Kentucky Kingdom (SFKK, KK) Discussion Thread

^ Someone thats familiar with the consumer in the Louisville area would be great compared to SF, CF, or any other corporation that run the park from hundreds of miles away. GP in Louisville DO want another coaster. It's not just the enthusiasts. I know people that say KK need a new coaster and they don't even ride coasters!

^ Someone thats familiar with the consumer in the Louisville area would be great compared to SF, CF, or any other corporation that run the park from hundreds of miles away. GP in Louisville DO want another coaster. It's not just the enthusiasts. I know people that say KK need a new coaster and they don't even ride coasters!

That;s a very strong point you just made. People who don't ride coasters think the park needs a new coaster. If Mr. Ed knows that the general public in Louisville wants a new ride, then he will probably put that in his plan. I can't see someone that experienced giving the park something that it doesn't need or the general public of Louisville won't like. When he is done with it, I could see that place being on the travel channel. For those of you are are from Louisville, try getting in contract with Ed and see if he wants to put together a group discussion on what the general public of Louisville, wants to see inside the park. You never know, it could turn into something, you have always dreamed of.

^ I sure do hope so. I also hope it caters to thrillseeker teens as well as families. A lot of thrillseeker teens did and will come to KK due to the park being right on a bus line. Ed Hart has been stating for years that he wanted control of the park back and he wished he never sold it ever since SF started killing the park IIRC!

 

Any original owner wishes they had kept their park before Six Flags bought it. Look at what happened to Six Flags New Orleans. The previous Six Flags management with Dan Snyder and Mark Shapiro fought tooth to nail to get out of their land lease deal, and the judge let them have their way. That place has the saddest history. If Dan Snyder had of never got the company, Six Flags New Orleans would have been rebuilt and we would still own the other three parks that Six Flags sold back in 2006. So yes, there are a lot of owners that wish they had never had anything to do with Six Flags.

 

Mr. Ed will probably end up putting his hardest effort in reviving the place. At least now the park has someone with theme park experience, to manage it.

Considering all the properties divested prior to the RedZone takeover; I seriously doubt Kieren Burke would have "saved" Six Flags New Orleans. The obvious reasons have been stated many times. There's simply too much damage, and a terribly small clientele base post "Katrina". Had RedZone never attempted a hostile takeover of Six Flags, I *do* believe Astroworld would still be in operation. The closure of Astroworld has everything to do with the takeover.

Actually, I think Astro World had been set to close under Kieren Burke. Shapiro mentioned that he wanted to save the place. At least that's what I heard.

Astroworld's closure and sale was announced at the time of RedZone's takeover proposal. Six Flags was "exploring strategic options", and Burke put the company up for sale. Astroworld sat upon extremely valuable real-estate (this was mid-2005, before the "bubble" bursted), and issues with parking with the neighboring Reliant Park made the property an easy target. Burke hoped a "quick flip" would help shore up the company's cash position, stave off a sale, and save his job. It was a stupid, impulsive move that was doomed to fail (RedZone sold the property for a song). The situation Six Flags faced with Red Zone in 2005 is quite analogous to Chrysler in 1997 (Iacocca and Kirk Kerkorian's attempted takeover ultimately forced the sale to Diamler).

Daniel Snyder initially opposed the sale of Astroworld, but did nothing to stop it. Injunctions could have been sought considering the state of the company at the time. None were however, and the rest is history.

Regarding the topic, I believe Six Flags and the Kentucky State Fair will settle the matter out of court. Considering "Chang" existed prior to Six Flags assuming the Kentucky Kingdom lease; I believe a compelling case can be made that Six Flags does not own the ride. Approval to remove "Chang" was contingent upon Six Flags investing in a water park expansion. They defaulted on that obligation. Despite the bankruptcy court canceling the lease, Six Flags lacks the explicit right to remove attractions from the property without approval of the landlord or court. Six Flags may have owned a majority of the land "Chang" existed on, but Kentucky State Fair remains the ultimate trustee of the park and ride. Ultimately, I think Six Flags will surrender all properties abutting Kentucly Kingdom (as well as some cash) to settle the matter. Returning "Chang" and being forced to pay punitive damages and reassembly costs (among legal fees and finding a new attraction for Great America), seem cost prohibitive. Six Flags is done with Louisville, so shedding the unwanted land and a small cash payment seem like a no-brainer to me.

That;s a very strong point you just made. People who don't ride coasters think the park needs a new coaster. If Mr. Ed knows that the general public in Louisville wants a new ride, then he will probably put that in his plan. I can't see someone that experienced giving the park something that it doesn't need or the general public of Louisville won't like. When he is done with it, I could see that place being on the travel channel. For those of you are are from Louisville, try getting in contract with Ed and see if he wants to put together a group discussion on what the general public of Louisville, wants to see inside the park. You never know, it could turn into something, you have always dreamed of.

Louisville SHOULD have been on the travel channel with Chang! It really pisses me off that Mantis, Riddlers Revenge, and Georgia Scorcher all made it on to TV but NEVER once have I seen Chang.

Also KK need something else that can be billed like Chang (Broke 5 records), Twisted Twins (First dueling woodie), and T2 (first SLC in America). Yes Chang's records were broke quickly, TT while fun sucks at it execution of a dueling coaster, and i'm not gonna start on T2, these coasters advertised well! We need another ride that can be advertised as either a groundbreaker or a recordbreaker. The latter would be harder due to space OR may turn out gimmicky like Chang. However while we may see a gimmick, the GP around here doesn't read the fine print! for example, Chang broke five world records for STAND UP COASTERS! GP only see BROKE 5 WORLD RECORDS!!! T2 GP only see first SUSPENDED LOOPING COASTER! Not being well traveled enough to realize the BTR at SFGAm exist, they feel that they are riding something that's really revolutionary! I still remember GP saying "KK got a new ride where you go upside down and your feet hang! Then six flags painted it black and ironically, alot of GP stopped calling it T2 and started calling it "The Batman", despite the fact the name never changed.

These are just some ideas on how to advertise a new thrill ride or thrill coaster. One day maybe the park can be more like this...

^ I have to say I Hart, could buy back Chang, but now that I come to think of it, it's not worth it. Because he would have to pay money to transfer it and then rebuild it, when in reality, it's something we already had. Best thing now is to move on and see what else is on the market. The new Vekoma's would work well, in KK. If you go on their site, you can find them. They resemble the B&M's that suspend riders and seat 4 people across. I'm surprised none of the Six Flags parks have any plans to build them.

If Kentucky Kingdom was my business, I would not hesitate to sue Six Flags for the return of "Chang". It was a popular ride and it was removed under false pretenses. At the very least, I'd want the full value for the ride, and its assembly costs before moving on. Regarding Vekoma Coasters, I've yet to meet a design of theirs I like. You can keep them, as I wouldn't trust them to build a park bench.

If Kentucky Kingdom was my business, I would not hesitate to sue Six Flags for the return of "Chang". It was a popular ride and it was removed under false pretenses. At the very least, I'd want the full value for the ride, and its assembly costs before moving on. Regarding Vekoma Coasters, I've yet to meet a design of theirs I like. You can keep them, as I wouldn't trust them to build a park bench.

I agree. Six Flags robbed that place blind of it's best thrill attraction. Bottom line is the previous management with Snyder and Shapiro got away with too much in court. Almost as if the judge was being paid under the table. Not only that, but I thought Resilient Capital Management had a good fight against Danny and Shapiro and would have gained control of the company, to sell it to Apollo. Once Apollo got it, the would have merged it with Cedar Fair. But then, Danny and Shapiro managed to get a win over that. I think Ed Hart, wants to really put his best foot in there by starting clean and putting newer ideas in there. It will take a good bit of time before it gets back up to par, but when it does, it should be amazing.

Something tells me Ed Hart always wanted to be in charge of KK...

Now I want a photo like that!

C'mon Ed Hart - There is a dormant B&M sitting about 700 miles to the east of you. Go pick that one up and put it where Chang used to be!

Great thought Robb, but didn't SFKK always have an issue with wanting bigger/taller rides but there being a max. height restriction on their rides because of the airport next door? Would Led Zep/Time Machine fit in there? Even as off-the-shelf as that ride is, it would be really nice to see it get a good home...it is a B&M after all.

Great thought Robb, but didn't SFKK always have an issue with wanting bigger/taller rides but there being a max. height restriction on their rides because of the airport next door? Would Led Zep/Time Machine fit in there?

It's 4 feet shorter than Chang so height wise it should be fine.

C'mon Ed Hart - There is a dormant B&M sitting about 700 miles to the east of you. Go pick that one up and put it where Chang used to be!

That be nice - but I'd settle for having the whole park actually open when I go, rather than cutting it off before Mile High Falls and a few others. Maybe some redesign work on the pathways would be nice too - that park was impossible to navigate.

So did SF purchase Chang or was that bought before the SF "takeover"? Seems to me if they (SF) bought it - they should be able to do what they will with it, just like any other rides. But I have a feeling it's not that simple...rebuttals in 3...2...1...

^ Chang was purchased and installed by the group (Ed Hart and Co) that owned the park BEFORE Six Flags (Premier Parks) bought the park at the end of 1997.

I think this is why there is some controversy.

BTW, is Deluge still at the park or was that removed as well?

--Robb

^ Chang was purchased and installed by the group (Ed Hart and Co) that owned the park BEFORE Six Flags (Premier Parks) bought the park at the end of 1997.

 

I think this is why there is some controversy.

 

BTW, is Deluge still at the park or was that removed as well?

 

--Robb

Ah - then that would be a problem! Thanks for the info.

BTW, is Deluge still at the park or was that removed as well?

 

--Robb

Deluge is still at the park.

^ I sure do hope so. I also hope it caters to thrillseeker teens as well as families. A lot of thrillseeker teens did and will come to KK due to the park being right on a bus line. Ed Hart has been stating for years that he wanted control of the park back and he wished he never sold it ever since SF started killing the park IIRC!

Wasn't it Hart who invested the money to build Chang? If so then that ride was NEVER SF's asset to redistribute to begin with & should be returned to the park ASAP.SF would have ownership of the newer attractions(what little there were) that were installed from the time they managed the park to the present but nothing more.

My understanding is that Mr. Hart financed Chang himself, then leased the ride to Kentucky Kingdom. I would imagine that when Premier Parks acquired the park, they most likely purchased the ride from Mr. Hart at roughly the same time.

C'mon Ed Hart - There is a dormant B&M sitting about 700 miles to the east of you. Go pick that one up and put it where Chang used to be!

GP woudn't even know the difference!

Columbia, is that a real pic or is it photoshopped?!

My understanding is that Mr. Hart financed Chang himself, then leased the ride to Kentucky Kingdom. I would imagine that when Premier Parks acquired the park, they most likely purchased the ride from Mr. Hart at roughly the same time.

If Six Flags owned "Chang", I'd doubt they would request permission from the Kentucky State Fair to remove the ride. They sure as heck wouldn't promise a major waterpark expansion in return! Even if the Six Flags lease agreement was similar to the City of Montreal's for La Ronde (where annual park improvements are a precept in the lease agreement), the termination of the lease wouldn't allow them to remove "Chang". They would have needed the express permission of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. If the Kentucky State Fair truly pursues this matter, this will be an interesting case. Six Flags could lose big, and they no longer have the bankruptcy court to protect them.

...just imagining lawyers from Kentucky...

"If it pleases the court, I'd like to use a metaforce. See, six flags is like the man who buys up your tobackey farm with the promise that he'll take care of it and make it profitable while paying youse to have the privelige, but then they plow it under and have relations with yer daughter without permission before she's of legal age in the great commonwealth (14). t'aint right, yer honors."

^... umm... close!

Something tells me that Chang will be back in Kentucky Kingdom, I don't know why but I just got that feeling in the bottom of my feet (stand-up-coaster joke!... no?...hmm ). Chang was probably the best reason why most people would come to Kentucky Kingdom, otherwise they'll say KK has a great waterpark and some good rides.

^^Says the guy from Ohio...

Just kidding, James.

...just imagining lawyers from Kentucky...

 

"If it pleases the court, I'd like to use a metaforce. See, six flags is like the man who buys up your tobackey farm with the promise that he'll take care of it and make it profitable while paying youse to have the privelige, but then they plow it under and have relations with yer daughter without permission before she's of legal age in the great commonwealth (14). t'aint right, yer honors."