Posted Tuesday, August 9, 2005 9:20 AM | Contributed by Jeff
Six Flags Inc. on Monday reported a second-quarter profit, up from a year-ago loss, as the company said good weather and the second year of an advertising blitz helped drive attendance at its theme parks. The company reported profit on common stock of $5.6 million, or 6 cents per share, compared with a loss of $12.3 million, or 13 cents per share, last year.
Read more from AP via Yahoo.
ProSlide is the new B&M. Muuuuahahahahahaha.
Here's the new SF Coaster Dork whine, learn it well:
SF turned a profit and all I got was a Steenking Tornado!
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
By all means correct me IF I’m showing ignorance here…
They’ve gone from a real $5.8 mil loss to a real $2.2 mil gain (this is $8 mil better than last year)! No doubt this is a good trend, but $2.2 mil does not seem like a lot for 18 parks.
Furthermore, the $8 million dollar difference averages out to $444,000 per park (improvement) for the 2nd quarter. This does not seem like a large amount of improvement considering the debt they owe and the large number of parks they operate…? If you divide the real profit number of $2.2 mil by 18 parks you get a weak profit margin of $122,000 per park for the 2nd quarter. While they are not losing money, it seems there is not much room for error IF I'm reading the numbers correctly.
Management seems to credit weather and advertising for the supposed turnaround…? Is it really accurate to credit a waterslide with this “turnaround?” And even if the waterslide has something to do with the turnaround (which I believe it probably does somewhat), how much of that $8 mil turnaround can be attributed to the waterslide versus weather, advertising, improved customer service, etc…?
And…even if you decide to give 100% credit to the new waterslide (how many did they build?), it seems that $8 million is a rather weak improvement for an entire quarter. I’d love to know what the percentage return on investment is for the waterslide versus a new coaster? Doubt we would get those numbers. I’d love to know which is actually the smarter investment. My guess is that this is market-dependent.
I do not doubt that waterparks are the driving force in much of the amusement business today. I’ve seen it with my own eyes (in terms of crowds). However, the objective numbers in this article certainly do not seem to support an argument that a waterslide is a great savior while coasters are an aging dinosaur…
Let me know where my logic is flawed… :-)
*** This post was edited by Jeffrey R Smith 8/9/2005 10:54:44 AM ***
Initial estimates here in gatorville say that waterpark additions are more than twice as profitable (in ROI terms) as coaster additions...I wish it was the other way around, but I guess Captain Wavepool is more in tune with the masses than I am... ;)
Weather happens every year, good and bad, across the country. Just because SFI *finally* decides to make good business decisions doesn't mean the Lord Almighty is gonna change global climate patterns...but He *might*... ;)
*picks up phone*
Hello, this is nine-one-one piece. Can you explain the emergency?
Sir? Take your time. Try to breathe.
Polka dots? And a pierced....WHAT?
Help is on the way, sir. Yes, tranquilizer darts AND a circus tent. Just try not to look to your left till they arrive.
Okay, where were we?
So, SFI sold a buncha parks, added to the waterparks in a time that all the other parks seem to be getting an increase as well as 9/11 fears are fading, and they increase by $8mill in a year that has been hot, not rainy.
I'm beginning to think it was more about weather and fading fears more than anything for an $8mill increase. Thanks for doin the math, Jeffery!
Are you accounting for the increased bodies through the gate that will in turn spend more at the park? I realize the initial cost of a coaster make the ROI a long and tedious process versus the relative cheapness of installing a waterslide. I just wonder how many people will return again and again for waterslides over time...?
I return to Holiday world and Cedar Point (from Vegas) every year to ride the coasters. I can get waterslides anywhere...
No offense to "Captain Wavepool", as I'm pretty sure he is on to something...but I'm not ready to fully accept it yet! :-)
But go to a park with no included waterpark. They're still gonna get a boost when they have customer service and add rides. I'm not disputing that Water gets *More* people thru the gate. But people are still going to Amusment parks and Theme parks for what they've been offering for over 100 years.
A percentage increase is still just 'extra' people in the gate than what they would have already gotten with just coasters and flats, etc. Parks are stupid not to add water parks/overhaul waterparks. Then they cater to more types of people. Esp. if the park is included.
Of course, you hardly need SF--or even an unprecedented attendance jump at one of their larger park that didn't spike like that with a flying coaster or two coasters in a single season--to make that case.
You could just stick to the HW...who enjoyed attendance jumps with Zinga and Zimbabwe...or just look at the hotels going up at a cost of your average coaster park combined lift-hill-and-drop lineup.
Just slide a dark T-shirt over the pasty, flabby parts and join in the fun already. The rest of Planet Earth awaits!
*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 8/9/2005 11:21:35 AM ***
Not at all, I admit that waterparks cause increases. How is that denying it? I just don't think that waterparks are the 'the new opiate of the masses'.
Of course people go to local parks for water parks. I haven't said nor denied that. But what I am saying is that people have been going to those parks for 100s of years without water parks. I said *more* people are going to go with a waterpark in a park because that is targeted to a whole new market along with what you already have.
I'm all for water parks, I love em. In fact, I really was mad that I was under the impression that I'd have 2 hours at Boomerang Bay last year @ PKD because I REALLY want to try a Proslide Tornado. They look like fun.
But Waterparks are not the 'end all, be all', with no one going to Amusement/Theme Parks (local ones) for coasters and thrills. Otherwise, a company in major debt wouldn't have dropped a gazillion Gs on a new Tallest, Fastest, Most Broken Down coaster in the world.
You must be logged in to post