Snyder: Six Flags wouldn't listen to me

This reporter needs to get his facts straight. First, Six Flags America isn't changing to Hurricane Harbor, just the water park. Second, Hurricane Harbor opens on May 28th, Six Flags America opens April 9th. The whole story presents no new information, seems to be wrote by a reporter with a grudge against the park and to say the least stale news. I think The Washington Post should invest more resources into discovering the reason why their print newspaper is loosing subscribers and money instead of rehashing a old story.

Yeah, advertising in video games would "restore shareholder value". As Adam Sessler would say (pre-G4), "A 1.... out of 5."

I knew someone would nitpick about the park name. While those facts were indeed incorrect, they were not the focal point of the article.

Although I'm not a big Snyder fan, I was kind of hoping to see if the company would improve at all because of his suggestions. Unfortunately, we'll never know if his plan would have worked or not since Burke and Co. basically ignored everything Snyder suggested. They can argue that he had no "understanding [of] the theme park business," but the fact that he knows business in general can't be disputed, and I have a feeling the company, at the very least, wouldn't have lost any more this year than the nearly $70 million it lost last year.

I don't think I'm nitpicking. Now, an uninformed public is going to think 1) Six Flags America is now going to be a Hurricane Harbor 2) The park doesn't open until May 28th. Both not true and could substantially effect park attendance. A reporter has an obligation to make sure he/she is getting fact right! This reporter didn't.

I saw the article in the business section of the post this morning while looking for any word on SFA's recent announcement & was aso a bit upset over the number of errors contained within as well.

Still you can't help but wonder if Snyder's long term plans would've made a difference,now of course we'll never know,anyone notice they interviewed SFA's marketing director in the article? when I saw his name mentioned I thought it sounded familiar.

The name is irrelevant to the story. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference in the grand scheme of things.

Snyder's focus was all wrong. I'm not one to defend Six Flags generally, but applying a pro football team growth strategy to a chain of several dozen amusement parks is stupid, and that's exactly what he as suggesting. Marketing, as far as I'm concerned, is the one thing that Six Flags actually got right last year. Where they failed was gate pricing and customer service. It's not rocket science. The rest of the industry is getting it right.

I agree the name change is irrevalant to the story, it shouldn't have been mentioned at all. The story was about Dan Snyder and Six Flags, not Six Flags Hurricane Harbor and not Six Flags America. Which makes the reporter twice as ignorant. Not only do he do a story about Dan Snyder and Six Flags, he incorrectly reported a story about one of the local amusement parks. Six Flags America's name should have never been brought up and by bringing it up he opened the door to inaccurately reporting the story. Whether it's relevant to the story or not.

Suppose this was Cedar Point and they reported Cedar Point was changing their name to Splashwater Kingdom and opening instead of Mid-May they were opening Memorial Day weekend.

---

Suppose this was Cedar Point and they reported Cedar Point was changing their name to Splashwater Kingdom and opening instead of Mid-May they were opening Memorial Day weekend.

---

Same irrelevance.

Those of us geeky enough to care know better, those interested in the main story don't care and those looking for that kind of information aren't getting it from an unrelated news article.

*** This post was edited by Lord Gonchar 2/25/2005 5:17:30 PM ***

This reporter wanted corporate answers from a local Six Flags PR person. When he didn't get the answers he wanted, he deliberately mis-quoted the press release. It's very clear what the reporter intended, and it was to further damage Six Flags by claiming that SFA PR person didn't care, and that the park opens on May 28th.

He's probably a die hard Redskin Fan

Oh please... what possible motive could the reporter have. There is no conspiracy, he just didn't fact check.

You don't know Wash Post writers like I do, this guy had it out for SFA and SF Inc before he even called SFA for an interview. (Or he would have done the intelligent thing and interviewed a corporate officer rather than corner a lowly (sorry chris) local park PR person)

There was ALOT more to this than the article indicates, and I believe the mis-information was purposely printed for malicious purposes.

Doesn't what you just said border on libel?

Be careful before you start making public accusations.

Yeah it does. It's the Washington Post, not the National Enquirer.

There was ALOT more to this than the article indicates, and I believe the mis-information was purposely printed for malicious purposes.

Sam, I dare you, no I Triple Dog Dare you to send that in to the Washington post.Somebody needs to look up slander, libel, and the law.

State your personal feelings, but don't state something as fact when you A) have no basis of said fact & B) could get yourself into trouble. If that reporter is so malicious, the last thing I'd be doing is saying something like that on a public forum.

Just because not everyone likes SFA means that you need to spend such large portions of time defending a park that, in the grand scheme of things, probably won't be around in a million years.

Okay, enough, I've posted too much this week already...
*** This post was edited by Somebody 2/28/2005 1:52:07 AM ***

this is the text of my letter to the editor of the washington post.

---

Staff writer Bill Brubaker should be ashamed! People depend on journalists for unbiased writing. Mr. Brubakers story about the dealings of Dan Snyder and Six Flags, is biased writing at its worst.

Mr Brubaker, not only sides with Mr. Snyder, he also attempts to damage the local Six Flags spring business in the same article.

After visiting the local Six Flags' web site to read about this years new attractions, I was directed by a friend to Mr. Brubakers story. Mr. Brubaker starts off his story with a fair assesment of the dealings between Snyder and SF Inc., But he soon strays by attempting to get the local Six Flags parks PR person to comment on a corporate issue. When the local PR person doesn't give Mr. Brubaker the answers he wants, he makes assertions that the PR person "doesn't seem to care". This assumption is a disservice to the public, and Six Flags. And to add insult to injury, Mr. Brubakers story indicates that the Entire park is getting re-named, when indeed it's only the waterpark, and Mr. Brubaker writes that the park won't open til Memorial day, when indeed the park opens April 9th!

Wild World was probably one of the crappiest parks i've ever been to. Today under the management of Premier Parks/Six Flags the park is 500% better and is home to the #3 steel coaster in the world (on a reputable internet poll) Superman Ride of Steel.

Six Flags has done incredible renovations to numerous struggling parks all over the country, Mr. Brubaker seems to like to "kick 'em while they're down" rather than provide honest unbiased reporting.

With some of the best roller coasters in the region and a renovation of the waterpark Six Flags America will be high on my list of things to do this summer!

Sam A. Marks

---

TRIPLE DOG DARE?

LOL what is this? 6th Grade?