View Full Version : Six Flags not doing well



Patrick
11-09-2004, 11:24 PM
Well, nothing new here. Six Flags continues its fall. Where it will land, nobody knows. I guess this means no improvements made at Frontier City for awhile.

---------------
"Six Flags

Attendance declines continued to plague amusement park operator Six Flags Inc. in third-quarter results released Monday.

The Oklahoma City company said attendance fell 4.8 percent in the third quarter due to poor weather and hurricane activity in the Southeast and on the East Coast. Revenues fell 3 percent to $527.4 million, down from $545.2 million in the same period last year.

That decline was offset partly by a 1.6 percent increase in spending by visitors on food and gifts.

Six Flags had third-quarter net income of $56.4 million, or 53 cents per diluted share, compared to $140.2 million, or $1.32 per diluted share, in the third quarter of 2003.

Six Flags also said its banks had modified credit agreements to give it additional cushion for debt service and capital expenditures.

Six Flags shares fell 2 cents to $4.98 Monday on the New York Stock Exchange. The company released earnings after the market closed. "

~~*DarlingDiva*~~
12-26-2004, 03:13 PM
Hey Patrick,

This sure does not seem to be good news.Everyone loves theme parks there is always something for everyone even if you dont want to throw up your way too expensive lunch after that near death experience roller coaster ride.Anyway I do want to go ahead and ask a DUMB question.Why is it that the Headquarters for Six Flags is here in OKC?When as anyone who as ever traveled basically anywhere can tell Frontier City has got to be the sorriest excuse for a so called Theme park I have ever seen in my life.If it was the head quarters you think they should put A few more $$$ into ours to show it off a bit.Instead of pouring it all into Texas,Callifornia and elsewhere.Anyway that is my 2 cents.
DarlingDiva:dontgetit

mranderson
12-28-2004, 10:49 AM
Actually, I can name a lot of people who do NOT like theme parks.

However, that is beside the point. If Six Flags would improve their parks (especially our city dump) and improve both PR and advertising, they might get better results.

Luke
12-28-2004, 10:59 AM
The only theme parks I'll pay to see are Disney Parks.

I don't like roller coasters.

I wish the best for Six Flags though.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 11:01 AM
The only theme parks I'll pay to see are Disney Parks.

I don't like roller coasters.

I wish the best for Six Flags though.

I will add to your list Universal. The motion picture studios are interesting, and have very few "thrill" rides.

Keith
12-28-2004, 02:15 PM
I couldn't tell you the last time I was at Six Flags. To me, it is a waste of good money, while standing in line for two hours for a ride that lasts only 2 minutes. To top that off, it is usually very hot when you are standing in line.

Never, ever, look up at a roller coaster coming down because you never know when someone will lose their cookies(liquid, chunky version), and you will catch them.

Plus, theme parks are always so crowded with such rude people.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 02:24 PM
I couldn't tell you the last time I was at Six Flags. To me, it is a waste of good money, while standing in line for two hours for a ride that lasts only 2 minutes. To top that off, it is usually very hot when you are standing in line.

Never, ever, look up at a roller coaster coming down because you never know when someone will lose their cookies(liquid, chunky version), and you will catch them.

Plus, theme parks are always so crowded with such rude people.

Amen. The Disney and Universal attractions are MUCH longer. The rides average five minutes, and the attractions even longer. Six Flags needs to take a look at those.

Luke
12-28-2004, 02:29 PM
Given the choice, I would pick Disney over Universal, but either of those over Six Flags anyday. I'm not much of a thrill ride kinda guy. It's a small world after all, for me. :)

mranderson
12-28-2004, 02:38 PM
Given the choice, I would pick Disney over Universal, but either of those over Six Flags anyday. I'm not much of a thrill ride kinda guy. It's a small world after all, for me. :)

Universal has many attractions that teach the audience the tricks of the trade. Examples are the foley stage, the special effects (at least was based on "Back to the Future"), a pyrotechnic stage ("Backdraft") and more.

Universal also has several rides that are not "Thrill," or "roller coaster."

FYI. I agree. Disney IS better, however, Universal is good also... As long as you do not go more often than every three or five years. (Not enough change until then)

Luke
12-28-2004, 02:53 PM
I've been to both Universal Studios in Florida and California and the Magic Kingdom in Florida and California and Epcot in Florida. I haven't been to Animal Kingdom or Disney/MGM Studios in Florida or California Adventure in California.

I did enjoy seeing the behind-the-scenes kind of things at Universal as well as "riding" some of the movies like ET or Back to the Future. Disney just has the happiest-place-on-earth feel to it. It's clean, landscaped, friendly, fun and very cool.

mranderson
12-28-2004, 02:58 PM
I went to Animal Kingdom in 2000. I may have gone too early in it's life. To be blunt, it sucked. I probably liked Epcot best of all. Disney-MGM is like Universal. Every three or so years.

Next is California Adventure.