New Orleans says Six Flags removed rides

Posted Wednesday, May 20, 2009 9:02 AM | Contributed by Jason Hammond

Six Flags removed some rides and attractions from its eastern New Orleans amusement park as recently as this month without first telling the city, a violation of its lease with the city, City Attorney Penya Moses-Fields said. The city received a temporary restraining order Tuesday that prevents Six Flags from removing assets from the site, such as rides and other attractions.

Read more from New Orleans City Business.

Related parks

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 10:03 AM

Gee, guess this means 6Flags should just power 'em up there to make some money with them in New Orleans. It's not like New Orleans or Six Flags is making any money on them now. If New orleans wants a park so bad, let them buy the rides off of Six Flags and call it a day.

Mr. 666: fine then, just take the football and we'll still go home...

Great Lakes Brewery Patron...


Wednesday, May 20, 2009 10:21 AM

The city of New Orleans annoys me. I don't think they understand that Six Flags is not reopening that park.

Millennium Flyers: Who says America can't make a good car?

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 10:26 AM
Soggy's avatar

Six Flags owns the rides, not the city. And it's pretty obvious SFNO isn't reopening. I find it odd that the city, who HAS received millions (billions???) in disaster relief money is attempting to squeeze blood from a stone here. SF has received no government cheese in hurricane Katrina funds, and the company otherwise is now facing possible bankruptcy. Also, as mentioned in the previous article, SF offered the city a settlement when they could afford it and they said take a hike.

My rather uninformed opinion here is that the city is trumping up false accusations in a thinly veiled attempt at extortion.

Last edited by Soggy, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 10:27 AM

Pass da' sizzrup, bro!

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:55 AM
Raven-Phile's avatar

I have to agree with you, Soggy. I also have to be a bit of a jerk, and chuckle at the fact that someone with the name "soggy" is commenting on SFNO. :)

I'm insensitive, I know.

Last edited by Raven-Phile, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:56 AM
R.I.P LeRoi Moore 9/7/61 - 8/19/2008
Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:52 PM

That would be like e x i t english sending a TR from Alton Towers . . .

My author website:

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:54 PM
Lord Gonchar's avatar

Why does this play out more and more like a Lifetime movie domestic distpute with each new turn?

Six Flags needs to claim that the city of New Orleans is stalking them.

Last edited by Lord Gonchar, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:54 PM
Wednesday, May 20, 2009 3:12 PM

^ If SF does that, NO will claim it was abused and sodomized by SF was a child.

Oh wait... that was the Cathoic church! Oh wait, that was last night Law & Order; SVU

(Toung firmly buried in cheek :) )

Coaster Junkie from NH
I drive in & out of Boston, so I ride coasters to relax!

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 4:25 PM
Soggy's avatar

I was "Soggy" long before Katrina hit... but that is kind of funny.

And as long as I'm re-commenting, I'll say that MegaZeph would be a fine addition to any park that would pay for its relocation. A prime example of CCI goodness.

Pass da' sizzrup, bro!

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 5:06 PM

Maybe they think that moving the rides will expose the body of Jimmy Hoffa, thus implicating all of New Orleans in a major, world-Class conspiracy.

Okay, maybe not.

Great Lakes Brewery Patron...


Wednesday, May 20, 2009 10:00 PM

I don't get how the city thinks they're entitled to any insurance money if they don't own any of the property that was insured, and they weren't paying for the policy.

I like how Attorney hyphen-hyphen claims that SF is "secreting some of those dollars." Don't you wish your glands could secrete money?

Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:25 PM

Why doesn't the city just man up and say
We want you to reopen even if you loose money so we can collect gate tax,parking tax,and hotel tax.

Ok I was stretching with hotel tax.but visitors might stay an extra day to visit the park.

The city knows they will get squat if/when bankruptcy is declared.By freezing the rides that are left they will be securing an asset the can attach a lien to. This is a way the city could get title to the rides and try to reopen the park again ?

Is this a strong arm tactic to get the entire park turned over to the city ?

Last edited by kevin38, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:27 PM
Thursday, May 21, 2009 12:52 AM
phoenixphan :-)'s avatar

I wonder if these people causing legal issues with SFNO realize that it doesn't matter if Six Flags were to pull out and give them the rides. I can't imagine anything is ready for turn key operation, as the park was submerged under flood waters. Any attempt to repopen the park would be futile, and starting from the ground up seems a better option. I say NO, let SF remove all the rides, at their expense, then get the land back to do as you wish. Just seems like a better business deal IMO.

Real men ride wood... coasters that is!

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2021, POP World Media, LLC