well, because a lot of people expecting a big announcement of 2026 additions but instead got disappointment
well, name me some who willing to buy six flags, I can wait
News Cedar Fair Merges with Six Flags
- Thread starter horsesboy
- Start date
wow, I just opened a paradora box of dislike comments, I sorry, I just got mad over the fact that the current six flags/cedar fair just made a teaser only to get us angry
Nobody needs to purchase Six Flags due to less than stellar marketing. If that were true, companies would be trading hands left and right daily, this isn’t an issue exclusive to Six Flags. I also don’t really get what your persistence on an NFL franchise owner buying the chain is about.
They didn’t do this just to make anyone angry or upset. It’s a very tone deaf act, especially given the fact that SF has historically announced their new attractions for the following year in August, but never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. What do you think they would gain from going “hey, wouldn’t it be funny if we pissed a bunch of people off?”
They didn’t do this just to make anyone angry or upset. It’s a very tone deaf act, especially given the fact that SF has historically announced their new attractions for the following year in August, but never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. What do you think they would gain from going “hey, wouldn’t it be funny if we pissed a bunch of people off?”
because of the whole dan snyder era of six flags
AmyUD06
|--🩵🩷🤍🩷🩵-- | |----🩷💛🩵----| Credits: 373
Which was arguably one of the worst eras of the chain. Why would you want to bring that back?
because say what you will about that era, but at least it give us wiggles world & Thomas town (and Tony hawk big spin)
AmyUD06
|--🩵🩷🤍🩷🩵-- | |----🩷💛🩵----| Credits: 373
Oh, so you're just a troll. Thanks for confirming.
I would argue that this Forum is exactly the right place to discuss park history. That said, those discussions probably deserve their own threads, and should not just be brought up as random jokes/tangents/rants in unrelated threads.
I would also remind everyone about the rule against personal attacks. I fear people are getting fairly close in some cases.
I would also remind everyone about the rule against personal attacks. I fear people are getting fairly close in some cases.
the article on the whole controversy of six flags in 2025 (sorry if paywall)
looks like six flags maybe under investigation, possibly due to the merger
looks like six flags maybe under investigation, possibly due to the merger
I'm impressed. This was a worthwhile, useful, informative post. Post more like this, and you will see far fewer eye rolls and dislikes.
^ Yes, but still a bit of advice, though, for Harry - it's helpful to quote embed whenever possible to ensure the post benefits as wide of an audience as possible and also can sustain relevancy in case the links die in the future.
For example, yes, the WSJ article is behind a paywall, so can't read it. Here's the second article, though:
For example, yes, the WSJ article is behind a paywall, so can't read it. Here's the second article, though:
In Harry’s defense, copying and pasting an entire article is discouraged by the Forum Etiquette guidelines. My memory of why exactly that guideline was added is fuzzy, but I believe the concern was that it potentially robbed the original source of clicks/ad revenue and bordered on plagiarism.
That said, adding at least a summary or quoting the most important paragraph or so definitely is helpful.
parkfans.net
That said, adding at least a summary or quoting the most important paragraph or so definitely is helpful.
ParkFans.net - Forum Etiquette
I am once again seeing a pattern that I think needs to be addressed. As I am sure everyone will recall, a year and a half ago @Zachary eloquently explained why we prefer that members not indulge in what used to be called "useless nonsense." I want to take his request one step further. If you...
parkfans.net
There are a couple versions of the fraud investigation press releases going around and they are just advertisements for the law firms. A quick google search of the law firm name will show that the law firm issues several fraud investigation press releases a day for any company that reports poor financial results.
I believe that they should be under investigation for false advertizing, such as them advertizing Holiday In The Park for this year, all to then suddenly cancel it a few months before when it was supposed to begin at a few parks as a notable example. If they plan on canceling it, they should at least announce it for the following season that it will not return instead of the current one, as it already caused frustration for a lot of people. It does makes sense from a business perspective if it is underperforming, but they should at least allow people enjoy HITP for the last time this season as what people payed for their season as advertized.
They are covered by the Terms of Service you agreed to when you purchased a pass.
"Prices, availability of attractions, operating schedule and park policies are subject to change without notice."
https://www.sixflags.com/six-flags-season-pass-terms-conditions
The firm is investigating on behalf of investors, not consumers, so false advertising and pass sales would be outside the scope of the investigation.
Most likely the firm saw that the stock price tanked and is offering its services to anyone affected by that. Scummy move imo, you invest at your own risk, I don’t think SF purposefully misled investors but they were too optimistic in some cases and off base in some of their strategies. Now a firm comes in and wants to extort more money from a struggling corp by putting every claim under a microscope.
Most likely the firm saw that the stock price tanked and is offering its services to anyone affected by that. Scummy move imo, you invest at your own risk, I don’t think SF purposefully misled investors but they were too optimistic in some cases and off base in some of their strategies. Now a firm comes in and wants to extort more money from a struggling corp by putting every claim under a microscope.
I’m trying to think of the best way to word what I want to say in regards to this so I’ll say it this way:
Just because you invest at your own risk doesn’t mean that you aren’t protected. This investigation is likely more into if they purposely mislead investors. Do I think it was purposeful? Not likely. But as someone who invested into FUN (actually back when it was CF) do I feel mislead by everything and what has happened so far? Absolutely.
I don’t think anything will really come of this other than a big time scrutiny on their dealings moving forward.
Yeah, I have no idea what the fraud investigation (if it’s even a real “investigation”) will look into, but like @warfelg, I’ve invested in FUN — and I certainly feel misled by some of the merits the company put forward about the merger. If the merger were as financially beneficial as they claimed it would be, it doesn’t seem like they’d be making nearly as many desperate moves as they’re making right now. It’s also increasingly clear that they’re taking steps to make the merger seem like it’s working, but I think those steps are meant more to cook the numbers than they are to legitimately realize the benefits of the merger.
For example, the cost savings numbers they’ve been touting don’t actually seem to be the results of “synergies” as promised, but of axing entertainment, entire events, and tons of full-time staff. None of those cuts are actually related to combining resources or eliminating redundancies (which are legitimate cost savings that a merger can produce) — these cuts all could have happened under either Cedar Fair or legacy Six Flags as separate entities. I think the savings numbers are a farce designed to save face for a merger that wasn’t nearly as financially beneficial as expected; they’re cutting things that have nothing to do with the mechanics of the merger and hoping investors don’t look into it.
When this merger was first announced, my fear was that it was a classic case of “good for investors, bad for consumers.” Now it’s looking like it might have been bad for investors too. We’re still early into the merger, so I think it’s too early to say the combined company will never be healthy. But their desperate acts certainly signal that things haven’t gone the way they expected, even at this early stage. And I think investors deserve answers into how they miscalculated the benefits of the merger — or, if there was more nefarious behavior happening behind the scenes, how and why they deceived us into thinking it was a good idea.
For example, the cost savings numbers they’ve been touting don’t actually seem to be the results of “synergies” as promised, but of axing entertainment, entire events, and tons of full-time staff. None of those cuts are actually related to combining resources or eliminating redundancies (which are legitimate cost savings that a merger can produce) — these cuts all could have happened under either Cedar Fair or legacy Six Flags as separate entities. I think the savings numbers are a farce designed to save face for a merger that wasn’t nearly as financially beneficial as expected; they’re cutting things that have nothing to do with the mechanics of the merger and hoping investors don’t look into it.
When this merger was first announced, my fear was that it was a classic case of “good for investors, bad for consumers.” Now it’s looking like it might have been bad for investors too. We’re still early into the merger, so I think it’s too early to say the combined company will never be healthy. But their desperate acts certainly signal that things haven’t gone the way they expected, even at this early stage. And I think investors deserve answers into how they miscalculated the benefits of the merger — or, if there was more nefarious behavior happening behind the scenes, how and why they deceived us into thinking it was a good idea.
Last edited:
This merger has been really poor in terms of getting any benefits from a merger, namely pricing power and consolidation of overhead. The fact that prices haven't changed and there are now fire sales on passes doesn't produce confidence in the merged entity.
At this point they would almost be best divesting off the lousy performing assets and debt into a separate company to put that entity through bankruptcy as this current structure probably isn't salvageable.
At this point they would almost be best divesting off the lousy performing assets and debt into a separate company to put that entity through bankruptcy as this current structure probably isn't salvageable.