Rumor: Busch Gardens Parks to Be Sold Off?
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
D.R.Money said:
I agree, but even though those are the standards...it doesn't mean that Disney always keeps to them. Future World is barely themed at this point, Hollywood Studios needs work...etc. I think BGW could be brought up to Disney standards without rebuilding it. In some ways, I think it already surpasses Disney standards (cleanliness, landscaping, general design and flow).
Interesting stuff to think about anyway! I'm sure every hotel in the Williamsburg area would LOVE for Disney to be the buyer
Keep in mind that if Disney purchases BGW, that doesn't automatically mean it's going to become Virginia's Magic Kingdom. Disney in the past had several concepts for parks that had little to do with Disney characters, including the park planned for the DC area.
While they have only really built parks from the ground up, with the current leadership, I think if they see the potential for profit they could be a player.
While they have only really built parks from the ground up, with the current leadership, I think if they see the potential for profit they could be a player.
Disney is having financial issues with parks, DLR is barely floating the entire PR division. NextGen is creeping on 3 billion. It is not Disney.
-Source in Burbank.
-Source in Burbank.
Take it for what it's worth, but MiceChat posted an article, and along with being mostly apologetic for the recent quarter's loss, it also states that the possible sale of the Busch Gardens parks is now completely off the table:
http://micechat.com/38486-seaworld-parks-and-entertainment-update-a-tough-summer-but-a-bright-future/
http://micechat.com/38486-seaworld-parks-and-entertainment-update-a-tough-summer-but-a-bright-future/
I highly doubt it's "completely off the table" due to a TV show slot. It may not be express shipped like what was being discussed here, but it likely is still up the pipeline within the next 5 years.
I'm not going to say true or false on this one but I feel they are spreading any news that will protect their stock price. At the same time I don't know if holding onto the parks or selling them will be the best way to pay back their $1.4 BILLION loan. They might be thinking well we just took out a loan so we have time to try and fix this without selling. But we all know if you keep doing the same thing you will get the same results. Having the same management team who continues to spend more than they receive will result in the same problem. So is it possible that some management might change? Maybe the new finance manager at BGW will shed some light. I know for a fact that BGW entertainment's finances are flawed and misrepresented. "Making the parks better" is clearly not the answer here. It is logical business sense that anyone with a lemonade stand could figure out. Stop spending more than you make. Almost every company does this and tries to expand too much because of greed and ends up crumbling or has to rely on other investors. What a cyclical pile of crap. Oh and now we have moved from "Everyone" saying possible shut down to "bright future". Something is amiss.
Insanity-doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.
SWP&E management-insanity
SWP&E management-insanity
Something fishy is going on. Trying to sort it out but crazy stuff is being said. I would say if I knew what it meant but honestly have no idea what all this means. Some sources are still not ruling sale out.
My prediction based on nothing is that they sell BGW, WC and Sesame Place to Six Flags. This will keep the Seaworlds together, which makes sense. And will also keep the Florida parks together which makes sense too. The three that don't make sense in the group are BGW, WC and SP. In addition, these are the three that are in climates that have winter and lots of rainy days, something Six Flags is used to.
Evil words!Marie said:
Seriously, though, I understand your point, Marie, but I don't think Six Flags is even interested in the market of these parks. Much more so than even Cedar Fair in my opinion, Six Flags specializes in cheap, amusement park rides with low quality and a cutesy name to tie it to Batman or Superman for the trillionth time. I highly doubt they would want a heavily immersive, themed attraction with such attention-to-detail and uniqueness that makes Busch Gardens different from other parks. While I've never been, Sesame Place looks like a very high-quality park to be aimed at children. Plus, while a small children's area can be rethemed to fit another company's branding, retheming an entire park to Loony Toons or whatever Six Flags has would be difficult and not worth it. I also have heard very little of SWP&E having any major issues with Sesame Place. Water Country is BG's sister park, in a sense, and it's still bounds ahead of Six Flags' market for how they would run a water park.
Logically, Six Flags, Cedar Fair, and likely Disney would all be out of the equation for a sale--Busch Gardens is just not what they do. On second thought, according to the information from Bill's find yesterday, a sale itself may be out of the equation.
I'd love to see SWP&E sell the parks off piecemeal - with BGW going to Herschend Family Entertainment.
J0E1 said:
Not to say the article is wrong, but I'm not sure I believe their logic that because of a Saturday morning TV show on ABC that the possibility of a sale is off the table. Unless they have better information, which isn't eluded to in the article.
I know, I know, evil words Ok, here are more reasons..
Town officials in Jackson just announced a (possible) massive hotel complex next to the Six Flags Parks there. My jaw hit the floor when I saw this...namely wondering who would want to drive there and actually stay over? 600 rooms? But then I read on and 3 million people visit each year, so maybe so, and maybe they are trying to improve...
http://www.app.com/article/20130819/NJNEWS/308190088/Jackson-hotel-plans-bring-vision-new-look-lower-taxes
Back to my reasons...
Using the NJ park as the model just because that is the Six Flags I am familiar with...
Animals: They have the Wild Safari park which is actually quite large. So they know about animal parks.
Waterparks: They have waterparks, so that takes care of operating WC and Sesame Place's water areas.
Sesame Place: As for Sesame Place, it's definitely not considered a high-quality park around here. It could merge with Six Flags easily in terms of image.
Coasters: Six Flags knows coasters, something BGW is well-known for as well obviously.
Climate: Six Flags knows how to operate in a three-season climate. Remember how they blamed poor weather in Virginia in that earnings report? Uh, sorry Virginia is not Florida?
Price: BGW is more expensive, but it's not that far off. It's not up in the stratosphere with Disney ticket prices or anything.
So anyway, maybe there are more similarities here than would appear at first. Maybe Six Flags wants a higher-caliber park in their collection. And maybe they are trying to improve their current parks. I don't know how all of the licensing would work out, I'm sure all of that stuff can be dealt with. The Looney Tunes area is just the kiddie area I think, kind of like the Sesame part at BGW.
I dunno, when I look at the list of parks, I see Florida parks and SeaWorlds. The other three just don't fit in.
Ok, here are more reasons..Town officials in Jackson just announced a (possible) massive hotel complex next to the Six Flags Parks there. My jaw hit the floor when I saw this...namely wondering who would want to drive there and actually stay over? 600 rooms? But then I read on and 3 million people visit each year, so maybe so, and maybe they are trying to improve...
http://www.app.com/article/20130819/NJNEWS/308190088/Jackson-hotel-plans-bring-vision-new-look-lower-taxes
Back to my reasons...
Using the NJ park as the model just because that is the Six Flags I am familiar with...
Animals: They have the Wild Safari park which is actually quite large. So they know about animal parks.
Waterparks: They have waterparks, so that takes care of operating WC and Sesame Place's water areas.
Sesame Place: As for Sesame Place, it's definitely not considered a high-quality park around here. It could merge with Six Flags easily in terms of image.
Coasters: Six Flags knows coasters, something BGW is well-known for as well obviously.
Climate: Six Flags knows how to operate in a three-season climate. Remember how they blamed poor weather in Virginia in that earnings report? Uh, sorry Virginia is not Florida?
Price: BGW is more expensive, but it's not that far off. It's not up in the stratosphere with Disney ticket prices or anything.
So anyway, maybe there are more similarities here than would appear at first. Maybe Six Flags wants a higher-caliber park in their collection. And maybe they are trying to improve their current parks. I don't know how all of the licensing would work out, I'm sure all of that stuff can be dealt with. The Looney Tunes area is just the kiddie area I think, kind of like the Sesame part at BGW.
I dunno, when I look at the list of parks, I see Florida parks and SeaWorlds. The other three just don't fit in.
Honestly, I can't see anybody breaking up the Busch Gardens brand. I know it could happen but I don't think it will happen. If anything, I think some company will come along scrape up WCUSA, AI, and the BGs and they may re-theme and re-do the water park brands, but they will keep the Busch Gardens brand. I mean it is probably easier to improve upon an existing brand that some people know rather than start a new one from the ground up that nobody knows.