If I am Cedar Fair or Paramont (the only two chains that might be at all interested), I am not going to be stupid enough to purchase a park that is not turning a profit and has nothing to make it look like it will in the near future.
I dunno, from *my* addmittedly limited perspective, there's not many parks out there that don't have the POTENTIAL to make SFI money...sure, those in SMALL markets may not MAKE much money, but they don't COST that much to operate either...
The reason that SFWoA wasn't doing as well as it should have (obviously, the bad climate conditions were outside of SFI's control, ROFL) had nothing to do with the park being in a bad location or not having a HUGE market to draw from, and everything to do with the fact that SFI didn't really "get it" in terms of what makes a park $ucce$$ful.
They SAY they now understand...if they really DO, then there shouldn't be many more sell-offs. If this newfound dedication to Customer Satisfaction turns out to be another "quick fix" for ailing parks, and more of a corporate FAD, then expect more than a few parks to be sold off in the next 3-5 years...
Many of the parks in the SF chain have the potential to become good...dare I even say great parks under different management it's just that right now SFI has taken these parks & practically run them into the ground.
SO you see just because SFI did a lousy job at running any given park doesn't automatically mean that another company would do the same & it doesn't make the park anymore of a financial risk to the new owners than it did to the previous ones.
Coaster Lover said:
The reason SFDL doesn't add more is because for its location, it is doing about the best it can and adding more attractions wouldn't create the same surge in attendance that it would at other parks. The majority of guests visiting a park come from within 100 miles of the park. SFDL pulled in about 1.46 million guests in 2003 and there are slightly under 3 million people within 100 miles of the park. That's a lot of people for a park to pull in by comparison to the number of people in the area. To really increase attendance at the park, they would need to do something to draw people from a much larger region, and to do that, they would need to add a coaster that would get national recognition. Unfortunatly, SF is just not in a position to take that risk right now, so the park will remain the size it is addind a small attraction every once and a while to give the current guests reason to come back to the park....
Not to keep beating a dead horse when I try to defend my home park BUT...
But I've lived here all my life, and I know what areas they are trying to market towards... and it includes areas as far south as Erie, PA, as far East as Rochester & Syracuse, NY... and as far North as Toronto, CA. Not to mention that they are also pushing their advertising into the Niagara Falls tourism district, which racks in over 17 million guests per year (Canadian side, of course).
They advertise heavily on Canadian television & radio to try & compete with Canada's Wonderland (which they really can't). So to say that they have a relatively small market, isn't exactly true. Their immediate regional market is Buffalo/Rochester, yes, but that's not their only target.
Not to mention that Six Flags is also pushing this park as "The only Six Flags Resort", because of the campground/hotel.
So in theory, it does make sense to invest money into this park w/ potential. Their peek attendance was at 1.7 million in 1999, and has dropped steadily since. Before Premier bought Six Flags, they were treating this park like royality... almost as their flagship park. Once they bought Six Flags & had many other larger parks to contend with, they basically all but abandoned their old Premier parks (except Geauga Lake, which then was sold...)
It's usually a rule of thumb for parks to add something new each year to keep things fresh & new for park guests... and every few years, come up with a major attraction to spike the attendance, and therefore... increase profit. Unfortunately, Six Flags hasn't really kept that rule-of-thumb with SFDL... and this gem of a park is getting lost in all the other Six Flags parks, along with a few others...
So another company taking over SFDL would really be a benefit & savior, because it would get the attention it deserves. (and yes, again, they [SFDL management] do have big plans including a full 18-hole golf course)
Suppose that CF was looking to purchase another property and was given a "list" of available parks. Maybe SFWoA was the only park that made financial sense to them, causing them to pass on the other available properties.
Or maybe CF didn't want to expand but didn't want another competitior, either. A good rule in business: If you don't want competition, then buy your competitor!
The point of all this? There could be other SF parks for sale right now, but no one will ever know until buyers are found.
The long-range forecasting calls for more bad weather at a few selected SF parks, LOL...
BATWING FAN SFA said:
Thecoasterguy: look at it this way,in the case of SFWOA(now GL) being sold to CF...Cedar fair has the capital & the desire to pick up where SF left off/failed to do & with CP nearby the locals all trust in CF to do a great job in running this park thus making a lot of money for the chain & proving to be a good investment for them.
You are a coaster fan. You know the difference between Six Flags, Cedar Fair and Paramont and all the details that go with it. The public have no such knowledge, nor do they care.
On top of that, Six Flags Ohio was making money when it got sold. Sure, it wasn't making boatloads of money, but it was one of the profitable parks in the chain. Six Flags did not "fail" to run this park so it made moeny. They may have failed to run it so that it beat Cedar Point, but realistically who were they kidding if that was their ultimate goal. Cedar Fair had years of a head start.
I'm not saying that companies couldn't turn underperfoming parks around, but why would you want to invest a significant amount of money into an investment that is already losing money if you have the chance to instead put that money into a park that has been a proven money-maker? On top of that, how would Cedar Fair explain that move to the shareholders who expect that the Cedar Fair properties all make money?
And as for someone who stated that perhaps there were other parks that were up for grabs and SFO was the only one that sold, that sounds like a really, really astute idea. Probably moreso than you know.
This is my opinoin!
We've already seen this when SFWOA was sold....I was kinda hoping they'd send the SF themed rides(Dominator,S:UE etc.) to other parks that could use them but of course CF simply rethemed the rides instead.
So if SFKK were to be sold(which it won't) then rides like Chang would stay in the park with the new owners,or just be demolished should the park itself be shut down.
You must be logged in to post