Cedar Fair and Six Flags merger to complete July 1, mostly Cedar Fair executives to lead new company

Touchdown:

I hope this doesn’t lead to a spectacular bankruptcy in a few years. Can’t wait to see how expensive an all park pass is next year…

That does raise an interesting point. Ive been a Six Flags "member" since 2012. The difference with me is I dont pay an annual fee each season. Six Flags debits a small amount from my bank year round. And my membership has allowed me entrance into every park nationwide. Now with this merger, Im curious to see how this will be affected, if at all ?!?!?

You pay a monthly subscription fee (like Netflix)?

Or is that the cost of your annual pass divided up for the year?

Maverick00:

Has anyone heard anything if this has affected the ownership structure of SFOG and SFOT? IIRC, Six Flags Corporate did not own 100% of both parks as their original owners still had shares.

I'd guess the only thing that changed is those shares are now owned by Six Flags (FUN) instead of Six Flags (SIX).

My stock conversion happened. I went from 10 shares of old SIX to 5 shares of new FUN. I bought it (for, uh, "fun") during the pandemic figuring it was an obvious lift when they reopened, but it's still down 32% from then. This is why I shouldn't buy individual stocks.

So, if we are to give Richard Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt based on the Vimeo video he made and the facts he stated, let me highlight a few things:

1. Opportunities for employees. The legacy CF parks, under his leadership, couldn’t retain or staff parks effectively. What is he willing to do now to change this to be an “employer of choice?”
2. He speaks of opportunities in food/beverage service at legacy SF parks, upgrading the items and bringing in culinary chefs. Legacy CF parks have a revolving door of culinary chefs and food service employees. See point #1.
3. People go to amusement parks to ride rides and water park attractions first and foremost. Operations was at the core of CF and the decision to forego decades of CF safety and leadership in efficient park/ride operations was handed to an external vendor to now tell them how to do things which has led to frustrations for guests, employees, and management who see the downward trend. What is he going to do about this, if anything?

Lastly, there sure are an awful lot of male executives and board members when it is women/mom’s who make vacation/entertainment decisions. Shouldn’t leadership reflect that?

Yeah, it's icky that they canned the last female exec (marketing) and the C-suite looks like something out of Mad Men.

OhioStater:

You pay a monthly subscription fee (like Netflix)?

Or is that the cost of your annual pass divided up for the year?

Its a monthly subscription fee. Season passes are typically more expensive annually than what I pay. You could say I was "grand-fathered" into it before Six Flags changed their membership policies.

I can't help but wonder how the company avoids the traps and challenges that came with the Geauga Lake purchase. How is this not going to be a repeat? Six Flags arguably is still giving away the gate, their ops are terrible and most of the parks seem to lack recent large investments? It will be interesting to watch as to how the company can turn a profit at each of these parks given all of the challenges. In my opinion, this is going to take years to undo along with a lot of capital.

Coasterhound36:
Its a monthly subscription fee.

I too am curious as to what will happen to the membership fee. We bought our memberships in 2021 as the pandemic was ended (had thought about season passes early on in 2020 - you all know where that went). It's very hard to figure out any details on membership any more, and the emails often do not make sense.

Jeff:

it's icky that they canned the last female exec

Is it ickier that they replaced the last female exec with a male or to assume that they did it because she's female? I get that it might be "not a good look", but context matters, and it would be interesting to know the full story. Taking it a step further, would it be even ickier to replace her with another female solely because they don't want to appear sexist (i.e. strictly to avoid the "not a good look")?

Maybe they shouldn't have canned her at all, then no one would feel icky.

I don't find it very difficult to acknowledge a good ol' boys club when I see it. If that group were appointed on merit, would Fisher be COO?

Unconscious and deliberate bias are alive and well in corporate America. The absence of women and people of color in a nation a diverse as ours is not coincidence.

Yes, I know there's bias. I admit I don't know (or really care) about the C-level environment at Six Flags or Cedar Fair, I was more thinking out loud, and maybe giving them the benefit of the doubt, because we can't truly know the motive for firing the female marketing exec (maybe she sucked and her successor was exceptionally qualified?). And yeah, I was admittedly poking a little because you have virtue signaled about bias in instances where I don't necessarily think there was any. However, I'd argue that it's not always the case, and often is coincidental. The team I manage is currently all dudes (not all white!), and it's precisely because we had no female applicants when we were hiring. Sometimes it's not icky.

"Virtue signal" is kinda fighting words, and implies there is no action. I can assure you, I've acted a great deal in this area. Women objectively make less than men to do the same jobs. They occupy fewer C-suites. Is it because they're not as qualified? If you don't have female applicants, why is that? I'm not saying that it's your fault, but why do you suppose it is that way?

If you doubt the ick, follow some of the females on the Internets who do stuff that used to be the exclusive domain of men, especially the trades. The comments are just awful. We have a lot of work to do.

“If you don’t have female applicants, why is that?”

Maybe because they aren’t always interested? I’m not saying it’s a universal truth, but I could’ve sworn I heard somewhere that in certain fields, there just wasn’t the same level of interest amongst women as there was among men.

I’m all for ensuring that discrimination doesn’t take place against women, minorities, or anyone, but the comment about applicants ignores the fact that maybe, just maybe, there are different levels of interest in things amongst different genders.

It's interesting being a male in a female-dominated field (therapy). But, story of my life. Two sisters, three step-sisters, and then when I procreate I end up with two daughters.

True story; once upon a time I was applying to enter the family therapy program at The Ohio State University. I really didn't think I had a fantastic chance since I literally just graduated from there and the cohort they select is notoriously small.

One of the reasons I got in was because I was a male, and they wanted to make their program more diverse by having a male therapist. At the same time, my wife was working in a mental health facility when she found out she was getting paid significantly less than her male counterparts, despite being more experienced and, quite frankly, easily more credentialed. That's when she decided to be her own boss and start a private practice.

Women.

sirloindude:

I’m all for ensuring that discrimination doesn’t take place against women, minorities, or anyone, but the comment about applicants ignores the fact that maybe, just maybe, there are different levels of interest in things amongst different genders.

I am personally of this belief. But there are plenty of people out there who think we can change natural human behaviors and interests amongst the sexes. It’s an interesting debate.

Gender norms are a cultural construct, not biological. Women are not inherently less capable of voting, driving, wiring electrical or building a camper from scratch. Where does "interest" in anything come from? Things are encouraged or discouraged by adults, and kids respond. We've come a long way, but have a long way to go. It was a big deal once to see a woman astronaut, because that was a "man's job." We still haven't cracked the presidential nut, and one of a few western nations that hasn't.

The argument that people do what they do as a defense for workplace gender discrimination is dismissive of the actual problems. My field (software/tech) is notorious for its "bro culture," and unwinding that has been a long road far from the end. The problem is that, as is the case with any skilled profession, it has to start with change among the beginners. There are relatively few female managers, slightly less few senior/staff engineers, more mid-level, and definitely more junior developers than ever. It has taken a lot of deliberate action by way of academic institutions, intern programs, etc. to even make a dent in it. And the pay disparity is still pretty bad. In the last decade I've had to make three "catch-up" adjustments to get people on an even level.

Jeff:

We still haven't cracked the presidential nut, and one of a few western nations that hasn't.

That may not even be a concern anymore depending on the outcome in Nov.

Jeff:

Where does "interest" in anything come from? Things are encouraged or discouraged by adults, and kids respond.

Thinking out loud again, but does that include my interest in girls at a very young age?

We've come a long way, but have a long way to go.

Perhaps. But should we also be encouraging male kids to pursue careers as teachers? Childcare? Dental hygenists/assistants? Speech pathologists? Admin assistants? Cosmetology? Or, is it possible that we as a society don't need to force a 50/50 gender ratio in every facet of the workforce in the name of "equality"?

Speaking of ick, the context of what you're saying here feels a little indoctrinatey. I'm not saying adults should discourage either gender to pursue whatever career they want, but to "encourage" them specifically to pursue careers currently dominated by the opposite sex in the pursuit of some form of equality that not everyone wants seems strange. We bought my son a drumset when he was a toddler because I wanted to encourage him to be like dad. He had close to zero interest after banging on them a few times. He plays piano now, and quite well, and I'm ecstatic about it. Imagine what a stellar dad I'd look like if I'd kept "encouraging" him to play the drums because I thought more Vaters should be drummers.

I'm all for equity and equal rights, which I think we're closer to achieving at this point in time than ever in human history. Forcing complete equality across the board--where everything has to be as close to 50/50 as possible, is not the same thing, and in my opinion isn't necessary, and in fact more closely resembles a fictional utopian society than a free one.

Vater:

...where everything has to be as close to 50/50 as possible, is not the same thing, and in my opinion isn't necessary, and in fact more closely resembles a fictional utopian society than a free one.

I, for one, wlecome our AI overlords and suggest you get with the 2100's where we'll be splitting everything 33/33/33 with them.

50/50 is so 2000!