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

Six Flags Conference Call Details, 6 Parks Possibly For Sale


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 497
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I do not believe a protest will help in this situation, but who knows maybe it will. I think our only real hope is if A: another company wants to buy MM or B: Valencia will not allow permiting for additional housing in that area.

Otherwise the mighty dollar always seem to prevail. The short term cash infusion to the company will help them out of the red enough to sell the whole thing again while keeping the major shareholders rich. Pehaps Mark has had enough of the amusement park buisness and those pesky teenagers causing problems. Hey Disneyland is a family park and they still have that darn teenager problem. Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just watching NBC 30 news and they talked about the SF plan, and the newscaster noted that the idea is either to sell or close the parks and pull off a Six Flags Astroworld plan. Close, sell the rides, and sell the land for real estate profit.

 

Ok, I can see SFDL and SFEG being closed, but how could they close SFMM? That seems too big of a park and too big of a loss to close and sell off the rides....plus with the addition of Tatsu, how can that be relocated to another park since I'm pretty sure that coaster was designed for the terrian of SFMM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work for sfmm for 5 yrs i was my first high school job through the rop program i was in my junior yr when i was hired i thought the co was healthy money wise then and now i dont think i could'nt go back to work there with all this going on. my younger brothers want to work there but i dont know how they would do performance wise

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just had a blurb about it on my local news. Here's what they said:

 

(1) Six Flags might close some parks

(2) They haven't identified which parks could be closed (which is false, because they did annouce those six.)

(3) Attendance is down and operating costs are up

(4) Apparently there is a Six Flags near Chicago! Who knew?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

everyone is talking about petitions and standing in front of the gates. what good will that do? its not like six flags cares. they tore down astroworld in a heartbeat, what makes you think they will care any more about other parks. plus standing in front of there like idiots will just back up their idea about it being a security risk park.

 

nobody has any control but mark. if he wants to tear down the park, its gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Exactly. Protesting does no good. Neither does boycotting or petitioning. The only possible way a boycott would work is if it were at all the SF parks nationwide. And that'll never happen because no one outside So Cal (that's not in the enthusiast community) gives a flying crap about SFMM. Doing anything specifically at SFMM is a lost cause, because they've already given up on it.

 

If it does happen, yeah that sucks, but there are worse injustices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They just had a blurb about it on my local news. Here's what they said:

 

(1) Six Flags might close some parks

(2) They haven't identified which parks could be closed (which is false, because they did annouce those six.)

(3) Attendance is down and operating costs are up

(4) Apparently there is a Six Flags near Chicago! Who knew?

 

thats the point!!! MIGHT be closed, they never said it would be closed. might does not mean definately it means they may or may not.

saying that the park is going to be bulldozed does not help the situation, and neither does boycotting. nothing is said or done so we can't say it will be bulldozed for sure because we just don't know

 

protesting does not help because they will do whatever they do no matter what people think. boycotting SFMM will only make the situation worse, and boycotting SF in general is going to make things a lot worse because then they will have to sell all of the parks due to the debt. we don't know what sharpio is going to do, we just have to hope he won't sell SFMM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is just sad to see one of the worlds biggest and best roller coaster parks run into the ground, sold to Snyder and then pretty much given up on. He has not even owned the place over a year yet. He was making positive changes things were starting to look better and brighter and then this announcement. With every property developer in Cailfornia and there mothers now putting up bids is there anyway to turn back the tide?

With some adjustments into the dynamics of park operations as well as the introduction of more family freindly flair, MM has lots of potential being near one of the largest metro area in the world not to mention the biggest property development in the history of California (Newhall Ranch, 25,000 homes) there is some serious opportunity here to make a kick butt family and teenage/adult friendly park!

Some ideas to help achieve MM's status as a more all around freindly park for all ages.

The introduction of more flat rides, dark rides, family shows,

Instituting a 18year and younger with adult or guardian only policy (to keep some of the riffraff in check)

A zero tollerance for criminal behavior policy (fighting,cursing, abusive behavior, spitting etc..

More CCTV and security central monitoring.

Keeping pay at par with local buisnesses to attract and retrain employees, better guest relations. Leaving families and guests with a good taste in there mouths when the leave the park instead of feeling they have been ripped off waiting in 4 hour lines due to one train operations and slow load's.

I say the Six Flags board should give Magic mountain three years to turn itself around. Not to mention all the ad's they have been running for MM are strictly geared towards the segment he speaks about not wanting! Strange, especially if he feels they do not bring in any money. I think MM and the other parks listed are just the scapegoat for the companies poor preformance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's been fairly obvious that SFMM would not fit into the new SF business plan for months now. If you break things down to simplest terms, SFMM does not equate to "family friendly" in Mark Shapiro's eyes. And really, honestly, can you fault him with that assessment?

 

I know there's a lot of love from the local enthusiast crowd out there, but like Wes suggested, you're such a small insignificant number in the overall scope of things. Save your protests, petitions, etc. It will do no good. Does it suck to think about losing your home park. Sure, undoubtedly it would. Has it happened yet? NO. Is there anything beyond a simple mention of radical changes? NO. If you really wanna prove to Shapiro and company that SoCal is more "family friendly," perhaps a better attitude towardds possible changes may help. Hostility gets you nowhere. Chances are the park will be sold off in one way or another to a new owner. Maybe I'm way off base, but I can't see an AstroWorld thing happening here.

 

I think what we're seeing is a gradual progression towards a new (predominately) eastern US business structure from Six Flags. With the exception of Darien Lake, Six Flags is chosing to focus on its east coast properties. Two of the three jewels of the company are located in the east. Both SFGADV and SFOG are solid performers, and still capable of expanding. Also, when Shapiro conducted his park to park off-season evaluation tour, SFA was looked fondly upon, thus surprising many industry followers. For a park with a generally bad rep, no one has expressed any shock that SFA wasn't mentioned in today's news reports.

 

I'd be willing to guess that by selling off the "problem" parks out west, SF will thus begin to focus on the parks they feel have more potential. I don't wanna forget SFFT or SFKK (for whatever reason), because if I remember correctly, Shapiro also looked favorably upon them.

 

With CF establishing themselves in Virginia with PKD, and Busch already a strong presence in Williamsburg, would it not make sense for SF to become a bigger player in the D.C. region? From what I understand, PKD has another 500 acres to develop. Think what you will of CF's transformations of parks once they are acquired by the company, but can you not see PKD becoming more like CP with lodging and plenty of room to become the SFMM or CP of the east coast? Although Busch is landlocked by comparison, they will remain a strong force for years to come.

 

So why wouldn't SF develop the "promising" SFA into a better park with the land it supposedly has around it? All three parks are within a couple hours of each other, and people already choose D.C. as a vacation spot. Okay, maybe it's more of a historical "field trip" type of vacation, but SFA would be a nice suplement to that, right? Also, Snyder already has roots there with the Redskins, etc.

 

Of course, this is probably mindless speculation on my part, and obviously not something that will occur overnight, but I'm willing to put it down as my uneducated guess as to the direction SF may be heading. Wow, that turned out to be pretty longwinded. Sorry bout that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be willing to guess that by selling off the "problem" parks out west, SF will thus begin to focus on the parks they feel have more potential.

 

SFMW isn't going anywhere.

 

I have a feeling there might not be any fright fests this year (or maybe in the future), and I don't have a problem with that.

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/