Lots of new attractions at Cedar Fair parks next year...HMMMMM.

...So, why a milti [sic]-billion dollar company, can't spend a fraction of what the original owners did with building up the park, with less money, is beyond me....

The original owners brought the park close to being the proper-sized park for its market. A multi-billion dollar company that invested heavily in expanding parks, regardless of what the parks actually needed, wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar company for long.

....As for Geauga lake, I don't think the park was failing at all. I think they planned to buy it, and dismantle it from day one. Not so much because it's location near Cedar Point, but, because they had a slew of shiny, almost new coasters...

Uh. My. Do you not realize that if Cedar Fair just wanted the coasters, they could have bought their own models of those coasters? At considerable less expense than buying Geauga Lake and investing heavily in converting it to a Cedar Fair park? The idea that Cedar Fair, or any company, would go through such a convoluted, expensive means to acquire a few coasters boggles the mind.

...I think the only reason the water park is still there, is because it may have been too costly for them to remove it...

Mind boggled, part two. You think it's more cost effective to run a park year after year than to just close it down?

...and milk it for cash...

It's an indelicate way of putting it, but "milking" things for cash is what for-profit companies do. McDonald's "milks" the sale of hamburgers for cash.

...What would you do if Cedar Fair bought your favorite park, and sat on it for 16 years...

I'd be happy it was still in business after 16 years.

I remain perplexed why you consider Michigan's Adventure to be your favorite park, considering you seem to like nothing about it.

Thank you, T-R, for providing the opportunity to pass a few minutes on a boring Tuesday evening.

T-R:

Maybe your former owner's vision was to build the park up with a few decent woodies (not the most expensive ride on the shelf, incidentally), a few cheap flats, and then sell the place off to the first large corporation that felt like taking care of it. To be fair, I cant possibly know their motive, but you act like it was stolen. I seriously doubt they took a bath on the deal...

I travel a lot and visit the park wherever I go. You wanna see a crappy park? Try Adventureland in Altoona, Iowa. Maybe I'm spoiled being from Ohio, but that place actually made me sad. Poorly maintained, out of date coasters, old assed flats, a so-so waterpark and the phoniest old-time atmosphere I've seen. The place was worn out, with dirty paint, cracked sidewalks, bad food, and horrible merch. And guess what? The fine folks of Des Moines seem perfectly happy with the park, and were lined up all over the place to get in and ride the rides. I've never once heard that park is in danger of going out of business.

My point to all that is this. Nobody, especially Cedar Fair, is sitting around thinking about how to make you miserable. You have a fine park there, (I liked it a lot and put it pretty close to Vallyfair in terms of atmosphere and entertainment value) and in spite of how you feel, it's successful for exactly what it is. Be happy you have a place to go to in Michigan, a place that's known nationwide for it's short summer season.

I might also advise you to move to a place that might make you happy, but that's a lost cause and would be a fool's advice. Even your trips to Cedar Point, the place you say garners all the attention, are fraught with misery.

Perhaps you should give up amusement parking, run a campground, and try to turn it into the type of playground you enjoy. If nothing else, it might teach you some business sense.

It's worth noting that the GM, still there years later, is part of the family of previous owners. She obviously cares about the place, and the evil corporation values her being there.

I've met her a few times. She does very obviously care about the park.

That's an excellent note. We met the Jourdens many times, back in the day, when they would speak to us at No Coaster Con over the winter. They seemed like a nice family who truly loved their park.

It's reported the Cedar Fair deal rang in at $28,000,000 which sounds like a win for everybody.

Timber-Rider said:

As for Geauga lake, I don't think the park was failing at all. I think they planned to buy it, and dismantle it from day one. Not so much because it's location near Cedar Point, but, because they had a slew of shiny, almost new coasters, that they could dismantle, and add as new at their other parks. They could then build for about 75 percent less, then what it would cost them to build from the ground up. They can call them new rides at their other parks, and boost up attendance and sales at those parks, at the demise of Geauga lake. Not because it was failing.

The key here is that you're referring to my comment and I never said Geauga Lake - I said SFWOA.

Big difference.

The funniest part about all of these wacky theories about how/why CF killed that park is that they never seem to acknowledge the fact that Six Flags sold the park...for next to nothing.

Why would Six Flags run as fast as they could from a wildly successful park?

CF could have had a number of motives when they purchased the park. Truth is we'll never know.

But what we do know is that Six Flags put just 4 years into the park before they had enough and practically gave it away just to get out from under it.

That's not generally what owners do to successful businesses.

SFWOA failed because they overbuilt for the market. MiA works because they haven't.

RCMAC said:

but that's a lost cause

You misspelled "kause," MAC.

Lord Gonchar said:
SFWOA failed because they overbuilt for the market. MiA works because they haven't.

Let's just repeat this, for emphasis.

Oh my, what's that over there? A dead horse? Oops, no, sorry... It's just Geauga lake.
:-)

Gonch is right, there's no way for us to know what CF's motives were up there. I personally think they saw an opportunity, gave it an honest go, and finally cut their losses. And let's not fault them for recognizing an instant ride re-location program was present. Who wouldn't sop up THAT gravy, for chrissake? There's where good business sense comes in. And the park goers in Richmond, Charlotte, Allentown, Cincinnati, and yes, even poor, neglected Muskegon are thrilled with their shiny new attractions. And we, as enthusiasts, should at the very least be thrilled that they live on somewhere.

What looked sketchy to the mad-as-hell GL fanboys was the handling of the closure. Writing was on the wall when rides started closing and trickling out of there, then the company let no one know the long-feared final day of operation was on them until it had passed. So if they're guilty of anything it's poor handling with public, but once again there may have been method to their madness. Perhaps it's as simple as just wanting to get out of there without causing an uproar, an angry mob at the gate, or the need to 'handle' a situation when they had other things to do.

And I guess until someone sits down to write their tell-all memoir, we'll never know. Right?

Lord Gonchar said:

But what we do know is that Six Flags put just 4 years into the park before they had enough and practically gave it away just to get out from under it.

That's not generally what owners do to successful businesses.

Obviously, you don't know the way Cleveland does things. Usually, if it doesn't work out within the first year, we kick it to the curb and start over.

^Explains the Browns... :-P

That'sTheJoke.jpg :)

I'm a little more than annoyed with them, to say the least.

For the record, Cedar Fair paid $145m for Geauga Lake. Whether that is "next to nothing" I'll leave for others to decide.

CF's EDITDA for 2003 (the year before they bought GL) was $175m, so GL cost them almost a year's cash flow. Again, whether that is a lot or a little, I'll leave for others to argue.

$145 million for 700 acres, 13 coasters, a full collection of flat rides, smaller rides and kiddie rides, a water park, animal park and all the infrastructure to go along with it.

Yep. Next to nothing.

And it's not CF's financial situation that makes the point, it's Six Flags'. To let all of that go and walk away for just $145 million says it all. Hell, they could've just closed the doors and pieced it all out like CF did. But they didn't. They took a bottom-dollar offer and walked away.

Although fans of alternative history scenarios might enjoy considering a timeline where SF does just that.

Wasn't HRP, a much smaller park, built for a lot more than Geauga was sold for?

Yes. And sold for a lot less...a LOT less ($25 mil?) than Geauga sold for. A year after it was built.

HRP cost about $225M
http://themeparkuniversity.com/backstage-access/hard-rock-park-10-w...rk-closed/

Just a comment about six flags selling Worlds of Adventure to Cedar fair. They were in serious debt, and they knew that Worlds of Adventure would sell, and Cedar fair was obviously eager to buy it. If it was failing so miserably as everyone says. Why would Cedar fair buy such a failure? unless they were expecting it to fail. (based on what you are all saying)

The park was not over built, the company was failing with all of it's parks, and World's Of Adventure was just one of many that were sold to pay off six flags massive debt, to which the sale of Worlds of Adventure, got them a much needed chunk of cash. There was even talk during the deal, the Cedar Fair wanted to purchase Great America as well, to which Six Flags said no.

Also, I think the reason Cedar fair's version of Geauga Lake did not do as well as they hoped, is because they pretty much abandoned what six flags did with the park, by not wanting to do anything with the sea world side of the park. Which, back during Worlds of Adventure, was still fairly popular, even though it was a million times better as Sea World. And, not having that same atmosphere, with nothing new to get excited about, is probably why Cedar Fair did not do well there.

Like I said I have been there under all 3 owner ships. And, I think it was way better under six flags. Cedar Fair did nothing with the park, and when I went there, way too many rides were closed.

Timber-Rider said:

Just a comment about six flags selling Worlds of Adventure to Cedar fair. They were in serious debt, and they knew that Worlds of Adventure would sell...

So when you're in debt do you sell assets that are bringing in a return or cut loose the dead weight that's causing losses?

Now which do you think SFWOA really was?

If it was failing so miserably as everyone says. Why would Cedar fair buy such a failure? unless they were expecting it to fail. (based on what you are all saying)

1. Because they thought they may be able to turn it around.

2. They may have thought this based on being able to offer a sort of 'synergy' with CP. (something SF couldn't do)

3. The fire sale pricing.

4. They most likely went in understanding that it might not work but at the price they got it for that if it didn't offer the expected returns they could piece out things to the rest of the chain and still leave an operating waterpark in that spot.

The park was not over built, the company was failing with all of it's parks, and World's Of Adventure was just one of many that were sold to pay off six flags massive debt...

There was even talk during the deal, the Cedar Fair wanted to purchase Great America as well, to which Six Flags said no.

Because Great America was appropriately sized for it's market and making money. (see the theme here yet?)

Also, I think the reason Cedar fair's version of Geauga Lake did not do as well as they hoped, is because they pretty much abandoned what six flags did with the park, by not wanting to do anything with the sea world side of the park.

That's entirely possible and maybe even correct. But it's neither here nor there because Michigan's Adventure currently doesn't have, nor did it ever have, a SeaWorld-level animal park as part of admission. (and it never will because it'd be too much for the market to bear)

Like I said I have been there under all 3 owner ships. And, I think it was way better under six flags. Cedar Fair did nothing with the park, and when I went there, way too many rides were closed.

So you think it's just a convenient coincedence that the park existed as a small/moderately sized park for 113 years, but closed just 7 years after Six Flags added a buttload of coasters, new rides and combined two gates into one to create an oversized megapark?

I'm still putting my money on the idea that it was too much for little ol' Aurora, Ohio. Just like it'd be too much for little ol' Muskegon, Michigan.

Why was Cedar Fair "obviously" eager to buy the park?

Saying that Six Flags "knew" the park would sell implies that Six Flags knew the park would be successful. If they knew the park would be successful, why would they sell it?

The park was not overbuilt? Context, please. What do you base that opinion on? Because -- frankly -- the park was overbuilt.

Cedar Fair chose not to replace the aquatic animals Sea World and Six Flags removed from the park? That's not "pretty much abandoned" -- that's making a deliberate choice based on corporate objectives.

When you went there, "way too many" rides were closed? Sounds to me like Cedar Fair was trying to match the parks attendance to the parks capacity.