commonwealth, not Six Flags. If the lease between the Commonwealth and Six Flags states that a fixture can be sold or moved by the lessee, then Six Flags is free to remove the ride. The Commonwealth would have no recourse. If there is not a clause that over rides KRS, Chang needs to be returned, and rebuilt to operating condition. This would need to be done to avoid harm to the lessor. I am basing this on my experience as a landlord in Kentucky, and legal advice I have received over the years as a landlord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/