Six Flags Corporate Discussion Thread

P. 130 - Six Flags 2019 Announcements
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests
Discuss theme parks, roller coasters, and mules!
You can just skip over my posts.
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Largo, Maryland
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby SFA Regular » Thu Apr 08, 2010 1:12 pm

I think they would sell the park. The county would fight them if they threatened to close down the park. For all I know, the park has been doing well in this tough economy. The county could argue that there is no reason to close it down as a park, do to the amount of people that depend on it for summer jobs and recreation. It wouldn't surprise me if the county would attempt to buy the park itself, to prevent it from being closed.

But what makes you think Apollo would want to remove the rides and close the park? There are other smaller parks that are doing worst than SFA.

Obsessive Overlord of the TPR Park Index
 
Posts: 17678
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Staten Island, New York
Gender: Male
Age: 51

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby larrygator » Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:41 pm

^Because Apollo is looking to make a quick buck and SFA is the only Six Flags property where the land is worth more money to developers.

^^^thanks for that insight, I value your info.
Last edited by larrygator on Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:48 pm.
As usual, my analysis is free of charge!
Original enough to not steal someone else's quote as a signature

Image
Image

You can just skip over my posts.
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Largo, Maryland
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby SFA Regular » Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:03 pm

larrygator wrote:^Because Apollo is looking to make a quick buck and SFA is the only Six Flags property where the land is worth more money to developers.

^^^thanks for that insight, I value your info.


Here is the catch to that. Yes, they could sell it to developers, but the developers would have a hard time dealing with the county for approval of things like homes and shopping centers. PG County already has enough homes and with the economy being the way it is, people can barely afford them. Due to this, there are a lot of houses that have been put up for sale and forclosed over the years because people cant afford them. So if Apollo told the county that there plans were to sell the land for housing development, the county would most likely say no to that. As for shopping centers, PG County has more than enough shopping centers. So those types of development plans come on the low end of a approval against an amusement park that gives jobs and recreational use to the youth. In my opinion, SFA is here to stay until it becomes almost non-profitable to operate it under Six Flags Inc.

As for the quick buck statement, that's exactly what people thought Dan Snyder was going to do once he bought Six Flags Inc. Everyone in the DC area thought SFA was going to become a huge parking lot for FED EX Field shuttle transportation. The same would be in speculation of stock holders and local government if Apollo bought Six Flags Inc. Selling one park is not going to bring the company out the hole. I have told many people that SFA can be a very good place under a good corporate and park management.

It would be a shame if it was sold to lets say a company like (Merlin Entertainment Group) and they built it up to the level of threatening Hershey and Kings Dominion. I always thought they would be a good management for Six Flags parks.

Obsessive Overlord of the TPR Park Index
 
Posts: 17678
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Staten Island, New York
Gender: Male
Age: 51

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby larrygator » Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:55 pm

SFA Regular wrote:
larrygator wrote:^Because Apollo is looking to make a quick buck and SFA is the only Six Flags property where the land is worth more money to developers.

^^^thanks for that insight, I value your info.


Here is the catch to that. Yes, they could sell it to developers, but the developers would have a hard time dealing with the county for approval of things like homes and shopping centers. PG County already has enough homes and with the economy being the way it is, people can barely afford them. Due to this, there are a lot of houses that have been put up for sale and forclosed over the years because people cant afford them. So if Apollo told the county that there plans were to sell the land for housing development, the county would most likely say no to that. As for shopping centers, PG County has more than enough shopping centers. So those types of development plans come on the low end of a approval against an amusement park that gives jobs and recreational use to the youth. In my opinion, SFA is here to stay until it becomes almost non-profitable to operate it under Six Flags Inc.

As for the quick buck statement, that's exactly what people thought Dan Snyder was going to do once he bought Six Flags Inc. Everyone in the DC area thought SFA was going to become a huge parking lot for FED EX Field shuttle transportation. The same would be in speculation of stock holders and local government if Apollo bought Six Flags Inc. Selling one park is not going to bring the company out the hole. I have told many people that SFA can be a very good place under a good corporate and park management.

It would be a shame if it was sold to lets say a company like (Merlin Entertainment Group) and they built it up to the level of threatening Hershey and Kings Dominion. I always thought they would be a good management for Six Flags parks.


Your sense of loyality to your home park is causing you to have delusional thoughts about Apollo Group.

Do you know anything about Apollo Group?

Dan Snyder might have been flawed in his empire building strategy but he had a vision?

Apollo Group has no plans to invest a lot of money in Six Flags, that is not their forte. They try to turn a company around without huge capital improvement expenditures and then flip the investment for a profit, or cut bait and close shop if they can't turn it around.
Last edited by larrygator on Thu Apr 08, 2010 4:58 pm.
As usual, my analysis is free of charge!
Original enough to not steal someone else's quote as a signature

Image
Image

I prefer to mate with donkeys over humans!
 
Posts: 2084
Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Location: Manassas Va.
Gender: Male

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby KDCOASTERFAN » Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:15 pm

larrygator wrote:
SFA Regular wrote:
larrygator wrote:^Because Apollo is looking to make a quick buck and SFA is the only Six Flags property where the land is worth more money to developers.

^^^thanks for that insight, I value your info.


Here is the catch to that. Yes, they could sell it to developers, but the developers would have a hard time dealing with the county for approval of things like homes and shopping centers. PG County already has enough homes and with the economy being the way it is, people can barely afford them. Due to this, there are a lot of houses that have been put up for sale and forclosed over the years because people cant afford them. So if Apollo told the county that there plans were to sell the land for housing development, the county would most likely say no to that. As for shopping centers, PG County has more than enough shopping centers. So those types of development plans come on the low end of a approval against an amusement park that gives jobs and recreational use to the youth. In my opinion, SFA is here to stay until it becomes almost non-profitable to operate it under Six Flags Inc.

As for the quick buck statement, that's exactly what people thought Dan Snyder was going to do once he bought Six Flags Inc. Everyone in the DC area thought SFA was going to become a huge parking lot for FED EX Field shuttle transportation. The same would be in speculation of stock holders and local government if Apollo bought Six Flags Inc. Selling one park is not going to bring the company out the hole. I have told many people that SFA can be a very good place under a good corporate and park management.

It would be a shame if it was sold to lets say a company like (Merlin Entertainment Group) and they built it up to the level of threatening Hershey and Kings Dominion. I always thought they would be a good management for Six Flags parks.


Your sense of loyality to your home park is causing you to have delusional thoughts about Apollo Group.

Do you know anything about Apollo Group?

Dan Snyder might have been flawed in his empire building strategy but he had a vision?

Apollo Group has no plans to invest a lot of money in Six Flags, that is not their forte. They try to turn a company around without huge capital improvement expenditures and then flip the investment for a profit, or cut bait and close shop if they can't turn it around.


I doubt that they would close the park since it IS making money,otherwise Snyder would've done so already & given the fact that AW & GL both closed & so far have no takers on the land that either park once occupied it'd be better for Apollo to try to run the park as it is rather than sell it out for real estate.

SFA Regular: It's a pipedream to hope for the county to take over management/ownership of the park because they cannot afford to do so,I would however love to see them hold SFI accountable for failing to follow through on their proposed ride additions that were presented to,and approved by the zoning board in 1999 however citing the failure of SFI to live up to their promises to implement such changes.

You can just skip over my posts.
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Largo, Maryland
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby SFA Regular » Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:24 pm

I agree with you on some things. I went a little over board with the county trying to own the theme park. And yes, I do know of the master plan that they had proposed to the county. I don't know why they decided not to follow through with it, but all my sources tell me that they had plans to resume shortly after getting Hurricane Harbor in 2005. It would have only been 4 years sense a coaster was last added. Other sources tell me that the same was going to be done to (Darien Lake). If I'm correct, they also received a Hurricane Harbor just like us. Anyways, that's something that the old corporate management did, not the new. So holding SFI responsible would be pointless. And SFA just got Thomas Land, so they could argue that the park is still getting new additions.

The park does need a new coaster, which is what a lot of enthusiast are crossing their fingers on. We just have to wait and see what 2011 brings for us. If they don't want to give us a new ride, they could revamp Joker's Jinx to an indoor building structure. Would be great for a nice scary theme.

As for the rest of the company, SFI seems to be holding a steady balance on what the parks are getting in order to receive good comments from park guests. Shapiro did want to make the parks more family friendlier, which he is doing. The real goal is keeping everyone happy. Most of the Six Flags parks were crowded with teenagers, so trying to please one group is always shutting the door on the other. Maybe he can think of some kind of way to keep the thrill seekers happy. I would like for Shapiro to get on a steady agenda of giving a park a family ride one year, and then following it up by a thrill addition the next. Doesn't always have to be a monumental thrill ride, but just something to tie us over until the next break through of thrill evolution.

Can I park my donkey here?
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Location: Houston
Gender: Male

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby Markieb » Fri Apr 09, 2010 5:58 am

KDCOASTERFAN wrote:I doubt that they would close the park since it IS making money,otherwise Snyder would've done so already & given the fact that AW & GL both closed & so far have no takers on the land that either park once occupied


The former AW plot was sold not too terribly long after deconstruction.
SF's has not owned that land for many years now.

You can just skip over my posts.
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Largo, Maryland
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby SFA Regular » Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:31 am


Online
Open Up Happiness
User avatar
 
Posts: 8145
Joined: 21 Jan 2006
Location: Orlando, Florida
Gender: Male
Age: 27

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby jedimaster1227 » Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:14 pm

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Resilient-Capital-Management-prnews-451266709.html?x=0&.v=1

Resilient Capital Management, a holder of Six Flags Preferred Income Equity Redeemable Shares ("PIERS") notifies all PIERS (OTC Bulletin Board:SIXOQ.ob - News) and common shareholders of Six Flags (OTC Bulletin Board:SIXFQ.ob - News) concerning its Motion to Participate in the Confirmation Hearing (Premier International Holdings Inc., et al., Case No. 09-12019, Docket Number 1989) scheduled for April 28, 2010 which it filed last night in the bankruptcy court in Delaware. The motion can be accessed at http://www.kccllc.net/documents/8812019/8812019100414000000000011.pdf.

In its motion Resilient highlights the valuation work performed on Six Flags by Amherst Capital Partners, L.L.C. - http://www.amherstpartners.com.

Amherst valued the company at a total enterprise value of $2,679,000,000. At this valuation the holders of the PIERS are entitled to approximately a 100% recovery or approximately $300 million. This compares to the current market capitalization of the PIERS of $2.75 million (SIXOQ closing price $0.25 per share - 11 million PIERS shares outstanding).

This contrasts sharply with the inaccurate valuation work performed on the company by Houlihan Lokey and Lazard Freres (NYSE:LAZ - News). These purported "experts" valued the company at approximately $1.5 billion only days before the SFI Bondholder group offered a deal which the market valued at between $2.3 and $2.5 billion.

The SFI Bondholders are poised to take over control of the company, having wrested control from the common shareholders by entering into a transaction which benefits management at the expense of the PIERS and common shareholders. According to Resilient's motion, "The valuation contest has been skewed such that it has been conducted within an artificial range defined by the parties with the resources to pay the costs of admission to the contest and by a management team with a more than $100 million vested interest in a particular outcome."

Lance Laifer, CEO of Resilient Capital Management said, "A cottage industry of lawyers is conspiring with management teams to take companies into bankruptcy and enrich management teams at the expense of the very shareholders they are supposed to be protecting and representing. This motion is about much more than just Six Flags. When a management team can take over a company, drive it into bankruptcy and then emerge with ten times more equity than it had prior to the bankruptcy filing, the system is seriously messed up and people - mostly individual investors - are losing massive amounts of money unnecessarily". Laifer continued, "We filed our motion at great expense, because we believe that real people are losing real money on the basis of faulty valuation reports. Resilient is committed to making sure we do our part to highlight and fix the problem that seemingly has developed in the Delaware bankruptcy court and corporate boardrooms throughout America."

Resilient's motion alleges a pattern of conduct by the SFI bondholders and the Six Flags management team, including the following:

The SFI bondholders managed to raise over one billion dollars of consideration at approximately a $2.5 billion valuation even though it was battling management at the time it raised the capital.

The lawyers and other professionals involved in this case are working off of a wrong valuation for the current deal on the table and that this incorrect and low valuation is being utilized to encourage the Honorable Judge Christopher S. Sontchi to confirm a plan of reorganization that is based upon an artificially low valuation that fails to address the points raised in the valuation performed on behalf of Resilient.

Based on Amherst's valuation, management is poised to achieve a $150-200 million jackpot for steering the company into and out of bankruptcy and wiping out shareholders. It also points to under-explored and under-examined pockets of potentially substantial value, including Six Flags TV and the value likely to be realized from Six Flags' licensing business.

The Debtor's management team is continuing to clearly violate its fiduciary responsibilities to the PIERS and common stockholders of Six Flags.

During March at the confirmation hearing, management stressed that the company was off to a poor start in 2010, which contrasts with a recent NY Post article in which Mark Shapiro stated that, "we're having a terrific spring right now."

This motion supplements an earlier motion made by Resilient which calls for a Trustee to be appointed to replace management -http://www.kccllc.net/documents/8812019/8812019100211000000000004.pdf

Resilient is encouraging all shareholders of Six Flags to object to the Debtors' current plan of reorganization. Any such objections should be filed with the Delaware Bankruptcy Court at the following address:

Honorable Christopher S. Sontchi
United States Bankruptcy Court
District of Delaware
824 Market Street, 3rd Floor
Wilmington, DE 19801
T: 302-252-2900
Bankruptcy court in Delaware

To request more information or a copy of the Motion to Participate in the Confirmation Hearing scheduled for April 28, 2010 please contact Lance Laifer at laifer@gmail.com (Tel. 646-734-6657).
Change the scheme, Alter the mood! Electrify the boys and girls if you would be so kind!

Image

You can just skip over my posts.
 
Posts: 320
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Location: Largo, Maryland
Gender: Male
Age: 28

Re: Six Flags Bankruptcy & Restructuring Discussion

Postby SFA Regular » Fri Apr 16, 2010 8:22 am

If I were a shareholder, I would have to object the companies new plan. Shareholders have not been making much money under this new management. Maybe it is time for a new team to be brought aboard. One that really knows how to run a theme park chain. Or maybe the merge with Cedar Fair, that Capital Avenue had planned on will be good for the company.

PreviousNext

Return to Theme Parks, Roller Coasters, & Donkeys!

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 0 guests

These pages are in no way affiliated with nor endorsed by SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Cedar Fair, Legoland, Merlin Entertainment,
Blackstone, Tussaud's Group, Six Flags, Universal Theme Parks, the Walt Disney Company or any other theme park company.

All onride photos and videos on this website were taken with the permission of the park by a professional ride photographer.
For yours  and others safety, please do not attempt to take photos or videos at parks without proper permission.

Disclaimer!  You need a sense of humor to view our site, 
if you don't have a sense of humor, or are easily offended, please turn back now!
Most of the content on this forum is suitable for all ages. HOWEVER!
There may be some content that would be considered rated "PG-13."
Theme Park Review is NOT recommended for ages under 13 years of age.

cron