Weber and Reid-Anderson... Your Opinion

[warnerleroy]

Comments welcome!

[acq10uaz]

I voted No, for how they're running the company, and Not sure for the out look of 2011. It's to early to tell right now.

[Yoshi]

No to both, I am not happy with all the cutbacks and firing of employees. If I thought 2011 would be better I would have voted yes for the 2nd poll but other than Green Lantern, I am really concerned what will be cutback for 2011.

[CoasterPete]

I voted unsure for both because although we have the new coaster and the possibility of other additions, we may be giving up more than it's worth in layoffs and the uncertainty with the tigers.

 

Pete

Edited September 24, 2010 by CoasterPete

[BuddyChrist]

I voted unsure for management because I want to see how they perform in a full season of control from start to finish. It's hard to gauge the performance of a new team when they step into a company that is doing things according to the last team's budget. The same thing happened with the RedZone takeover so I'm gonna wait and see how they handle the budget and operations in the upcoming season.

[GAcoaster]

I agree, it's too early to really judge. While some of the decisions made so far feel questionable at best, if it produces better results in the long run then maybe they were right in making them. It always takes time.

 

It's like lately I've been looking back at what happened under Premier, and have to say that many of the positives outweigh the negatives at this point in history and I almost wish they had had another couple of years to finish the new vision for the park. At the time they were doing it, I didn't care for most of what they did.

[sfgasue]

Question #1: Not hardly!!

Question #2: Too early to tell.

[Thunderbolt]

I've voted "no" to choice #1 and "not sure" for choice #2. Unfortunately, the receivership has not demonstrated a commitment to improve the parks. Instead, they have decided to cost cutting and improving the bottom line. While returning Six Flags to profitability is imperative, the company has been ran "on the cheap" for the past 5 years. Further efforts to dilute what is already considered a "watered down brand" will only hinder long term sustainability. If customers don't consider your product worthy of a premium price, they won't pay it. "Giving away the gate" has failed Six Flags under every ownership including Premier Parks, RedZone, and I will venture to say this receivership.

It's like lately I've been looking back at what happened under Premier, and have to say that many of the positives outweigh the negatives at this point in history and I almost wish they had had another couple of years to finish the new vision for the park. At the time they were doing it, I didn't care for most of what they did.

Premier Parks expanded too quickly, and lost it all due to the post "9/11" economic downturn. When you consider their overall vision for Six Flags however, I do think they would have proven to be the best stewards of the company (customer wise). PKS's plans for Great Adventure and Worlds of Adventure were quite grand (Which is why Dick Kinzel bought the latter park. He wanted Six Flags out of Ohio badly.), and given the chance to see them though; could have paid high dividends to shareholders at this point.