Jump to content

will they rename the rides of the paramount parks?


peteytherocker
 Share

Recommended Posts

Cedar Fair said already during the conference calls that the Paramount Themes would have to be "Looked at", and decided on at a later date. I beleive they do have the right to use the Paramount names for the next 10 years if they decide to do that. I beleive it would alot of work to remove all Paramount things from 5 parks before the 2007 season. We will probably see the Paramount stuff being removed a little at a time. (I'm not saying the rides themselfs just the names).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ That's a logical conclusion. Since the purchase price included the "other" (non-Nickelodeon) Paramount theming for ten years, they've basically already paid for it whether they keep it or not. Why spend a lot of extra cash renaming/retheming rides right away if you don't really have to? (Especially when you just took on a $2B debt, and could probably put that cash to a lot better use, other than the ego stroke of getting rid of the previous owner's themes just because you want to...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I`d venture to say that the Paramount name will be dropped from all five parks next season. Beyond that is anybodys guess. Cedar Fair probably has not made a decision on that matter, and might not until sometime in the post season (if even by then).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be a couple years before you see any changes to the name of any attractions at any of the parks. I think Cedar Fair is going to continue on with the Paramount theme for a while seeing how Nick Universe was just installed. Only time will tell what is going to happen. I am just happy that Six Flags didn't buy any of the Paramount parks. It would have spelled disaster if they had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple of scenarios:

- Does Paramount even want CF to have rides with there movie themes?

- If CF wants to keep the name of a ride to a movie theme, will Paramount charge them?

- Will CF want to keep the rides' name the same even under new ownership, or just distinguish themselves as the new park owner?

Saying that if CF changes the names is only stroking their ego is just a foolish statement. CF may have aquired $2 billion in debt, but that did not deplete all of their funds. They have more than enough money & assests that they could pretty much do anything to the parks that they want to next year. It is all in their business plans that were decided & approved before the announment of the sale. Deciding the names of rides is all in part of crossing the "i"'s & dotting the "t"'s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple of scenarios:

- Does Paramount even want CF to have rides with there movie themes?

- If CF wants to keep the name of a ride to a movie theme, will Paramount charge them?

- Will CF want to keep the rides' name the same even under new ownership, or just distinguish themselves as the new park owner?

Saying that if CF changes the names is only stroking their ego is just a foolish statement.  CF may have aquired $2 billion in debt, but that did not deplete all of their funds.  They have more than enough money & assests that they could pretty much do anything to the parks that they want to next year.  It is all in their business plans that were decided & approved before the announment of the sale.  Deciding the names of rides is all in part of crossing the "i"'s & dotting the "t"'s.

Again, the purchase agreement gives CF rights to use the Paramount licenses at the five parks for ten years (four for Nickelodeon). It was part of the $1.24B purchase price. So, yes, changing them is an extra expense that they don't have to spend, at least for several years. CF has a long history of being very conservative and frugal with their funds, and taking good care of their unit holders in the process. If it came down to spending thousands of dollars renaming rides next year that they didn't have to, or raising the distribution by a penny per unit, they'll choose to raise the distribution in a heartbeat. My point about ego was that CF would need a good business reason to retheme all of the rides when there was no contractual reason forcing them to. (What exactly would be the ROI of renaming/retheming all the "Top Gun" coasters to "Thunder Hawk" or some similar name next year?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be something done over time. So probably within 10 years they will be no more Paramount Themed attraction left. They will probably tackle one ride at a time. They will probably start with the Paramount names that aren't really themed rides. Such as Face/Off, Drop Zone, Days of Thunder etc.... I guess we will find out soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will be something done over time. So probably within 10 years they will be no more Paramount Themed attraction left. They will probably tackle one ride at a time. They will probably start with the Paramount names that aren't really themed rides. Such as Face/Off, Drop Zone, Days of Thunder etc.... I guess we will find out soon enough.

I agree. Over the next few years you will see changes in names and themeing but nothing major as of yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(What exactly would be the ROI of renaming/retheming all the "Top Gun" coasters to "Thunder Hawk" or some similar name next year?)

Distinguishing that Paramount no longer owns the park. Even though the name will probably be changed to just "Kings Island" the general public will still not be aware that CF owns the park. Changing the name of a ride will have a larger impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(What exactly would be the ROI of renaming/retheming all the "Top Gun" coasters to "Thunder Hawk" or some similar name next year?)

Distinguishing that Paramount no longer owns the park. Even though the name will probably be changed to just "Kings Island" the general public will still not be aware that CF owns the park. Changing the name of a ride will have a larger impact.

Ok...so help me understand. What's the financial value of that to the company? How is the money invested in changing names, themes, logos, merchandise, etc., etc., returned to the company (and thus to the unit holders)? Will renaming "Face Off" to "Steel Venom" result in increased revenue, profitability, or customer service scores?

You seem pretty certain that removing all of the Paramount themes is a major strategic initiative for CF next year. As a CF unit holder, I'm just trying to understand why (and figure out how it will increase my distribution smile.gif )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the rides that are themed to paramount will be re themed for sure to save money to licening rights: they will be renamed: for sure: like: to give money back to stock holders:

but tr tr the ride will be volcanic panic

top gun thunder road

drop zone will be tower drop

face off will be yellow screamer

options only:

fx theatre will be motion notion theatre

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the rides that are themed to paramount will be re themed for sure to save money to licening rights: they will be renamed: for sure: like: to give money back to stock holders:

...but, keep in mind that whole point of my post--ten year's worth of license rights were included as part of the purchase price. That's already been paid for whether they use the licenses or not. (Or, rather, will be once the sale actually closes...) Viacom isn't going to refund part of the $1.24B if they decide to call Top Gun something different next year biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol! I actually like the name Yellow Screamer better than Steel Venom. Overused names are one of my pet peeves though. Really I'd rather just keep it Face/Off, but throw out all the movie references.

And about CDBB......Why not just call it Boomerang Bay? That doesn't have anything to do with a movie or Paramount property, yet still sounds cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol! I actually like the name Yellow Screamer better than Steel Venom. Overused names are one of my pet peeves though. Really I'd rather just keep it Face/Off, but throw out all the movie references.

And about CDBB......Why not just call it Boomerang Bay? That doesn't have anything to do with a movie or Paramount property, yet still sounds cool.

They have actually started to call it just Boomerang Bay. At Carowinds since they redid the water park this year, called it just Boomerang Bay from the get go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I thought, but I wasn't completely sure about it. I think Boomerang Bay is a cool name, much better than the numerous Hurricane Harbors. (Again the name thing wink.gif )

Parks like the SFKK's Hurricane Bay (I guess that wasn't SF's choice, but they haven't changed it), and HW's Splashin' Safari have cool names for their parks as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CF re-named all of the DC Comics (owned by Warner Brothers) and SF names of rides when it purchased SFWOA. Hence, it is logical it will do the same with all of PP. However, since it has the option of using the license for a number of years - when the changes will be made is questionable.

Have a great day!

Italian Chef

chef.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CF re-named all of the DC Comics (owned by Warner Brothers) and SF names of rides when it purchased SFWOA.  Hence, it is logical it will do the same with all of PP. However, since it has the option of using the license for a number of years - when the changes will be made is questionable.

Have a great day!

Italian Chef

chef.gif

...because, SF has the licensing rights to the WB/DC franchises, and it was no longer going to be a SF park. Having to retheme that entire park a month before it opened wasn't CF's choice...it was a contractual requirement.

If CF would have bought one or two of the Paramount Parks, I'd agree that they were comparable situations. But, buying the whole chain (with the licenses part of the deal) is a very different situation. Case in point...Time Warner hasn't owned Six Flags since the mid-90s (in fact, it's effectively changed hands three times since TW owned it), yet the Looney Tunes and Batman are still alive and well. (Ever get deja vu when writing a post? wink.gif )

I don't think CF will keep most of the Paramount theming long term, either. Mostly because I think the value of anything but Nick is pretty questionable. (I agree that Top Gun could be renamed Thunderhawk tomorrow and wouldn't miss a beat...) But, I also have faith that CF won't spend a lot of money renaming for renaming's sake without a compelling reason to do so.

And, while we discuss all of our opinions on what CF will do with licenses for the five parks, we never seem to mention the property that can't be rethemed...Star Trek:The Experience. How do the SFWOA or "they want to get rid of everything Paramount" (paraphrased from earlier posts) arguments fit there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem pretty certain that removing all of the Paramount themes is a major strategic initiative for CF next year. As a CF unit holder, I'm just trying to understand why (and figure out how it will increase my distribution smile.gif )

I am in no way certain that CF is going to change any of the names of the rides. But a good way to create new intrest is to make a ride "seem" new to the general public by changing a name. It is not uncommon for new ownership to make small changes, like changing a name of a product to spark new intrest or even for an existing company to come out and say "New and improved!" even though chances are it is the same old thing.

All of us here are interested of the changes that CF is going to make. And we are all going to go to the park just to see anything that CF has changed and being KI enthusiasts that we are we will be actually "looking" for changes. When the media blitz starts next year about CF's opening of Kings Island, they are going to mention changes and ride names- people may not realize that there is not a new ride and the name was not changed and just come to the park to see the changes for themselves. Instead of being "Oh it's just Top Gun" they may think, "Let's check out Thunder Road".

Now if this is going to increase stock value, I have no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you find it obvious that they will retheme at least one ride? Also, Coasterking123456, you need to work on your grammar and spelling. You have a whole slew of posts that look like they are thrown together without much thought put into them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a lot of cases, large corporations make purchases of other companies, and exclusive copyrights for just one purpose. So they can dismantle them, and so no other company is going to be using the copyrights against them. I'm not a wrestling fan at all, but the expansion of the W.W.E. a few years ago was remarkable from a business point of view. Just to use for an example. The W.W.E. bought out its largest competitor. Just so that they could destroy it. It was printed in business magazines everywhere. This business decision was on CNN and ESPN. It was a bold and extremely EXPENSIVE move. This is just an example. But it proves that company's can make the final competitive blow by making the final purchase. After all, they own the rights now. No other company is going to use it now. Possibly, they could make the decision to simply make it so that "If you are going to go to Kings Island, then you are going to a Cedar Fair L.P. Park."

By next year, you might walk through that front gate for the 1st time of the year and wonder to yourself ( Paramount "WHO" ) It is also in the right of the new owners to postpone the opening of the parks next year, until changes are made to their liking. Who knows, for sure. But I wouldn't be too surprised.

M.F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...It is also in the right of the new owners to postpone the opening of the parks next year, until changes are made to their liking. Who knows, for sure. But I wouldn't be too surprised.

M.F.

CF needs those parks firing on all cylinders next season to bring in as much revenue as possible. Reducing an already short operating season to repaint signs doesn't do much to serve that purpose. (And, honestly, if that were their thinking, Geauga Lake shouldn't have opened at all that first season...)

Cedar Fair did not buy Paramount Parks to spite their former competitors. (Although, on a personal level, I imagine there's a certain amount of satisfaction that they did.) They bought them because they saw them as a good investment, and now they need that investment to perform as well as possible. Even after the new public offering they still have a $1.75B debt to service. Five parks sitting closed when they would normally be open doesn't help with that.

Cedar Fair does not "own" the rights to Nickelodeon or any other Paramount branding (those are owned by Viacom), they simply have an agreement in place to license them for use in the parks for a certain amount of time. It doesn't stop Viacom from licensing the Nick characters to any other theme park they wish if CF decides not to renew the licenses. So, buying Paramount Parks "so no other company is going to be using the copyrights against them" wouldn't apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
the rides that are themed to paramount will be re themed for sure to save money to licening rights: they will be renamed: for sure: like: to give money back to stock holders:

...but, keep in mind that whole point of my post--ten year's worth of license rights were included as part of the purchase price. That's already been paid for whether they use the licenses or not. (Or, rather, will be once the sale actually closes...) Viacom isn't going to refund part of the $1.24B if they decide to call Top Gun something different next year biggrin.gif

ten years from now some of those rides may not even be there. i look for face off and top gun to be the first to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read question 8 and its answer, here:

http://members5.boardhost.com/buzzboard/msg/1153934442.html

"subject to certain early termination rights"

Who knows what that means? It could well mean a refund if they don't use the rights...or it could mean CBS/Viacom has the right to terminate if certain conditions are not met...or both.

In any event, I would not assume the parks and rides will retain Paramount theming merely because the transaction included certain licensing rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...