Electric company sues Conneaut Lake Park for $273k in unpaid bills

No I dont.. I have a "look at me" link in my signature ;)

The other Ken...Ken Jones... it can't always be about you, you know! :) ;)

Im sorry.. I was thinking about me.. What was that again? :)

Nice! :)

Ensign Smith said:
Jeff, I'd be very interested in hearing you back this up.

Isn't this story the evidence? Why people keep throwing money for good after bad is beyond me, or why a judge continues to allow it to go on. If I can't pay my bills, the bank takes my house. Why do they keep giving this thing a pass?

RatherGoodBear said:
I always find it amusing thatany time there's a thread about Conneaut, there's at least 10-12 postsfrom people who claim they don't care about the place. You'd think theywere going to get the money to pay the debts by sawing you open andtaking it out of your colon.

If by people you mean me, no, Icomment on all kinds of things about the industry, regardless of howmuch I care about them. That's what people do in a forum like this. I'dprefer you keep the colon comments to yourself.

Newplusnotes has a very interesting new article about the state of Conneaut and what's being done to save and strengthen the park. I came away feeling somewhat more optimistic about its chances.

Yeah, they always need more funding. Sounds like Silicon Valley, only without the venture capitalists, MBA's, entrepreneurs or a potential market.

Ken Jones said:
But when the plan was devolped there was not much that could be done with out funding but with the new groups I can say that the plan is being done I can't say much about the plan as it has more pages than the last Harry Potter book. But when the plan is done Conneaut lake Park should be a Self Substainable self operating facility.

See, that's the part that doesn't make sense to me, though. A plan that doesn't contain the funding to support its implementation can't really be called a plan, can it?

I know there are things being done to generate funds to support the plan. But a solid source of funding is necessary to ensure success. I'm skeptical that fund raising (like the Blue Streak fundraiser) can be counted on to bring this park back.

And I really would love to be wrong about that. But the other thing I want to say is that I have a ton of memories of this park from when I was a kid. It seemed huge to me then when I was so small. To think of it operating in less than those terms seems sadder to me than if it were to be closed altogether.

If you have to raise money to operate in this manner, that's not a business, it's a charity.

I guess here's the main reason I am questioning this so much. If CLP is on its way (in any degree) to being a self sustainable business, then why are they still being sued by creditors? It seems to me that if CLP could present verifiable fruits from a solid plan, then shouldn't they already be in payment agreements with the prior creditors?

And I also just want to offer that while the Blue Streak fund raiser my be meant to only fund the project of bringing the coaster back, it's also true that the Blue Streak is a significant factor toward drawing larger numbers of guests back to the park. So in that way, that fund raiser is supporting the park as a whole and its future success.

Non-profits still have to pay their bills.

Again, where is the real leadership with a public outline of how things are going to turn around? Carrie is right. If there was some solid plan in place, they wouldn't keep getting sued.

Baloney. You can have the best business in the world and people will still sue you left and right. (Speaking from personal experience.)

And since CLP is officially an NPO, don't those types of organizations often rely heavily upon fundraisers? Goodness knows our local NPR station tries to grab my wallet through the speakers every three to six months.

They won't sue you for owing them money unless you don't pay them. You knew what I meant.

Carrie M. said:

I don't really know who that comment was directed toward, but for me, I really am interested in understanding the plan in play for CLP. Ken has a signature that states he is a CLP representative, so I was hoping he could shed some light about the details of what's going on.

Nope, Carrie, that comment wasn't directed toward you. You're at least asking intelligent meaningful questions. The usual tone of CLP threads is that Jeff mentions how much he hates the place, doesn't care about the place, and wishes it would close for good already. It's certainly his and anyone else's prerogative to do so. It's not my place to tell people which parks to like or not like. I'm just puzzled why a person who doesn't care about the place worries so much about its business plan and where its money is coming from, as long that person is not on the hook for any of it.

I'm also not aware that the word "colon" violates the TOS. And as long as I'm not violating the TOS, I see no reason why I should keep my comments to myself.

Baloney? Ham!

Yeah, Mike, you aren't really suggesting that sound businesses get sued all the time for not paying their bills, right? I don't think that happens.

I know this is Wikipedia and all, but there is a time line offered that is pretty interesting. According to this, CLP introduced the concept of leasing in 2005 when a judge finally ordered that it could not borrow money in order to open. That very next year, they still needed to borrow $250,000 to open and ended up with a loss of $400,000 for the year.

That was the last time it was open until this year. It may be true that it finally has what it needs to break even in operations each year. But still, isn't there a point when the hole that's been dug is so deep it can't be recovered from? Someone mentioned the hole is 2.4 million dollars deep. Can a NPO really make up that kind of spread?

Btw, the Blue Streak fundraiser was canceled for this weekend.

Carrie M. said:
I know this is Wikipedia and all...

Dont be hating on Wiki, yo! :)

And now I have a sudden urge for a sandwich.. Thanks Carrie.

You're welcome, my dear. But really, don't blame me; blame Mike. He's the one that went and started throwing lunch meat around and stuff. This was a peaceful, non-delicatessen discussion until then.

Carrie, would it help if I were to tell you I'm salami for everything I said? What can I say, I ham what I ham. But I promise I'll bacon it up to you. I didn't meat a word of it.

Just hope this makes it past Jeff's spam filter....

Oh, Mike, stop being such a meathead!

(I hate it when there's tension in a thread. I get all anxious and start making bad jokes.... -that's right, 'cause all my other jokes are awesome-....pretty soon I'll be begging for hugs again. ;) )

RatherGoodBear said:
The usual tone of CLP threads is that Jeff mentions how much he hates the place, doesn't care about the place, and wishes it would close for good already... I'm just puzzled why a person who doesn't care about the place worries so much about its business plan and where its money is coming from, as long that person is not on the hook for any of it.

First of all, you're putting words into my mouth. I don't hate the place. I don't even care much about it. But this, like everything else discussed here, is stuff about the amusement industry, and that's what we talk about here. Who cares if I have a vested interest in it? Am I to just ignore everything on my own site that I don't care about because you say so?

I'm also not aware that the word "colon" violates the TOS. And as long as I'm not violating the TOS, I see no reason why I should keep my comments to myself.

Don't play like you're devoid of responsibility. You're making it personal in an underhanded and prick-ish way, and I don't like it. There's a line between stating your opinion and what amounts to inadvertent name calling, and you're crossing it. Don't.