Mark Shapiro Visits Great Adventure - Again

[WadeJ]

I want to remind everybody that we have a Six Flags news feed on the left column of this site under the stock watch.  Which is where I happen to snag this article link just in case you missed it

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06060105.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y

And for the record, I still think this guy "gets" it.  And I can't even begin to describe how happy I am and more importantly, my son will be when Jungleland Express opens later this month 

[PcMan]

That's the best interview I heard from Shapiro all year.  And info about Great Adventure and how they touched on the Hotel.  I'm sure the English ride op on Nitro made the park look good.  There are things in the park that can always be improved like the test seat for KK is not near the line ticket entrance(you don't see it until you get off the ride) and in PDC there is a old park map in the middle of a new shrub bed to see/use it you would need to walk in and on the flowers.  I can see all these things.

ALso my friend (it's been 18 years since he's been to Grtadv) I took to the park yesterday said he liked the Ride Simulators and other stuff at Universal/Disney in florida. Thats what we need more of.  But I told him these rides (coasters) are the real thing and you don't have to spen 1000's of $ to visit.

But in 4 visits this year the park looks great and the future looks bright.

[Nitro1118]

I still am not a fan. I think he wants SF to be something it shouldn't, and is shying away from the one single thing that attracted people to the parks over more well rounded and family oriented parks like Hershey.

But, this line pisses me off, on the old SF regime's part:

"According to Mark, the delay resulted from placing a new coaster order three months too late. "

[ChuckR]

It's good he wants Jungeland Express to finally open. They should of asked him what he thought about Nitro's rusty sign...

[OrlandoRocks]

In PDC there is a old park map in the middle of a new shrub bed to see/use it you would need to walk in and on the flowers.

I noticed people standing in the shrubs and reading the map also. And I still wonder why you would have Plaza Del Carnaval open only to see El Mercado, La cocina, and the games open. I really don't see much of a change from the last six flags regime. Maybe things will improve during the peak summer season.

[kj_bennett]

What I like about is when they touched on the old regime winging it every year for the next year.  Maybe in the future they will start getting coasters opened early on in the season when they start planning parks improvements a few years in advance.

[WadeJ]

/\  Exactly.  Planning is crucial.  You can't decide in June of 2005 that you want a major wooden rollercoaster to open the following Spring.  They need to look towards the future and develop a 5 and then 10 year plan.  This would allow things to be done in such a way that it will open on time, be more reliable and have minimal impact on their current operating season.

[sir clinksalot]

I really don't see much of a change from the last six flags regime. Maybe things will improve during the peak summer season.

They have only had the parks since the end of last year ... give it some time. You can't change everything overnight.

Great interview, and I agree with him regarding SFMM.

Earlier, Mark had conceded that some parks like Six Flags New England were coming along splendidly, while others like Magic Mountain in California -- where a family emphasis could backfire, given the nature of competing parks -- were going to take some time to make it to the top.

[Dubya91]

I am liking Shapiro more and more becuase he knows what he is talking about....He doesnt skid by on everything, he wants everything to be organized. He also is very involved in the parks, you didnt see Burke roaming around GADV, thats for sure

[rjholla2003]

I still am not a fan. I think he wants SF to be something it shouldn't, and is shying away from the one single thing that attracted people to the parks over more well rounded and family oriented parks like Hershey.

But, this line pisses me off, on the old SF regime's part:

"According to Mark, the delay resulted from placing a new coaster order three months too late. "

I honestly don't see what you don't like about this new regime.  The coasters are staying, which will keep us happy.  Theming will be better.  Streetmosphere will be better.  New coasters will open with the new season, as they should.  More entertainment options.  Everything that Six Flags fans have wanted brought to the chain is being delivered, or is in the works.  I guess if you like longer lines, dirtier streets, unpainted buildings, winged attractions, cheap entertainment, and a bad atmosphere, they you would like the old regime.

[Nitro1118]

I still am not a fan. I think he wants SF to be something it shouldn't, and is shying away from the one single thing that attracted people to the parks over more well rounded and family oriented parks like Hershey.

But, this line pisses me off, on the old SF regime's part:

"According to Mark, the delay resulted from placing a new coaster order three months too late. "

I honestly don't see what you don't like about this new regime.  The coasters are staying, which will keep us happy.  Theming will be better.  Streetmosphere will be better.  New coasters will open with the new season, as they should.  More entertainment options.  Everything that Six Flags fans have wanted brought to the chain is being delivered, or is in the works.  I guess if you like longer lines, dirtier streets, unpainted buildings, winged attractions, cheap entertainment, and a bad atmosphere, they you would like the old regime.

I don't like the direction. SF will NEVER top Disney/Universal/Busch/traditional parks for family fun. Never will. The only thing that kept SF competing in old regime was the coasters, it gave people a totally new experience in amusement parks. Unfortunately, they added way too much way too early with all those parks they bought, which was cause for debt.

I feel that Burke and company was going in right direction in 2004/2005, adding more to the neglected parks, and finalyl adding theming and cleaning up parks that needed it. Also the thought of a true flagship park that could be like CP is for CF (GADV was gonna be that park, with all brand new additions, tallest and fastest coaster, 3 year cleanup, new hotel, etc..) but with the new hotel being scrapped, I guess that vision is no more.

My point is, there needs to be a balance between adding new rides and improving park quality/family fun. Old regime was focused too much on thrills, and from what I have seen and heard from new regime, they are exact opposite. But, SF's bread and butter and what can give them ultimately the best results is being the thrilling option to other chains, while keeping park nice and shiny and catering to everyone.

[GADVwow]

The hotel, as planned by previous management, has been scrapped.

That doesn't mean the hotel has been scrapped....It means only that the hotel that was planned before won't be built as planned.

Stay tuned.  I bet there are more developments rather quickly.

[PcMan]

Shapiro sounds like he wants a Hotel.
But at this point you have the stop the "bleeding" of money then things will fall in place.
2 billion is a lot of money.
Check back in 3-4 years.
Also what have GADV got in the last few years Worlds tallest fastest (which will stand for years) and one of the biggest fastest wood coaters in the world.
I'm a happy camper to have all that and will be for years.
If they can just drop the food prices.

[rjholla2003]

Nitro, I think you're reading selectively.  IMO, it's clear that balance is what they are going for.  Yes there is a family focus now, but the only reason it's so overwhelming is because they were so neglected before.  It's not that they are completely the opposite from the old regime, it's more that they are correcting the errors.

Yes, Burke and company started to get it right last season, but for the investors, it was too little, too late.  There were still a lot of things wrong, such as El Toro simply being ordered late and the general lack of planning in advance of park additions.  They also were not going after the family aspect as aggressively as they needed to be.

As for the flagship park thing, the new regime has stated that Great Adventure WILL be the flagship park, as it is the closest one to the NYC headquarters.  Great Adventure will be great soon enough.

To sum it all up, you are getting what you want Nitro.  The thrills will continue to pour in.  I honestly don't see how you can think that won't happen when it's been a recurring theme in the interviews.  But in addition to that, the families will get something they can all do.  They aren't trying to top Disney or Universal.  I don't think the chain would have those goals at this point in time.  You're right, they are different kinds of parks.  BUT, I can see them going at Busch.  The chain isn't too far off from Busch Gardens honestly.  All they really need is to improve the entertainment, keep the parks cleaner, and create that wholesome atmosphere that Busch has.  If they do those three things, IMO they will beat Busch out.  Not only do they have the look and feel, but they also have the thrills that Busch seems to shy away from.

All they are trying to do is be a local, cheaper alternative to Disney.  NOT a Disney competitor or replacement.

[Nitro1118]

Nitro, I think you're reading selectively.  IMO, it's clear that balance is what they are going for.  Yes there is a family focus now, but the only reason it's so overwhelming is because they were so neglected before.  It's not that they are completely the opposite from the old regime, it's more that they are correcting the errors.

Correcting is fine, but from what I have taken from his interviews, he wants around 5 or so seasons to stay away from thrills and just imrpove family atmosphere. This is too drastic of a change, too soon. Rome wasn't built overnight.

Yes, Burke and company started to get it right last season, but for the investors, it was too little, too late.  There were still a lot of things wrong, such as El Toro simply being ordered late and the general lack of planning in advance of park additions.  They also were not going after the family aspect as aggressively as they needed to be.

Except for the characters, this year at GADV was NO different than last year. Last year they made some VERY drastic changes in landscaping and theming, park cleanliness, and employee friendliness.I know it was too little too late, but I like what they did....with the new greatly themed sections devoted to families, they added a major roller coaster with it. I think they added too much in 2 years, but ya get the point.

As for the flagship park thing, the new regime has stated that Great Adventure WILL be the flagship park, as it is the closest one to the NYC headquarters.  Great Adventure will be great soon enough.

I already consider GADV great, and it has been flagship park for years now. But GADV, with being a resort, cannot be SF's answer to CP.

To sum it all up, you are getting what you want Nitro.  The thrills will continue to pour in.  I honestly don't see how you can think that won't happen when it's been a recurring theme in the interviews.  But in addition to that, the families will get something they can all do.  They aren't trying to top Disney or Universal.  I don't think the chain would have those goals at this point in time.  You're right, they are different kinds of parks.  BUT, I can see them going at Busch.  The chain isn't too far off from Busch Gardens honestly.  All they really need is to improve the entertainment, keep the parks cleaner, and create that wholesome atmosphere that Busch has.  If they do those three things, IMO they will beat Busch out.  Not only do they have the look and feel, but they also have the thrills that Busch seems to shy away from.

IMO, Busch is by far the best company right now. BGW is my favorite park (over IOA, CP, etc..), and I feel they do things right. But, they have 2 parks (not including the Sea Worlds). SF has over 25 theme parks, not including water parks. Different situation, and each park can't be top quality without cutting some slack.

All they are trying to do is be a local, cheaper alternative to Disney.  NOT a Disney competitor or replacement.

Being a Disney alternative is just wrong. SF needs to be their own chain, not a knock off. They still need to be the thrill ride leaders, but need to cleanup what they neglected, and not compulsively add coasters when attendance starts decling every year. But, SF will never outduel small traditional parks for families like HW, Knoebels, and places like Hershey. if people want high quality family fun, they WILL travel to Florida or California for those fixes. But, for thrills, they will always go to their local SF. That is SF's bread and butter. They are a thrill seekers paradise. What got them into debt wasn't that mindset, it was buying over 20 parks in 5 years, adding over 40 million to each one right away, then neglecting them for years and watching the parks deteriorate.

CF has been so succesful because they understand the balance that I want of SF (although CF is starting to turn into SF of late 90's, buying tons of parks and being only for thrills). They udnerstand they will never be a great alternative to Disney/Busch/Universal, so they go for thrills, but keep family fun and park quality in tip top shape.

[GADVwow]

Nitro, I think you have some very good points, but let me add that MOST Six Flags last year were not as great as Great Adventure.  The old regime had poured a great share of their capital and operating budgets into  Great Adventure...building first Kingda Ka and the incredible Golden Kingdom and then committing to El Toro and the redone BBNP and Plaza areas.

Even then, the older areas of the park were not well maintained.  New areas were beautiful, older ones were in decline.  This was true throughout the chain.

Too, Great Adventure, Great America and the two partnership parks--Texas and Georgia, were run far differently than was the rest of the chain.  The other parks were woefully understaffed, frequently dirty, many had falling attendance, were starved for attractions and suffered from the what little capital that could be put into rides being put into spectaculars in the biggest (and probably most profitable) parks.

To keep up attendance figures, season passes were sold at fire sale prices.  The thought was that they could make up in volume what they were losing at the gate in daily attendance in parks where there were no new rides, year after year.  It was beginning to not work, and how.

People here forget that Great Adventure WAS and IS far superior to the average Six Flags park.  That even with its reputation for most rides being closed, being dirty, attracting a rough crowd, etc. (Ask the average enthusiast outside the Northeast about Great Adventure...you will almost always get one of two reactions--a groan and an explanation of how bad it is--often coming from someone who has never been there---or an explanation that they haven't been because of how bad it is).  Yes, Great Adventure had changed and is changing, but the old regime had done little to nothing to promote anything but rides, rides, rides.  Rides that frequently didn't run for one reason or another.

Remember the ill fated "War on Lines" a few years back?

As for today's Six Flags, soon the results of that real estate audit currently underway will be announced.  At that time, I suspect you will see some of the smaller parks (and a larger one or two) either offered for sale or even just closed and sold for their underlying land value.  And surplus lands (as defined by the company) will also be sold.

Family emphasis?  Yeah, Cedar Fair is going there, too.  That is what the buyout of Paramount Parks is all about.  It isn't just adding more parks to the chain, it is a way to take the best parts of both chains and applying them to the other, while keeping the unique features of both (hey, that's what Kinzel said during the conference calls).  As boomers age, everyone in the industry is going more towards the family, but I don't think this trend will go all the way to the extreme that the focus on rides to the exclusion of virtually everything else did.

And I agree that Great Adventure has the potential to be better than the Busch parks at this point, if they could consistently keep rides and attractions open and just improve customer service a wee bit.  BUT, BUT, BUT, a chain is good as its weakest link.  Magic Mountain doesn't seem to have improved as much as the rest of the chain this year.  Kentucky Kingdom and Elitch Gardens still do not operate at SFOG, SFGAm, SFGAd type levels, just to pick two of the conversion parks.

The public sees the entire chain as whatever THEIR local park is.  Just as those at this site, for the most part, see Six Flags as whatever Great Adventure is.

Lastly, Shapiro and Snyder are looking at this as a work in progress.  They are fine tuning as they go along.  What works, they will keep.  What doesn't, they will hopefully change.  Many statements are made when you first take over a business that later turn out, for one reason or another, to be inoperative.  I've been impressed so far.  I'm more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.  After all, what is the alternative?

And no matter how you slice it, things look better now for Six Flags Great Adventure than they have in many, many years.  They were looking that way under the old regime, too; but the way they were doing it was not sustainable for long.  To be frank, in a last ditch effort to save the company, they were pouring virtually all their capital in to only the most profitable parks, while letting the others deteriorate.  And the financial results were beginning to show it.  You can't blame the weather forever...

[sir clinksalot]

I don't like the direction. SF will NEVER top Disney/Universal/Busch/traditional parks for family fun. Never will. The only thing that kept SF competing in old regime was the coasters, it gave people a totally new experience in amusement parks.

Don't kid yourself. They were not competitive at all under the old regime ... coasters or not. You want to know how much attendance at SFMM went up the year that Scream opened? Not a whole lot.

[PcMan]

I'm sure MM didn't make back the 15 + Million they paid for it.

[WadeJ]

Not much to add except for the fact that I've really enjoyed following this thread.  All of you have brought up really valid points and backed them up.

[Nitro1118]

I don't like the direction. SF will NEVER top Disney/Universal/Busch/traditional parks for family fun. Never will. The only thing that kept SF competing in old regime was the coasters, it gave people a totally new experience in amusement parks.

Don't kid yourself. They were not competitive at all under the old regime ... coasters or not. You want to know how much attendance at SFMM went up the year that Scream opened? Not a whole lot.

GADV consistently is top 20 in world in bringing in money, and was ahead of CP in attendance a few years ago. Coasters kept them competiting, not as resorts like Disney/Universal/Busch/SW/CP are, but they dominated regional sections.

[rjholla2003]

And the park is slipping.  If I recall correctly, Great Adventure used to pull in numbers that were comperable to Disney World.    Obviously that is not the case anymore.  If you look at the attendance figures that were leaked over the years, it's clear that SFI's strategy at the time was to keep adding coasters to boost attendance.  When you do that without adding any other value to the park, it's great for teenagers and thrill seakers, but it sucks for families.  Shapiro put it perfectly when he said that it wa like te industry was "addicted to coasters".  You can't have your park on roller coaster life support or it ends up like Magic Mountain.  The coasters don't increase attendance anymore because people expect it.  Guest do see past the mounds of steel you are throwing at them.  They see the dirty park.  They taste the bad food.  They see the lack of family attractions.  They notice the lack of qualty that is around them.  A lot of roller coasters never have, and never will, make a good park.  I know people who are die hard Cedar Point fans who are starting to feel the same about Cedar Point.  It's gotten to the point that they do not even want to buy a season pass to the parki anymore, or visit despite the even lower admission and food prices.  They see that the roller coasters are hust hiding the fact that Cedar Point has nothing to offer.  Why do you think their attendance fell?  If they don't change something quick, they will lose their coveted Golden Ticket.  Even as a resort, CP is statrting to lose it because they are not appealing to families.  They are not creating a complete experience.

I'll go as far to say that if all things keep going the way they are, Cedar Point will lose the Golden Ticket, and it might even be to Great Adventure.  If Shapiro keeps up the cleanup of the park, keeps retheming, keeps adding more entertainment, makes things like the parade better (wouldn't hurt if it was more than 3 busses), improves the quality of the food, and installs more family friendly attractions (Tango looks really fun!), it will be a Golden Ticket contender.

[PcMan]

Checkout the news on the left side of your page:
http://tinyurl.com/j25v5

Six Flags, Disneyfied
By Rick Aristotle Munarriz (TMFBreakerRick)
June 7, 2006

[rjholla2003]

That was an interesting read.  Nice to see CaRP is updating instantly and hasn't missed a beat with the change from 'PKS' to 'SIX'

[sir clinksalot]

Nitro ... your just talking about GADV which yes, I can say has definately received the most improvements and the most capitol the last few years.

Magic Mountain has 3 coasters built on parking lots ... Colossus, Goliath and Scream. On all 3 you can still see lines beneath them.

MM "supposedly" has the most coasters but Flashback has been SBNO since 2003. Psyclone and Colossus suck (as do most woodies in CA). Revolution has been butchered. People talk about X but most people outside of the GP hate it. Deja Vu is inconsistent at best and Batman: TR was running 1 train for about 2 years between 2003 and 2005.

Don't even get me started on the food.

The last thing the "Flagship" park of Six Flags Over Texas received was Titan in 2001. That's 5 years since the flagship park has gotten a new coaster.

Since 2001 GADV has gotten Nitro, S:UF, Kingda Ka and now El Toro. Not to mention great theming in Golden Kingdom and the new area.

So yes ... speaking of GADV the park has made great strides and is in the top 20 and is receiving good things. But there are 15 other parks in the chain that have been neglected.

[Nitro1118]

And the park is slipping.  If I recall correctly, Great Adventure used to pull in numbers that were comperable to Disney World.    Obviously that is not the case anymore.  If you look at the attendance figures that were leaked over the years, it's clear that SFI's strategy at the time was to keep adding coasters to boost attendance.  When you do that without adding any other value to the park, it's great for teenagers and thrill seakers, but it sucks for families.  Shapiro put it perfectly when he said that it wa like te industry was "addicted to coasters".  You can't have your park on roller coaster life support or it ends up like Magic Mountain.  The coasters don't increase attendance anymore because people expect it.  Guest do see past the mounds of steel you are throwing at them.  They see the dirty park.  They taste the bad food.  They see the lack of family attractions.  They notice the lack of qualty that is around them.  A lot of roller coasters never have, and never will, make a good park.  I know people who are die hard Cedar Point fans who are starting to feel the same about Cedar Point.  It's gotten to the point that they do not even want to buy a season pass to the parki anymore, or visit despite the even lower admission and food prices.  They see that the roller coasters are hust hiding the fact that Cedar Point has nothing to offer.  Why do you think their attendance fell?  If they don't change something quick, they will lose their coveted Golden Ticket.  Even as a resort, CP is statrting to lose it because they are not appealing to families.  They are not creating a complete experience.

I'll go as far to say that if all things keep going the way they are, Cedar Point will lose the Golden Ticket, and it might even be to Great Adventure.  If Shapiro keeps up the cleanup of the park, keeps retheming, keeps adding more entertainment, makes things like the parade better (wouldn't hurt if it was more than 3 busses), improves the quality of the food, and installs more family friendly attractions (Tango looks really fun!), it will be a Golden Ticket contender.

GADV never put up Disney numbers. In 2001 they had the most successful season in park history, and we all know what was added that year.

One again, I am not saying coasters make a good park, and definately do not condone it. If you remember, I was always the one to bash the park before 2005 about the crappy quality. But, there is nod enying they still kept up good attendance figures because of the coasters, and were always good competitors. Being a thrill park is SF's key to success, but they have to realize they can't slack off in other areas, as being a quality attraction is most important. But, in order to compete with the Disney's of the world, they can't bea tthem at their own game, and have to go to a different approach. They can't become local Disney's, they have to be their own, and compete with Disney.

si clinksalot- I was talking about direction of chain. During 2004 and on, all parks starting getting more attractions, whether it be new shows, new flats, or small coasters like the Intamin half pipe. They started improving park quality at all parks, but only had around a year or 2 to do it before getting bought out by Snyder. SF's numbers started to increase in 2005, too. Shapiro has a similar approach, but without adding thrills except every 5 or so years, they are changing the entire face of the chain, which is not needed. Improve park quality, don't be compulsive buyers, and promote more rides for the whole family, while still being thrill parks. Notice how I said thrill parks, and not family parks.