SF and CF: How they spend the profits.

Friday, June 29, 2001 10:12 PM
While I hear alot of CF spends the profits they make within the parks that make the profits and SF just sticks it in 1 pot and distributes it as they see fit, I kind of question this. While this scenario might be for the most part correct, you have to admit that SF usually spends the money at the parks that give them the best profit. This being parks like SFMM, SFGAm, SFGADv, and SFOT. Heck, you could look at SFGAm as a park with no close competition, but time and time again, they invest in this park. Why would they do that? They have nothing to worry about as far as another chain goes. Then you can look at a CF park like VF which also has no close competition. Do you see alot of building and expansion there? NO!!! So I think it is safe to say that SF practices what CF does for the most part. Exceptions would be SFWOA. I see the reasoning behind this. They have one of the best parks around from another company about 1 hour away. This is just my observation on this. Any other opinions on this subject?

-------------
Chitowns 6 year old daughter says "Daddy, Dippin Dots are nasty!!" I must say that I agree!!
+0
Friday, June 29, 2001 10:48 PM
I was thinking the same thing. I really don't want this to turn into another CP/SFMM thread, but it cracks me up when people say that Six Flags gives too much attention to SFMM. Look a little closer, it's not true. If anything, SFGadv has received the best treatment the last few years. A nice flat ride package, the best and most expansive waterpark in the chain, as well as "three" top line B&Ms. SFOT, SFWOA, SFGAm, SFOG, SFNE and SFMW have all been well taken care of.

I find the SFEG, SFKK arguement to be rather lame. How many people here actually call those two parks their homepark? My guess is, not many. I think that answers the question as to why those parks don't receive much.

-------------
"Hi, my name is Lara Croft. Welcome to my world".
+0
Friday, June 29, 2001 10:56 PM
I also have to ask the question, why aren't there 14 rollercoasters at "all" the CF parks? Why isn't CP's next coaster going to Valleyfair instead? I know the answer, but isn't it possible that Six Flags thinks basically the same way and just uses different means to get there? ;)

-------------
"Hi, my name is Lara Croft. Welcome to my world". *** This post was edited by OutKast on 6/30/2001. ***
+0
Friday, June 29, 2001 11:07 PM
Why don't all Six Flags parks have *15* rollercoasters like SFMM?. At least CF, Ill give them credit, wants hypers at all their parks. Why dont all Six Flags parks have hypers, why just the exceptions? SFEG doesnt have no competition, so tell me what have they gotten in the last 5 years?
+0
Friday, June 29, 2001 11:15 PM
Knott's does not have a hyper. And you missed my entire point.

-------------
"Hi, my name is Lara Croft. Welcome to my world".
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 5:43 AM
I agree, somewhat. I think you are right Chitown, it seems like SF would give money to the park that gives them the most money. Its smart, but I wonder what the other parks that are generating enough money but don't get anything will do

-------------
You are the Weakest Link, Goodbye.
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 7:41 AM
Basicly the park chains reinvest the money where they feel the funds invested will return the most profit. A big market can support more coasters and in fact needs more coasters to keep the lines reasonable. Let the lines get too long and people won't come back. Also new coasters keep people coming in. You'll never see 14 coasters at Elitch Gardens, the market just isn't big enough.

Of course, there are other factors, such as competing parks, length of season, building restrictions, political environemnt, land ownership, etc.
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 8:43 AM
You do realise that Six Flags is a MUCH MUCH BIGGER company than Cedar Fair with 5 times as many parks. They find it more difficult to choose where to invest in, whereas Cedar Fair can sit back and easily decide where to throw their money, usually at the Point.
Lets See, by your reckoning all of Cedar Fair's parks should have a hyper, fine thats 6 hypers. Now your arguement is that Six Flags does not want them in all of their parks. Bernard, I'll tell you know that there is NO WAY that Six Flags inc would buy about 30 hypers for each of there parks, and they have more than 30 parks. Plus you are missing the point that Six Flags inc is quite heavily in debt, they have said that they cant afford to buy any more rides, so they are focussing on improving their parks reputations.

-------------
Webmaster - Coaster Force
http://www.coasterforce.com
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 9:01 AM
I'll just put it this way. Six Flags makes some pretty haphazard decisions at times, but they are *still* a successful company and I'd gather that they know what they're doing. They are simply not going to invest heavily in parks where there will be no return of investment, bottom line in *all* major business.

-------------
There is no such thing as inner peace. There is only nervousness and death.
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 10:30 AM
Cedar Fair: It's all about the ROI...that's the way most parks should run. It's the most BRILLIANT idea that I have ever heard...

mikey
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 10:46 AM

Iron Wolf said:
"Bernard, I'll tell you know that there is NO WAY that Six Flags inc would buy about 30 hypers for each of there parks, and they have more than 30 parks.


That was my point in refuting Chitown's claim as to why certain CF parks dont get that much attention. My point was, at least CF is *gradually* installing those certain rides into their parks. Look at SFDL, when are they going to get something new. You cant just turn a park into part of the Six Flags chain, incorporate a major attraction/coaster and just forget about it.
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 11:08 AM
Why not? Parks do it all the time. The key word you used was *gradually*. If I'm not mistaken, SFDL received Superman:Ride Of Steel in 1999. To me that does not qualify as forgetting about the park. Some parks are just not going to receive a new attraction every year if their revenue does not warrent it.

-------------
There is no such thing as inner peace. There is only nervousness and death.
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 11:13 AM

DWeaver said:
"Why not? Parks do it all the time. The key word you used was *gradually*. If I'm not mistaken, SFDL received Superman:Ride Of Steel in 1999.


Hmmm, didnt they get it when they became a Six Flags Park in 99?
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 11:22 AM
How often do you think park's get new coaster's.
Everyone needs to step back and look at how often these park's got coaster's before SF or CF bought them.

-------------
Army rangers lead the way
+0
Saturday, June 30, 2001 11:30 AM

Exactly. Why do people feel that SF *must* add anything, especially a park where the return investment simply is not there. SFDL is one of the few parks lucky enough to have an Intamin hypercoaster. That isn't enough? Santa Cruz has operated with the same wooden and steel coaster for the last 10 years.
-------------
There is no such thing as inner peace. There is only nervousness and death.
+0

You must be logged in to post

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