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

SFNO/Jazzland Discussion Thread

P. 50: New Orleans seeking redevelopment proposals for SFNO site

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeti, Megazeph got a rehab over the 2004 off-season. That thing was flying around the course up until closing week before the storm...SFI also retracked the double-up, which took some punch out of it.

 

 

Ohwell, now it's just a huge lawn ornament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeti, Megazeph got a rehab over the 2004 off-season. That thing was flying around the course up until closing week before the storm...SFI also retracked the double-up, which took some punch out of it.

 

Ah, that would explain it! I was there in June 2004. Sucks that they spent the money to rehab it and then it gets water logged.

 

But like you said, it's just a lawn ornament now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

You've got it all wrong... the story clearly says there are "NO plans to sue Six Flags."

 

Seriously, though, that's a brilliant strategy. Sue a company on the brink of bankruptcy. That's like threatening to shoot someone who's holding a gun to his head.

 

Everyone remember how quickly the Superdome got repaired? That's because it's a big source of revenue and jobs. SFNO... not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That park sucked to say the least, I was their the beginning of May 2005 right before Hurricane Katrina and the park was dead their was no one their. I think there were maybe 30 cars in the parking lot when we left the park around 1ish.

 

I talked with some of employee's and they said that it would get a little busy-er in June and July but noting extreme. Most of the time it was dead, like the time we were their.

 

That park was a joke in the first place, why Six Flags even got involved with Jazzland is beyond me. That park should have left to rot in the first place.

 

Six Flags should not tried to save Jazzland, they should have been focused on trying to save Astroworld instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say anywhere that Six Flags "stole" anything from the city? I don't think that's a claim that the city has made at any time.

 

I'm not a legal expert by any means, but I wonder if the prospect of Six Flags filing for Chapter 11 might have forced this action. In Chapter 11, a company can often ask a judge to void contracts, and I'm sure their lease with the city would be on their list of "Contracts We'd Like to Void."

 

Filing a lawsuit prior to bankruptcy might allow the city some hope of collecting additional funds down the road. If New Orleans were to sit on its hands and wait for the lease agreement to be canceled under Chapter 11, then they probably have already received their final lease payment from Six Flags, like it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say anywhere that Six Flags "stole" anything from the city?

 

When somebody takes something from somebody (purposely) it's called stealing. Six Flags didn't own any of the rides they didn't put in. They're able to remove the rides they installed, but may not remove the rides that were originally there when SF agreed to lease the park from N.O. (N.O. owns the rides not installed by SF).

 

SF removed the S&S Towers that did not belong to SF, and they also took the 2 G-Train Mega Zeph trains (now used for Boss at SFStL).

 

-Tatum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Six Flags didn't own any of the rides they didn't put in.

I'm not so sure. Especially since I have not once seen any claim from the city that Six Flags didn't have the right to take that property.

 

It's entirely possible that Six Flags bought the rides, while continuing to lease the land and buildings, as part of its agreement to take over the park. Similar arrangements have been made before in other cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say anywhere that Six Flags "stole" anything from the city?

 

When somebody takes something from somebody (purposely) it's called stealing. Six Flags didn't own any of the rides they didn't put in. They're able to remove the rides they installed, but may not remove the rides that were originally there when SF agreed to lease the park from N.O. (N.O. owns the rides not installed by SF).

 

SF removed the S&S Towers that did not belong to SF, and they also took the 2 G-Train Mega Zeph trains (now used for Boss at SFStL).

 

-Tatum

 

You didn't answer his question. The article doesn't mention ANYTHING about "stealing" rides. All it mentions is the city intends to sue based on the fact Six Flags has no clear plan to re-open the park. And unless you have a copy of the lease agreement, I'm not sure how you can think "stealing" will be the basis of their lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say anywhere that Six Flags "stole" anything from the city?

 

When somebody takes something from somebody (purposely) it's called stealing. Six Flags didn't own any of the rides they didn't put in. They're able to remove the rides they installed, but may not remove the rides that were originally there when SF agreed to lease the park from N.O. (N.O. owns the rides not installed by SF).

 

SF removed the S&S Towers that did not belong to SF, and they also took the 2 G-Train Mega Zeph trains (now used for Boss at SFStL).

 

-Tatum

 

You didn't answer his question. The article doesn't mention ANYTHING about "stealing" rides. All it mentions is the city intends to sue based on the fact Six Flags has no clear plan to re-open the park. And unless you have a copy of the lease agreement, I'm not sure how you can think "stealing" will be the basis of their lawsuit.

 

It doesn't say that. Your right.

 

New Orleans bought the park ofter Odgen Parks filed for bankruptcy. When SF decided to remove two rides (Chaos, and Inverter) they had to remain on the property because Six Flags rightfully owns them. Up until the hurricane, they were sitting in the parking lot with a wooden fence around them. The city can't run a theme park. Hell, they can barely run N.O. They simply signed a lease agreement with SF saying that they own the land and the rides in the park, and you'll simply run it for us.

 

-Tatum

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
 Share

  • 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/