Six Flags and Cedar Fair Merger

Yeah, but there are some huge caveats to that...

1) The article talks about migration of stock to players with short term interests who are reluctant to block the sale. In Cedar Fair's case, it is pretty clear that there was significant migration of units to the very players who have announced their intent to block the sale.

2) The article notes that where shoreholder activism was successful in stopping a deal, there was something fundamentally wrong with the deal. That seems to be the case with the Cedar Fair-Apollo deal, given that the so-called premium price is actually a discount from any reasonable historical measurement of the company

There are other factors in the Cedar Fair situation that are also at play here. One is the comparatively large number of individual investors, and that is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, with the suspension of the dividend, these people have to consider certain tax implications as they are responsible for paying taxes on a portion of the company's earnings. That would make them more likely to sell. On the other hand, a large number of these individual investors...the ones who didn't sell back when anybody with a pulse could see that the unit value was about to crash...have already shown themselves to be irrational investors. That is, their investment in FUN is not necessarily for the usual reasons that people invest in a company. They invested in FUN because they wanted to be a part of it, and selling will end that relationship with the company. It may be the best thing to do in the short run, but the emotional tie to the company may not allow it. And besides, they're probably hoping for the price to go back up again, as it probably will.

Actually, if the Knott holdings vote against the merger, that's around 20% of the outstanding units already committed against the merger...that means approval really would be an uphill battle.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Lucky for us, it's not for you to decide where conversations go.

Jeff said:
Yeah, because being a douchebag is just like having a qualified opinion. And no, making a smiley face doesn't make it better.

LOL @ qualified opinion...

At least Dave wasn't just being biased because of his employment.

And how do you know that Jeff is biased because of his employment? If you do some digging, you'll find that his disdain for the whole Microsoft anti-fanboyism goes 'waaaaay back, back when he probably never even considered working for the Empire. The fact is, Microsoft is a gigantic company that does a whole lot of stuff. We all know that Windows and Office, the products that make them a whole lot of money, are mostly lowest-common-denominator crap. Windows less-so than Office, but it's kind of hindered by the garbage hardware out there that people try to run it on. But when you get into some of their other product lines, particularly some of their enterprise server stuff, and apparently their developer tools, some of their product is best-in-class. Jeff has been a developer for long enough that he has been able to see that "other side of Microsoft" for a very, very long time.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

I was being sarcastic Dave.

As far as Microsoft, my original point was I think it's rather prejudicial (and even biased) to call someone names simply because they used M$ in a post. That doesn't automatically make them a Microsoft hater. I like Microsoft, have their products, buy their stuff, use Bing! even (Love their maps better than Google maps).

But calling someone names simply because they used M$ (without actually saying anything else negative about the company) is really kind of being what he was calling the other guy.

If typing M$ (and I do use that) is what makes me a douchebag, then, well, I'm confused. I thought it was my antagonistic nature and petty arguing (and fist pumping, lets not forget fist pumping). If that's all it takes, then I don't want to be a douchebag anymore, it's too easy now.

The use of "M$" makes someone a douchebag, IMO, because it's a lame, lazy attempt at denigrating something while not actually taking the time to know what the 'eff you're talking about.

Hell, it was an old, tired joke 10 freaking years ago (Steve Jobs wears turtlenecks LOLZ!), and never made sense to begin with. I mean, is Microsoft supposed to avoid making money?

RideMan said:
The fact is, Microsoft is a gigantic company that does a whole lot of stuff.

Exactly the point I have to make on a regular basis. And even as someone with four Macs in the house (and iPhones, iPods and AppleTV's), I have to admit that Windows 7 is pretty damn solid. And in the better-late-than-never category, the things you'll see about the phone this week out of Mix will be impressive, especially from a developer perspective. The site you enjoy was built on Microsoft products, and it's all custom stuff. You're welcome.

Tekwardo said:
But calling someone names simply because they used M$ (without actually saying anything else negative about the company) is really kind of being what he was calling the other guy.

So in your world, it's OK if it's a big company, but not if it's individuals. Yeah, that makes sense.

And Brandon specifically keys in to my beef about the use of that stupid non-acronym. It takes no effort and makes no point, to say nothing of the fact that it implies that making money is immoral or naughty or God know's what.

...and still, to this day, whenever this retro-geek sees the "$" character parked to the RIGHT of a character or word, I still read it as "string"...

--Dave Althoff, ][.

A lot to comment on here. Where to start?

Interesting that it seems that Jeff isn't a fan of BASIC, even though, based on my limited knowledge, I was under the impression that Jeff's employer was a major player in BASIC back in the day. I used to program on the Commodore 64 (64c actually) while still in grade school.

I won't jump too deep into the Microsoft fight here, but will add that my Microsoft IntelliMouse Optical is having issues. The side right button isn't working. I BLAME JEFF! :).

I do want to know why Windows version 6.1 is marketed under the name "Windows 7." That just seems confusing to me. Why not make it version 7.0, or give it a non-numaric marketing name, like with 5.1 and 6.0 (xp and Vista)?

As to the burgers, I have eaten at Five Guys, In-and-Out, and B-Spot. Interestingly, I think I came across an old blog entry by Michael Symon about burgers, where I believe he claimed he was not a fan of fast food style burgers except for Five Guys and In-and-Out. All three of these burger places would rate good or better.

I try not to eat pork, so I don't go to B-Spot, since they cook with pork fat, (I've eaten there only once, and didn't have fries), but as Michael Symon himself told me, they are honest about it! Interestingly enough, B-Spot is near an area with a large Jewish population. I also try not to mix milk and beef, but Five Guys is my one major weakness, even though I don't get cheeseburgers, because there is supposedly dairy in their buns.

If anyone in Northern Ohio wants a great burger, B-Spot is the place to go. Plus, the "Porky Fries" look amazing.

As for the original topic, I am curious as to what happens tomorrow. I doubt they would merge with Six Flags, but then again, as was brought up before, look at what happened with Sears and K-Mart. And my understanding was that it was K-Mart that bought Sears, not the other way around!

-Sam