Why I bought Six Flags stock?

Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:00 AM
I broke down and put some money on PKS (Six Flags) yesterday. I got in at $11.34 per… My reasoning is not that I believe that the new ownership knows a thing about amusement parks. Nor do I believe Snyder et al care too much about saving the parks they now control. Speaking as a park enthusiast who is clearly in the anti-six Flags crowd, I can only guess this bunch will have little to no affect on me. Those of you, who are hardcore and are in it for the individual rides over the park as a whole, may indeed have difficult days ahead. No…none of the reasons I bought this stock have anything to do with me believing that they will turn this company around as an amusement park chain.

Rather…I believe these guys know value. I believe they are singularly beholden to the stock price. I’m sure that they will have another three announcements keeping PKS in the news before this thread hits the 2nd page. Every announcement they make reeks of shareholder propaganda. This bunch has no loyalty to the amusement park business. I’ve no doubt that any and every park is fair game for the chopping block if this will decrease the debt and in turn increase the stock price. Say what you will about Snyder…but the man knows how to play the game. He did not get into this to lose money. I do not believe he will.

I’ve two choices. I could sit around and complain about Six Flags and their crappy parks and how this bunch will not change a thing…and believe me I’ve done enough of that! OR I could take a lemon and make lemonade (some might say I’m drinking the Kool-Aide) by becoming an owner. I chose option #2! I now own what I despise (never a good strategy for you investment rookies out there).

Twenty years from now when there is no longer a PKS I hope to look back on yesterdays purchase and smile. Of course I plan on getting out before summer attendance/revenue reports come due! :-)

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:25 AM
11.34? Wow, almost time for me to sell, LOL...

100 shares won't make a difference to anyone at all (not even me, really), but I did get in at 3-something...from there, there was *no* risk and, I thought at the time, little chance of reward.

Enthusiasts may be crying about the gate (GP will too), but the Wall St. types seem to have fallen head-over-heels for SnyderCo...er, Red Zone...

If I had more stocks, I'd cash in and buy FUN...before those summer reports.... ;)

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 12:04 PM
I buy just enough to get the cost of my season passes back out of them.
+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 2:08 PM
I remember hearing about the good old days when you bought a stock because not only could you make money (mostly through dividends) but also because you believed in what the company did or produced. The employees were considered assets of the company. And companies actually looked to improve the communities in which they existed.

Nowadays, profit is the be all and end all-- not just profit, ridiculously excessive profit. If people's portfolios don't double in value every month, they're P&M-ing and switching stocks all over the place. Employees are now considered liabilities, and communities are practically extorted in order to give multi-million dollar companies tax breaks-- only to see said company up and move when the breaks expire.

I've passed up opportunities before to make lots of money on certain stocks, because I wasn't too thrilled with what the company was about. I haven't regretted it yet, and I doubt I would now.

Jeffrey, let us know when you get your first dividend, if you hold it for that long.

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 2:37 PM
I agree with you RGB.

As my sig says, "vote with your money." Since your political vote is usually spent choosing between the lesser of two evils (or if you wanted to vote independant, often spent on the candidate who is closer to the candidate you actually want to vote for), at least you can send your money to something you actually believe in.

I'd rather lose 10% on a company that I think benefits the world in the long run than gain 10% on a company that exploits the world.

</high horse>

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 2:44 PM
Well, he certainly has done wonders for me. I bought 6500 shares of PKS when it at $4.34 and it has more than doubled since. I've always thought that it was a great move from an investment stand point and I'm glad I did. Honestly I was totally against the take over but extra money in my pocket helps me bend, and on top of that, I really think the edit's in policy are necessary in my opinion.

Previously I had Fun (Cedar Fair) when it was at $29.49 and have lost a ton of money with them. So I cut my losses and bought Six Flags and it was a great move since I more than made up for the loss. Cedar Fair is a great REALLY LONG TERM STOCK if that's what you are interested in.

I think the doubters out there should check PKS out now because with all the consolidation going on and less financial obligations, Six Flags is poised to be one of the next big Stock to own.

*** Edited 1/31/2006 7:55:25 PM UTC by Magicmike***

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 3:00 PM
Translation: I hate Six Flags, I am certain their management will drive them out of business, but right now their stock is going gonzo; therefore, I will try to make money off it. But I'm still a "park enthuisast."

This is called having your cake and eating it too.

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 4:02 PM
How have you lost money with Cedar Fair? It has generally been trending upward for the last six years. Until the middle of last year, Six Flags has done just the opposite.
+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:07 PM
I also picked up some PKS last week. Unfortunately it wasn't still a single digit price but I'm still very satisfied with my decision.

I recommend this stock as a nice pickup right now, even if you disagree with all the changes...

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:18 PM
There's absolutely nothing wrong with holding an investment for the long term.

I've had all of 100 shares of Cedar Fair (FUN) for about a year and half or two years now. The stock price hasn't gone that far in either direction from where I bought it, but I've gotten about 180 dollars in dividends each year, which get reinvested in something else that makes some more money. At the very least, I could get about 6 Dorney tickets with it.

I think the whole market, investing, etc. has been ruined by people thinking that it's all about finding a cheap stock that will go up 1000 percent in three days, then you dump it and look for the next one.

I just get the feeling that even if the Flags start making a profit somewhere down the road, the company will decide to "reinvest" it all in the company (and executive perks) before announcing any dividends for the shareholders.

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:23 PM
I could be wrong, But isn't it the time to get out?

Seriously, I know a lot of people who bought in at $3, Have since tripled thier money and got out.

Im no stock expert. But until the debt is reduced greatly, The value is all percived.

Two billion in debt is darn near half the companys worth IMHO.

It's your money!

Chuck, who did buy in Chiquita at 3.50 a share and got out at 19.00 :)

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 5:50 PM
BAsed on info from a prospectus (?) from over a year ago, it looks like it's more like 58% of their worth, with additional losses in 2005. http://www.sixflags-greatadventure-burlingtoninn.com/images/prospectus11.17.04.pdf
+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:26 PM
Charles:

You are correct in the traditional view of the market. I've no doubt that the fundamentals of this company suck and that long term this is a lousy move. I'm not in it long term!

Perceived value is all the market is now. As there will always be risks, the key is finding those stocks that are perceived to be the next big thing. Snyner/Shapiro et al cast a large perception. I'll ride this wave for a while and place a nice stop up each rung...believe me...should it falter tomorrow I've protected myself!

...I probably would be out too if I tripled my money...no check that...I'd have a stop around $9.00 and let the rest roll!

...for the socially conscious crowd I'd like to say that you are better people than I am. It must be a wonderful feeling to know you are doing the right thing even in the face of mounting losses. I respect your choice! I myself have chosen to profit off this opportunity and will accept the risk it takes to do so! Time will tell if I am wise or a fool!

Jeff...who mostly holds boring stuff like ETFs and PG, but always has a few crazy picks in play in hopes of making the quick buck...

;-)

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:28 PM

RatherGoodBear said:I think the whole market, investing, etc. has been ruined by people thinking that it's all about finding a cheap stock that will go up 1000 percent in three days, then you dump it and look for the next one.

Well, and employees and their companies now have a similar relationship, as does upper management and the Board...loyalty is great when it's one-sided in your favor! ;)

These Enrons, Global Crossings, Martha Stewarts, that's more common than ANYONE wants to believe...and the punishments are laughable. Raiding the pensions of people who spent half their lives working for the company deserves something just a BIT harsher than a slap on the wrist and a bracelet around the ankle...

I bought SF when I realized that the old leadership was on the way out, figuring that the company would be more *valuable* under ANY other leadership...and it's an industry I believe in. Investing in alternative fuels also serves a dual purpose... ;)

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:28 PM
Olsor:

I don't think they will drive Six Flags out of business. I think they will sell the land when they can, and sell the parks when they can...until there is nothing left to sell! They'll go out of business by choice! This is a little different than being forced out...

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 6:39 PM
Wanna tip? When Xenical goes over the counter as Ally, Roche pharamcuitcal will rival fizer.

Chuck *** Edited 1/31/2006 11:41:05 PM UTC by Charles Nungester***

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 10:55 PM
Jeffrey, I don't think I'm better or more knowledgable than anyone, especially when it comes to investing. You may make a ton of money off of SF stock. Good for you if you do.

I don't agree with a lot of the things these guys plan on doing to make a profit. To me, investing in their company is giving them my approval. If I don't do that here in this forum, why should I put my money where my mouth isn't?

BTW, anybody notice that Google's stock dropped 16% immediately after the market closed today? How many "regular" people would have the chance to sell at that time? That just shows how fast things can change. *** Edited 2/1/2006 4:11:06 AM UTC by RatherGoodBear***

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:13 PM
RGB, I got no problem with buying straight stocks. It's the futures markets that tick me off. Buy oil for august and hope a hurricane comes. Then B&*() about filling thier SUV for 150 bucks.

Where's the profit?

+0
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:47 PM
You should not put money if you don't approve...I respect that (in all sincerity)!

I’m a capitalist at heart who has nothing but love for the free market. I know the flaws and inherent unfairness that you speak of in the system. I just happen to believe that this is the best way to grow an economy. All objective measurements seem to indicate that capitalism with minimal regulation is indeed the best way to grow an economy. Do you know of a better way? Therefore, I don’t have the convictions on this matter that you do. I understand what Snyder is doing and where his motivations are placed. His reponsibility is to the shareholders first and foremost. He cannot be burdened with enthusiast ideals if these ideals conflict with the bottom line! I see a man doing his job. It is not the way I would go about it...but I understand what his plan is and why it would be this way!

Random unrelated thoughts/opinions…

…In the old days when employees were assets and the companies were there for communities…the employees had self-respect and an inner drive to perform to the best of their abilities. A single trip to SFMM demonstrates how the employees themselves might be the problem…maybe? Chicken and egg scenario in my opinion… A sign of the times!

…I do not think it fair to castigate all corporations because of a few bad apples like Enron. Laws should severely punish the guilty. However, the unscathed should not be tarnished at the hands of a few criminals. The initial reaction of many to automatically castigate a corporation for nothing but mere existence is rather sad. Contrary to hater opinion, there are in fact a lot of good corporations to work for who strive to be good community citizens. Profit is not an evil word. It is a necessity to capitalism. Last time I checked, our relative (key word) unregulated form of capitalism results in better economic growth, higher standards of living, and lower unemployment rates than the heavy regulated European capitalistic economies and socialistic economies of the world.

…Investing in Six Flags is akin to investing in a real estate trust at this time and under this ownership. Those who still think of this company as an amusement park chain are so 2005! To expect this company to function in manners that best appease tourists is appetite for disappointment. Tourist opinions and expectations are only important so much as they can and will affect the stock price. In all decisions, the stockholder will trump the tourist.

…All talks of operating debts, etc, while certainly important…must be looked at in terms of debt to equity ratios. As a real estate trust, the land values must be considered as fair game in valuation equations. Without benefit of the open books and land appraisals certain value is impossible to know. Safe to say that with strategic park sell-offs, there is a good chance that equity outweighs the debt. When looked at from this perspective, without hindrance of enthusiast ideals, a scenario exists in which Six Flags could become an asset. Enthusiast ideals permeate this board as would be expected. Snyder does not share your enthusiasm or your ideals.

+0
Wednesday, February 1, 2006 10:47 AM
You know Jeffrey, being socially conscious contributes to everyone's bottom line.

And minimum regulation? Know what happens when a cell loses its ability to regulate itself? Cancer. Then again, I guess the argument comes down to what qualifies as minimum regulation. What would I consider the bare minimum? Enough to keep companies from selling out our great grandkids.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...