Continued: Cedar Fair announces Geauga Lake will be water park only
I'm not sure if it is still the case but Cedar Point maintained the road with snow plows/salt during the winter months.
But, getting back to the point (no pun intended) I don't know if any other use would garner more money than what the park makes now.
wahoo skipper said:
Comparing what Cedar Fair "could have" done with Geauga and the Point to what Disney did in California and Florida is ridiculous. In California you can almost toss a baseball from one entry gate to the other. In Florida about the longest drive from park to park is a half hour at most (Magic Kingdom to Animal Kingdom).
I'm by no stretch saying that it would have been the same or even similar, but marketing at stay at a local hotel that runs shuttle buses to both of the parks doesn't sound like a horrible idea. Maybe Cedar Fair buys and builds a nice hotel themed to coasters near the airport, and then does exactly that for its guests. Maybe it builds two hotels -- one near the airport, one near GL and the Breakers and uses all three of them.
The properties were spread out, but this would have been good in this case. The Disney and Universal parks that are side by side are completely different themes. The two parks CF owned in this area were very similar, so not being able to compare them side by side would've been nice.
Add to that that CF could've done something like on Saturdays at CP, they would open MF and TTD for one hour prior to park opening for people who were staying at a hotel, and on Sundays they would have opened Steel Venom and X-Flight, and I think that it would have been interesting to see how it worked.
It may have failed, and then I would've been happy that they at least tried (and they could've done this on a small basis -- maybe shuttle buses from the Breakers to GL on the weekend or something with a discounted ticket). But they didn't try, so we'll never know.
Jeff said:
Geauga Lake was a bargain. In 2005 dollars, just doing a quick add in my head, the land alone, with no buildings, no rides, was declared as $32 million in the sale. The five newest coasters were worth around $50 million alone. And here's the thing, they still get to keep the Sea World side. All things considered, it's far from a catastrophic loss.
But the problem is that even if the land price holds to be the same amount with the market a little down, they make $32 million from that. The buildings are practically useless, as they won't be moving them elsewhere. The coasters and rides, while valued at probably $100 million overall both spent the last four years depreciating and a move and re-install of a ride costs a lot of money, will probably end up at half their value, and I'm sure that at least a few of the bigger ones (rapids ride, Raging Wolf Bobs) won't end up being relocated and instead will just turn to scrap.
So, even if you take the land holdings and the rides holdings at the $100 mil mark, they're still going to end up about $40 million off the 5% gain that should be realistic for them.
Spinout said:When amusement parks are FREE, you will see the a whole lot more people going to them.
^That's what SFoG said! ;)
I know it costs to dismantle/move/rebuild the coaster, but surely not $10 mil, right?
So, basically, they had the blueprints, but scrapped it....
Could have been that was going where the old waterpark was....who knows?
It may have failed, and then I would've been happy that they at least tried (and they could've done this on a small basis -- maybe shuttle buses from the Breakers to GL on the weekend or something with a discounted ticket). But they didn't try, so we'll never know..
Yeah and I'd like to know how much money Cedar Fair should waste to make a few people happy? 10 more million? 100 Million? Should they sell the paramount parks that are making a profit, invest 300 million into the park? Should CF have added more rides despite not being able to make their bottom line? Or do they take a small loss and keep their losses minimal?
I'm afraid Cedar Fair may loose a few hundred dollars from a few angry members on here boycotting their parks, but the world doesn't revovle around them. In the grand scheme of things I think CF would rather lose a few thousand bucks from a couple angry enthusiest than continue to risk millions and millions.
You're completely ignoring the fact that the land is going to be rezoned for some other use.
thecoasterguy said:
But the problem is that even if the land price holds to be the same amount with the market a little down, they make $32 million from that...
So, even if you take the land holdings and the rides holdings at the $100 mil mark, they're still going to end up about $40 million off the 5% gain that should be realistic for them.
Mark my words, they'll come out of this at least even, and still get to run the water park and freshen the ride lineups of other parks on the cheap.
Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
PsychoMonkey61 said:
It may have failed, and then I would've been happy that they at least tried (and they could've done this on a small basis -- maybe shuttle buses from the Breakers to GL on the weekend or something with a discounted ticket). But they didn't try, so we'll never know.Yeah and I'd like to know how much money Cedar Fair should waste to make a few people happy? 10 more million? 100 Million? Should they sell the paramount parks that are making a profit, invest 300 million into the park? Should CF have added more rides despite not being able to make their bottom line? Or do they take a small loss and keep their losses minimal?
I'm afraid Cedar Fair may loose a few hundred dollars from a few angry members on here boycotting their parks, but the world doesn't revovle around them. In the grand scheme of things I think CF would rather lose a few thousand bucks from a couple angry enthusiest than continue to risk millions and millions.
Erm, did you really not understand my post that much?
I as an 'investor' want them to try to leverage the properties to make more money by getting people to stay at Cedar Fair hotels and spend more money at Cedar Fair parks. That they didn't do that was stupid. Running shuttle buses from the Breakers to GL would have been the perfect thing to experiment with.
Think about it -- the Breakers is getting guests to stay there for at least two nights, something that may not have been happening otherwise. The people go to GL and without a car stay in the park to eat. They spend another day at a CF property that they might not otherwise have done. And CF could even use the shuttle buses to show information about their other properties to sell people on them further.
Jeff said:
You're completely ignoring the fact that the land is going to be rezoned for some other use.Mark my words, they'll come out of this at least even, and still get to run the water park and freshen the ride lineups of other parks on the cheap.
Not ignoring it, I just don't necessarily believe that rezoning the land would result in a tripling of the value of it. Perhaps it will. I definitely hope that it does, for Cedar Fair's sake.
Would it have been a huge investment? I doubt it would have been more than $100,000 to try for a year, and probably half that to try for a year only on weekends. If each person to GL spent only $50 total between ticket and food, Cedar Fair would've only needed 2000 people to do this to break even.
That doesn't take into account the longer stays at the Breakers, either. As an 'investor', this was worth the risk because if it didn't work out, the risk was minor. If it did, the potential gain was MAJOR.
Now, the question is, how many people...realistically...want to ride a bus for an hour and a half (or longer) during the middle of their vacation to see another amusement park or water park? I mean, they already have both right outside their "front doors", not too mention the beach/lake. Now, I've scheduled day trips on vacations before (went to the pyramids while in Cancun) but even then I somewhat regretted taking that long day to do that even though it was a unique experience.
I just don't see it. Could they have done some other type of cross marketing? Sure. I think Universal has tried that to some degree in Florida where you can pay for a ticket package that would include their park(s), Sea World and/or Busch Gardens. But, those are three unique experiences.
Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
I've never used it and don't know how busy it gets, but they DO run it, everyday...
But, going from Cedar Point to Geauga Lake just doesn't make a lot of sense unless you are a coaster nut trying to get credits.
Jeff said:
Check the tax records, man! They have to pay out millions every year. The suggestion that shuttling people an hour and a half away from Cedar Point to make it profitable, is crazy. You've already got them spending money, why would you spend money to get them to spend somewhere else?
If they are spending millions on taxes every year, than that is more money down the drain. Like I said before, I'm not sure what will happen there, but I'm glad that you have such great optimism that they are going to make out like bandits on the closure. I just don't think that Six Flags would have sold it to them vastly under the market value if they could've done the same thing.
As for shuttling people, it isn't necessarily to make GL profitable -- it is to get people to spend more time and more money at properties owned by the same group. I'm surprised that everyone here thinks that this is such a foreign concept -- if a family of four would generally go to Cedar Point for a day and spend one night at the Breakers once a year, wouldn't it be better for Cedar Fair to convince them to spend their day at Cedar Fair and another day at GL, as well as two nights at the Breakers?
I do understand that the Breakers is often at capacity. That's why I think that they should have experimented with it to see if there was more of a market to invest into it in the future. Maybe because the parks were similar experiences, no one would have wanted to do it, and then the experiment is over. But maybe it works and then Cedar Fair can invest in different types of attractions for both places.
Yes, Cedar Point and GL are an hour and a half away from each other, but unless they were intending to do this from the beginning, it truly only did make sense for them to buy the property to shut it down, which they then should have done immediately. If Cedar Fair didn't want CP and GL to be complementary experiences, then there is no sense having one company own both parks which clearly do compete with one another, and again I question why the heck they bought it to begin with.
Again -- I point to the 'coaster wars' years when Six Flags and Cedar Point were both building more and bigger rides as the best years in the way of attendance for both of these parks. I'm guessing that a lot of people who went to one went to the other. That's the last time I was there, and I know I did. I was looking at heading to Cedar Point either this season or last, and I didn't even consider GL under their management, although I probably would have if they had made it look like a deal to stay an extra day and go to GL too.
If Cedar Fair could have done something to try and woo people back maybe they should have had a NE Ohio day with free or reduced admission to encourage those that gave up on Six Flags and it's dirty park with nasty staff to come try out it's cleaner park with better trained staff. Now THAT might have put a dent into the naysayers who gave up on the park while extending an olive branch to the community.
Years ago Cedar Point had a Sandusky day, or something like that, at the beginning of the season which served as a "trial run" and it was popular. I'm not sure what stopped it other than greed or insurance concerns.
That is a reasonable thing Cedar Fair could have done to reach out to the community.
thecoasterguy said:
But the problem is that even if the land price holds to be the same amount with the market a little down, they make $32 million from that...
So, even if you take the land holdings and the rides holdings at the $100 mil mark, they're still going to end up about $40 million off the 5% gain that should be realistic for them.
You're completely ignoring the fact that the land is going to be rezoned for some other use.Mark my words, they'll come out of this at least even, and still get to run the water park and freshen the ride lineups of other parks on the cheap.
I don't live in the greater Cleveland so I couldn't say.
However, the land under Astroworld in Houston sold for $77m. It was in the heart of Houston, which has a growing economy not on the outskirts of Cleveland and so GL should sell for less than that.
As to the $50m in coasters, unless Big Dipper, RWB, the Villian, Head Spin, and the Beaver Land mine ride are moved deduct those from the $50m. Also, do you think CF would have spent $$$ on an Impuse for DP or an invert for MiA? The potential ROI isn't there. Realistically, the only $$$ savings to CF are what they would have spent on new steel at KI & KD.
Don't forget to add the $25m they spent on the waterpark to the costs. If it ends up being profitable then it's $$$ well spent. If GLWWK ends up closing toss another $25m onto the wrong side of the ledger.
As I see it:
Costs:
Aquisition: $145
Water Park: $25
TOTAL:$170m
Benefits:
X-Flight: <$15 (don't forget relocation costs)
Dominator: <$15 (don't forget relocation costs)
Land: $75 (based on Astroworld price-and thats 2.5x the $32m Jeff says it was worth in 2004)
TOTAL:$105m
That means they need $65m out of the waterpark side to breakeven. And since that $170m was borrowed or could have been in the bank earning interest they would be $$$ behind at a 0% ROI.
Maybe the land is worth way more--it has to be to come close to break even.
This Isn't A Hospital--It's An Insane Asylum!
Closed topic.
