Posted Wednesday, October 28, 2009 10:14 AM | Contributed by Jeff
Southern Star Amusement was a no-show Tuesday's State Bond Commission meeting in Baton Rouge. The fledgling company is partnering with entertainment giant Nickelodeon to reopen the Hurricane Katrina-damaged Six Flags theme park in New Orleans East. One partner says it's not a fund raising issue, it's about who retains "their share, their title." Officials feel the company may not have the credit rating to get the money.
Read more and see video from WWL/New Orleans.
I know everyone has to be shocked that this company no one has ever heard of can't front a little cash.
I was just to say "Big Surprise!"
They should stick with Aussie Telley. ;)
Shocked? I think stunned and horrified are the words I was going for, Jeff. ;)
If you would read the article you'd see it wasn't really about the money but other conflicts at hand. They have the money but the guy who was in charge of handling the bonds stepped down due to internal power struggles. Definitely not a good start to have this kind of disorganization going on. But they did have the money, that was not the issue.
No, that's what they're telling you. We've seen this a hundred times. It's always "other issues." And the guy on the commission makes a good point. Who is going to loan them the money?
Well they claim they have the money and they will be at the next meeting in November. If they are a no show on that then we know for sure they are all smoke and mirrors.
Somehow I'm not surprised at these events. Is anybody, really?
Why the heck would they have been no-show at the meeting? Wouldn't it have been better to show up and say "financing is still working out" rather than just plain not being there?
Internal power struggles? I call BS. It's not like they had to scramble to get this financing in place in 3 days. Southern Star are the ones who've been talking the talk for the past few months, saying they could get it done. So s*** or get off the pot, as the saying goes.
I've suspected they were smoke and mirrors all along, and have said so everytime these clowns come up.
Remember: their first foray was effectively a bunch of kids who wanted to buy a lot of slides, on the theory that NOLA is really hot. That build-and-they'll-come was the sum total of the "business plan."
Someone obviously hasn't been to Blue Bayou/Dixie Landin'
Water attractions were a no brainer for that park something that past "more qualified" developers obviously failed to recognize.Last edited by Cameraman, Sunday, November 1, 2009 7:52 PM
As a matter of fact, I have been. In summer.
But, while "really hot" is a necessary condition for the success of a water-oriented attraction, it is not sufficient.
No, but every little bit helps. They did have more planned than just "a bunch of slides." I've been to SFNO during the summer on some of the hottest days and I noticed how water rides would often have long lines while the other rides were a complete walk ons. Riding water rides were the only way to make the park bearable on days like that. It wasn't just the lack of water rides that made the problem but also the lack of shade, which Six Flags never fully addressed. So just like how rain can hurt attendance, I think the extreme heat also made people avoid SFNO. There's only two types of weather in Louisiana, hot and wet. So that does create a problem.
You are forgetting the lousy location with respect to the tourist trade, in a city that has lost a significant chunk of its population (so fewer locals to draw from, too).
It would be nice if someone could make it work, but it's failed twice now, and the deck is stacked even more to failure for anyone who tries again. It's time to throw in the towel.
I agree in throwing in the towel. But if anyone is willing to put up their funding to redevelop it, I think it's in the city's best interest to give them some attention. It's going to cost them money to demolish the property and they do also have to pay off a loan on the property. But if any redevelopment requires city funding (for example, the sports complex that a councilman proposed), then I think they should give up and not take the risk. If they could get a lease payment every year, then they could use the money to pay the loan. The regional population really isn't much different than before Katrina now. It's just distributed much differently. The location is awful so if anything was developed in that spot, it would have to be very good to make people want to drive all the way to visit it.
You must be logged in to post