Cedar Fair announces Geauga Lake will be water park only

Said it before, say it again. Marineland in Niagara Falls runs a sea life park in the snow belt and they've been in business for a long time. Proof it can be profitable. Sea World was expanding profits at their other parks by adding thrill rides; they couldn't do that in Ohio.

I don't think CF bought GL with the intention to get rid of it. If that were the case, the place would have been emptied, rezoned as residential, and sold to developers when the housing boom was still in full swing. As it stands, the ride side of the park looks like it won't go anywhere while it's still a buyer's market in real estate.

Once the Paramount Parks were purchased and CF's debt skyrocketed, something had to give to keep that dividend coming. If the SLC doesn't relocate to MiA, I wouldn't be surprised to see that one go next.

There are a lot of really emotional responses here, and some pretty ridiculous accusations too, the worst of which being that Cedar Fair didn't try or intentionally tanked the park. Come on, do you really think they'd buy the park if they didn't think they could make it work?

I've talked to a lot of people close to the situation, people who worked there in the Six Flags/Premier days and even a few from the Funtime days. Piecing it all together, I am of the strong opinion that the company that really tanked the park was Anheuser-Busch, despite never having owned the place.

I'll post some more lengthy thoughts on that when I have some time.

I cant wait until next year when a family shows up at the park and says "Where are all of the roller coasters?"

Well, this saves me a 3hr trip to Geauga Lake.

All I hope is that Cedar Fair puts some of the rides up for sale... so other parks can buy them, and not just distribute them throughout the chain.

Darien Lake is near-by, and it sure could use Big-Dipper and/or Raging WolfBobs. :)

Busch did it with Boardwalk & Baseball (buy it in order to eliminate their main competition)

The moment that I first learned of the curious purchase of Geauga Lake by Cedaf Unfair, I knew this was their long term intent. They merely did it in a slower, more politically correct way in order to avoid any backlash to their nearby main park, especially from the press. It's very convenient to run it for a couple of years, take out some rides and provide no additional new dry rides, reduce the admission price, and then claim it's just doesn't make financial sense to keep running it as a traditional park as it has for over a hundred years. SO clever Dick, wow we never saw it coming from the moment you bought it to eliminate your primary competition and starting moving out the rides.

Keeping it as a waterpark to pay the bills on the property taxes and have a place to push CP Resort brochures presents no threat to their corporate cash cow nearby until they figure what developer will offer the most cash for lakefront development on the land. Thanks, Dick, for proving your board members really are the heartless bastards we've suspected all along and not something different and better from the corporate scum at Six Flags after all.

Jeff said:

"I am of the strong opinion that the company that really tanked the park was Anheuser-Busch, despite never having owned the place."

I have similar thoughts. Sea World and Geauga might have had a truely symbiotic relationship. Without the Busch owned and operated park across the lake, the place probably faced a real prospect of doom no matter what. If Sea World closed in let's say, 1996 and the Geauga was never Flagged or Cedar Faired we could still very well have a closed park by now! What SF did to the place just made things worse. Then, cedar Fair inherited a highly troubled property.

Cedar Fair is low on my list of people to "blame", and I'm really no fanboy of them.

"I underestimated the power of the animals that Sea World and (Six Flags) had".
Cedar Fair CEO Dick Kinzel - August 2, 2005

"I underestimated the power of the rides that Geauga Lake had".
Former Cedar Fair CEO Dick Kinzel - August 3, 2008

---

Peabody said (in response to Jeff):
Sea World and Geauga might have had a truely symbiotic relationship. Without the Busch owned and operated park across the lake, the place probably faced a real prospect of doom no matter what. If Sea World closed in let's say, 1996 and the Geauga was never Flagged or Cedar Faired we could still very well have a closed park by now! What SF did to the place just made things worse. Then, cedar Fair inherited a highly troubled property.

---

Should be no surprise that I agree with both the Jeffs here.

It's a series of moves that landed us here and the names attached to those decisions is irrelevant becuase they probably would have happened anyway.

Steve WoA said:
"I honestly don't know a single person that does not miss SFWoA"

I don't miss WoA. I'll miss Geauga Lake or at least what's leaving. But, I went to WoA for free (friends company picnic) every year Six Flags ran them except the first and I can honestly say I liked it much more after Cedar Fair took over.
*** This post was edited by Jason Hammond 9/22/2007 12:36:20 PM ***

Let me clarify my "no more CF parks" statement. I'm not mad at them for closing Geauga Lake to stop going to CP or other parks. I'm mad they really have shown no compassion to the guests with poor service, bad prices, and no last rides. They've shown no mercy to the feelings and emotions of guests, so why should I bother with them? I have other places I can go, and I shall.

I'm torn by this announcement. As an Enthusiast I’m saddened by the news that the rides are going away and 100+ year-old park is more or less gone. But the businessperson in me see this a positive for the Cedar Fair chain as a whole. They will save millions in capital over the next 2 or 3 seasons by recycling rides (For example, Dominator will probably cost around 5 Million to relocate, versus 20 million for new). This and the land sales will also help to reduce debt to a more manageable level in a short period of time.

But it does kinda feel as though they are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

CF did not kill the park.

To use a medical analogy:

SF mortally wounded it with poor decisions and builing too much, too fast. CF put it on life support, did some things (albeit not much) to try and save it and then ultimately decided to pull the plug.

---

Impulse-ive @ 9/20/2007 6:36:00 AM

You know I started to go into a whole market debate but I knew Rob would just come whining after it, so I'll just say this; you try and rescue and operate a mid- to large-sized rides and waterpark with 3 years of bad PR in the middle of the economic basement of the country with two well-respected parks with fiercely loyal fanbases less than 2 hours' drive in either direction.

I give you a 10% chance of success if I'm feeling generous.

---

Amen to that.PM ****** This post was edited by redman822 9/22/2007 12:52:50 PM ***

I like to wonder what would have happened to Geauga Lake in alternative histories. What if Cedar Fair had never purchased the Paramount parks? Thats millions and millions of dollars in quarterly interest payments that could have been saved and invested in existing parks like GL.

What if Cedar Fair had decided that running high quality amusement parks and making customers happy was more important than paying out over a hundred million a year in dividend payments? Maybe some of that could have been invested in Geauga Lake?

This may be "just a business decision" but it wasn't necessarily "the only business decision". Their actions show that money in the pockets of unitholders (many of whom are top execs at CF) is more important than preserving and improving a piece of history, showing respect to the community, or keeping its hard working people in work.

I love the blame people put on Six Flags for all this. Say what you will, the park was pulling in 2 million+ guests a year under their management. While some would love to argue that there was no way that trend could have continued, what proof is there? SF never got the chance. While attendance was dropping, a little customer service would have done the job just fine. SF at least had something to work with. Cedar Fair bled the place dry of every redeeming quality it had. If they did legitimately think they were going to save it with their series of removals, it shows a glaring incompetence on their part. There's no positive spin you could put on what Cedar Fair did during their time in charge. Either they were incompetent or they intentionally tanked the place.Plain and simple, I think it was a numbers game. They bought out the competition. They knew they couldn't very well try and maintain the numbers it could have had in the SF days because those were numbers taken away from Cedar Point. Heck, any improvement in the attendance numbers would quite possibly have hurt Cedar Point worse. So what is there to do? Make false accusations that the park would be better if it were a different style of park, feign a save-the-place attitude, and tank it. I can't fault them for wanting to protect their tried-and-true moneymaker, but it was a dirty move. Not only that, but with all the land on GL property, it could very easily have been expanded. However, CF's addiction to having a flagship park has hurt them. That's one thing I get the impression SF is smarter at right now. I get the impression Shapiro makes additions all around to bring business everywhere, and I don't think he's the type of guy to over-saturate his parks with coasters.That's one thing I think will come back to bite CF in the long run. They've built an expectation amongst their guests to introduce a massive ride on an almost yearly basis. There's only so much room left on that peninsula. Short of stacking coaster on top of coaster there to the point where you can barely see the sunlight through the Intamin track, they'll have to go heavy on removals (or relocate things such as Challenge Park to the mainland, but that's another story).Plain and simple, CF screwed up the place, whether anyone wants to admit it or not. SF was a quick fix. Some guest service and maybe a little more theming. CF turned it into a permanent problem. They bled the park dry of everything people liked and tried to pin it on SF. I bought it then, along with alot of us. It's obvious that wasn't the case. Bless those souls who saw it back then. CF killed GL. Period.

With regards to the SeaWorld comment that had it shut down while under anyone else's management, the place would likely have died anyway, it's a strong point and one worth noting, but that doesn't take the blame off CF. A) The right management team could have made the place survive, but it would have to have no ties to any of the park's former competition, and B) no other management team but CF did take over, and the SeaWorld side didn't go until CF bought the place. Now, if SF steadfastly refused to hand the animals over to CF, then you could send some of the blame back to SF. Not all, as the right management team who would be willing to bring numbers to the place could have done it, but some of the blame, as that leaves CF in a really tight spot. However, if CF just said, "Hey, we don't want the animals," then I stand by my belief that they ruined the place.
*** This post was edited by sirloindude 9/22/2007 1:22:10 PM ***

Let's get real here, people. In terms of blame for the loss of historic Geauga Lake and the beloved Big Dipper, Cedar Unfair has 100% of this burden to bear - Busch was already a known ruthless corporate giant having trashed Circus World (B&B), but at least they left the place to a company they knew would continue competing with Cedar Pointless.

Six Flags could have sold it to a developer - although they knew the ultimate fate of Geauga in this transaction, at least they kept it 'in the industry' which is better than their handling of Astroworld.

I urge people to not spend anything at their parks thru the end of October, not buy their stock and to sell off their current shares in an effort to dip their unit shares as backlash to communicate to their board how unacceptable their actions are - it is the only effective way to communicate with greedy companys such as CF - Regular shareholders and gen. public don't give a crap, so it's up to people who care about these things to try any make a temporary dent that will make them think twice in the future about doing similar bad things with their other properties, especially without warning people beforehand who may want to visit one last time - they pulled the same crap with Hercules. At least let them know this lack of communication is not only poor judgement on their part, but a major lack of marketing savy - at least Astroworld, original Elitches, and Pavilion reaped the benefits of a flood of people pouring in to spend money one last time and buy commenmorative memoriabilia. I know I did at all three and I would have otherwise not made those trips if I hadn't heard of their demise.

I think this coasterbuzz site should cancel their boobuzz event and demand a refund from the park in protest to CF's press release about Geauga. It's worth the minor embarassment to Cedar Point.*** This post was edited by 9/22/2007 1:29:15 PM ***

That doesn't make sense, Paul. I see this all of the time in enthusiast forums... "If they didn't spend money on this, they could've spent money on that." That's not how business goes! If you don't have to spend money, you keep it, not spend it on something else!

I'm glad that Jeff (Peabody) and Gonch see where I'm going with my previous comment, and "symbiotic relationship" was exactly the words I was thinking.

Let's not split hairs here. Geauga Lake was little more than a picnic park before SeaWorld came along. There were countless ticket deals for the two of them, and neither was an all-day park in all the time I was growing up. I don't think I had ever been in the park in the evening. Geauga Lake needed SeaWorld, because it was during the SeaWorld era that it experienced most of its growth and ride development. When Busch pulled out, and Six Flags went a year without a whale, that was the beginning of the end, made worse by combining the parks into one gate. Of course, there was the bigger picture that Busch understood as well: A seasonal marine park is really, really expensive.

I think the damage Six Flags did was repairable in terms of guest experience, sure, but it didn't change the fact that Geauga Lake without the marine park was simply not sustainable. In addition, the marine park itself was likely not sustainable or Busch wouldn't have left. It all seems obvious now.

The thing that sticks out in my mind right now is the statement Kinzel made some time ago about wishing they had picked up the park when Funtime was selling. In retrospect, the purchase now feels like a real ego builder in that context.

---

I urge people to not spend anything at their parks thru the end of October, not buy their stock and too sell off their current shares in an effort to dip their unit shares as backlash to communicate to their board how unacceptable their actions are...

---

You're being childish. If you invest in a company, this kind of action, admitting you were wrong and making a correction, is what you applaud leadership for, not chastise them. Besides, a sell-off causes the unit price to go down, and people aren't going to piss away their investment. Grow up.

I'm not so sure Kinzel's buying it the second time around was an ego builder. My guess is that he would have rather bought the park himself than have another competitor come in.

There is no way they bought that park in order to just close it. They put a lot of good people on that park's staff in order to turn things around. The fact of the matter, as Jeff said, was that park was on a timeclock when Busch pulled out. Nobody can do a sea park better and nobody had better marketing skills than they did. Bottom line - it wouldn't work.

And, there is no way the sea life park would work without the Orcas. Even when Six Flags got one they couldn't get a second and I think it would be abusive to make that one whale live alone.

I don't think you can underestimate the percarious position Six Flags put that park in. Massive expenditures on attractions, prices being raised, customer service being ignored...and let's not forget the economic crisis that started facing (and continues to face) Northeast Ohio.

Kinzel's hands are dirty on this. There is no doubt about it. But statements like "Cedar Fair is 100% to blame" just shows an ignorance about what was more than a 3 year process. The last decade (or more) led to what happened yesterday.*** This post was edited by wahoo skipper 9/22/2007 1:55:15 PM ***

Everyone keeps talking about the money they could have invested and the customer service they could have provided but there's one VERY important factor no one (the ones talking about what could have or should have been done) mentions: where exactly do you propose they bring in the PEOPLE from?

Cedar Point's attendance has been flat or down since they bought GL. King's Island's attendance has (if I remember right) been slightly up, flat, then down in the last 3 years, Kennywood's attendance has probably been flat, if not slightly down (from what I hear from friends who work there judging crowds). So, if all of these parks which do not have ride removal, bad PR and the whole host of other GL issues to deal with could not increase their attendance with this supposed "piece of the pie" that wasn't going to GL, where was GL supposed to get the people from? 90%-95% of CP, KI and KW people aren't going to stop going to those parks just because of a nice PR campaign by GL. And 700k + 5% market from those 3 parks I would bet still isn't enough to justify a double-sided park with 7 roller coasters. It's enough to justify a great waterpark though ... and I'll bet breakeven on that is around 350 - 400k which is easily sustainable in their current market.

Face it folks, the market wasn't there to sustain it. The best business plan in the world still needs people with loose wallets coming through the gates; when the people vanish, the park needs radical change to survive.

... and just to pile on that childish comment; you're going to encourage people to sell their shares even at a loss so that for a few weeks, the stock price goes down until every investor worth their salt notices that the chain just got rid of a huge drawdown on their profits and cashflow and their stock price is way low. Then everyone else buys up the shares that you gave away and not only are you out money, but the people you're "punishing" are probably making more, and to boot, the as you put it "people who care about these things" have less control (through shareholder voting) over the direction of the company! If you'd sit back and think for a second, if you're really that pissed off, buy more stock, accumulate more votes and on your next proxy, vote out Kinzel.

---

There are a lot of really emotional responses here, and some pretty ridiculous accusations too, the worst of which being that Cedar Fair didn't try or intentionally tanked the park. Come on, do you really think they'd buy the park if they didn't think they could make it work?

---

I can't read CF's corporate mind so I do not know why they bought the park. I believe they bought GL in order to control comeptition to CP in CP's home market. (I believe that is why they bought MiA as well. When was the last significant upgrade at MiA? Especially compared to WoF and VF)

CF had a plan for GL. They abandoned that plan when they cut Phase II of the waterpark. I do not know if the did this because they realized GL was doomed no matter what, they realized their plan was wrong, they lacked the courage of their convictions, they decided that closing GL would increase attendance at CP while eliminating costs or some other reason. However, at some point in time CF believed they could be sucessful at GL.

---

I've talked to a lot of people close to the situation, people who worked there in the Six Flags/Premier days and even a few from the Funtime days. Piecing it all together, I am of the strong opinion that the company that really tanked the park was Anheuser-Busch, despite never having owned the place.

---

I do not dispute this. However, looking at objective data, the numbers, we see that MiA in its best year drew under 600,000. In its worst year GL drew 700,000. Why is a park that draws 100,000 more visitors per year less tenable--especially with CF running much of GL from CP thus having lower administrative costs than MiA?

Jeff is right: CF got into GL believing they could make it successful--they send a good GM there, they invested $25 mil in the waterpark on top of the $140 mil to buy it. But at some point in Year 2, for some reason they changed their mind--they cut Phase II, they removed rides and added NOTHING.

My guess: CF decided that by closing the ride side they will boost attendance at CP while cutting GL's cost. Could they have operated GL profitably with a steady draw of 700,000 or more? Previous owners, who lacked CF's resources and economies of scale, did. CF runs MiA on less than 600,000 visitors. But CF may prefer funnelling those people--or some percentage thereof--into CP and eliminating GL's costs.

In the CoasterBuzz podcast Dick Kinzel pointed out that stand alone waterparks don't work. Their waterparks in California suceed because they can run them out of Knotts and because they bought them cheaply--one was in receivership, according to Kinzel. Although CF will run the Geauga Lake waterpark out of CP they have spent $140 mil buying the park, and $25 for the new waterpark. If we assume relocating 4 rollercoasters saved them $60 mil that is a net outlay of $105 million. Astroworld, in a better location with a growing economy bought $77 mil for the land. If GL's land sold for the same amount, CF bought a waterpark for $28 mil. Not exactly a bargin price--especially since I would guess Ohio's season to be less attractive than Southern California's.

CF bought MiA and GL to protect CP. If MiA were in Detroit it probably would have been closed too. Nothing personal, strictly business.