Q Funding calls for another special meeting to vote on rules for Cedar Fair board nominations

Posted Friday, February 4, 2011 12:58 PM | Contributed by Jeff

Stymied by Cedar Fair LP's corporate rules that do not allow its shareholders to nominate candidates for its board of directors, Q Investments is once more calling for a special shareholders meeting to remedy the situation. They want a special meeting for a vote on a proposal permitting shareholders to nominate board directors.

Read more from The Toledo Blade. See also: SEC Filing.

Friday, February 4, 2011 1:24 PM

Isn't this akin to the second season of "House" where Chi McBride's character kept trying to get rid of Dr. House? Just keep changing things till you get what you want?

Last edited by joe., Friday, February 4, 2011 1:29 PM
+0
Friday, February 4, 2011 1:46 PM

Is there a limit they can call in a calendar year? I assume obviously this is a tactic to initiate a higher distribution. Though, I do appreciate the sole fact that Dick's dander is being ruffled.

+0
Friday, February 4, 2011 2:34 PM

Q needs to "man up" and lay out EXACTLY WHAT THEIR AGENDA is and quit acting like thugs trying to change every rule in their favor so that unit holders have a clear picture of what the future of Cedar Fair can and should be and make educated votes based on FULL DISCLOSURE. At this point I think a lot of us can see that Q is no better than Dick Kinzel and hopefully in all of this drama one day soon someone with true INTEGRITY will come in an lead Cedar Fair to better days.

+0
Friday, February 4, 2011 2:39 PM

I thought their agena was solely to get rid of Dick Kinzel. I think when he is out of the picture, they will be a lot less active.

+0
Friday, February 4, 2011 10:13 PM

No, PGS, their agenda is to divert cash flow to unitholders. Getting rid of DK (who wants to pay down debt first) is the means, not the end. If DK slashed capex, ignored the debtholders and diverted the $$$ to the distribution Q was would be bff with DK.

+0
Friday, February 4, 2011 11:15 PM

Q-Funding, and all their hedgefund glory, is getting old within the park community. They want more money, and also, they have ZERO business involved in Cedar Fair's operations. Period.

I like Kinzel personally, but, I do not like all his decisions. He has a compnay to run, and as a human being, he makes good and bad decisions. Q-tips need to go away, and let Cedar Fair take care of their own house.

Go Steelers!

+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 12:41 AM

I will say that I'm not as big a fan of Q overall as I was at first. However, getting Kinzel out the door or his ability to control what goes on diminished is the first and biggest step towards keeping Cedar Fair in a good position. That much hasn't changed. Q's actions as of late though, do not seem to sit entirely well with unit-holders, and I can understand the hesitancy. I'm still a "wait and see" person, but if I were a unit holder, I would definitely be closer to the "lay it all out on the table, right now." side.

Last edited by maXairMike, Saturday, February 5, 2011 12:41 AM
+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 9:42 AM

Maybe it has been Gordon Gecko the whole time.


Kevin, who just watched the original "Wall Street" last night.

+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 10:39 AM

As far as agenda it's simple - Q is in this for the money - nothing else. That is often an american way!

When Q bought the shares they did not "Sign a promise" to fix cedar fair - show me that document if I'm wrong...

That all said - if you don't like what Q is doing then start a grass roots campaign with the rest of the shareholders which share your viewpoint.

Last edited by Jerry, Saturday, February 5, 2011 10:40 AM
+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 11:25 AM

maXairMike said:
I will say that I'm not as big a fan of Q overall as I was at first. However, getting Kinzel out the door or his ability to control what goes on diminished is the first and biggest step towards keeping Cedar Fair in a good position. That much hasn't changed.

I must disagree.

1) DK maintained capex. Will Q do that or slash it and divert the $$$ to unitholders?

2) Q wants to minimize debt reduction, thus leaving CF (and capex) more vulnerable.

3) DK is committed to the parks business. How fast do you think Q would close the parks and sell the land if they thought they could make more $$$?

If getting DK out is followed by replacing him who is only interested in sucking money out of CF, then "the first and biggest step towards keeping Cedar Fair in a good position" would be followed by bigger steps in the wrong direction. Blind faith that whatever follows DK must be better is not remotely justified.

+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 3:09 PM

Q won't do anything. They don't have any daily decision making capability. Why is this so lost on people? Furthermore, there's a balance that has to be made as well between getting the distribution that Q wants and maintaining the long-term integrity of the company. The only reason they have any influence at all is because they're a huge unit holder, and obviously they'll want to sell those units eventually. Devaluing the company and causing the price to tank is not in their best interest.

+0
Saturday, February 5, 2011 4:57 PM

Q reminds me of my wives Grandmother who used to love playing "Crazy Eurchre." Pretty much if she had a bad hand she would say "ok we are playing Crazy Eurchre. The person with the fewest tricks wins"

Q wants to changes the rules to suit them instead of going with the rules that are already there.

+0
Sunday, February 6, 2011 12:07 AM

What does that even mean?

+0
Sunday, February 6, 2011 12:39 AM

Agent Johnson said:
They want more money

I know. What nerve those guys have to expect a bigger return on their investment.


Q-tips need to go away, and let Cedar Fair take care of their own house.

And they're holding the company accountable? Next thing you know they'll sell the stock when the price reaches a high point.

+0
Sunday, February 6, 2011 9:07 AM

Jeff said:
The only reason they have any influence at all is because they're a huge unit holder, and obviously they'll want to sell those units eventually. Devaluing the company and causing the price to tank is not in their best interest.

Unless the "eventually" is right after the distribution is reinstated, but before the actual long term impact kills the company.

+0
Sunday, February 6, 2011 12:10 PM

Jeff said:
What does that even mean?

Seriously? It means they keep trying to change the rules till they are rules they can win with. I didn't think speaking in metaphor was such a problem.

+0
Sunday, February 6, 2011 1:51 PM

What rules? You're speaking in vague generalities.

+0
Wednesday, February 9, 2011 9:45 AM

Yesterday, Q made yet another SEC filing.

+0
Wednesday, February 9, 2011 11:21 AM

"It saddens us to have to bring to your attention such serious charges."

Ironic to see that statement in a filing alleging securities fraud.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...