The Interpreter Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 QUOTE WILLIAMSBURG - The Financial Times of London reported Thursday that bidders are lining up for the anticipated sale of $7 billion in assets that brewing giant InBev wants to unload as part of its $52 billion takeover of Anheuser-Busch. Chief among those assets is Busch Entertainment, which operates 10 theme parks including Busch Gardens Europe and Water Country USA. The sale is expected to reap up to $4 billion.... http://www.vagazette.com/news/local/va-new...0,1970371.story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Why is Six Flags even mentioned in that article as asking for the sales memorandum? Six Flags is going to have a difficult time staying afloat the next several months by itself, without taking on any additional debt. Not to mention that Six Flags would likely destroy the atmosphere of the Busch Parks. It would be interesting if Disney became a bidder, seeing as all of the current Disney parks have been developed from the ground up as Disney parks. Additionally, since Busch Gardens Europe is seasonal, it would be interesting to see if Disney wanted to pursue the Busch Entertainment parks. I think that Disney would be a nice fit for the Busch parks though. The article mentions a rather hefty price of up to $4 billion for Busch Entertainment. That is a huge sum of money (especially in the current economy). Remember, Cedar Fair bought Paramount Parks for $1.24 billion in 2006. And given that no one submitted a bid on the Hard Rock Park (where the minimum bid was a paltry $35 million, I have to wonder if anyone will seriously enter a bid that is anywhere near what Anheuser-Busch InBev wants for Busch Entertainment. Given that, I would think that what the article calls a "demerger", also known as spin off, might end up being the end result. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens. I unfortunately have never been to a Busch Gardens or Sea World park yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer1972 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Why is Six Flags even mentioned in that article as asking for the sales memorandum? Six Flags is going to have a difficult time staying afloat the next several months by itself, without taking on any additional debt. Not to mention that Six Flags would likely destroy the atmosphere of the Busch Parks. It would be interesting if Disney became a bidder, seeing as all of the current Disney parks have been developed from the ground up as Disney parks. Additionally, since Busch Gardens Europe is seasonal, it would be interesting to see if Disney wanted to pursue the Busch Entertainment parks. I think that Disney would be a nice fit for the Busch parks though. The article mentions a rather hefty price of up to $4 billion for Busch Entertainment. That is a huge sum of money (especially in the current economy). Remember, Cedar Fair bought Paramount Parks for $1.24 billion in 2006. And given that no one submitted a bid on the Hard Rock Park (where the minimum bid was a paltry $35 million, I have to wonder if anyone will seriously enter a bid that is anywhere near what Anheuser-Busch InBev wants for Busch Entertainment. Given that, I would think that what the article calls a "demerger", also known as spin off, might end up being the end result. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens. I unfortunately have never been to a Busch Gardens or Sea World park yet. I knew Busch Parks wouldn't last very long. I could see them being put up for sale. I wonder who will bid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 You could always try reading the article! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer1972 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Thats true thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tubaman Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Well, I feel bad that I have not made it to a Busch park yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer1972 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 They're not really all that great but they're ok. I would probably last about an hour and a half and then get bored. But thats just me. Not trying to make you feel bad tubaman! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 16, 2009 Author Share Posted January 16, 2009 A lot of people do not agree with you. So many, that InBev thinks it can make up to $4 billion selling these "not really all that great" parks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer1972 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 They are really nice parks, my opinion is that the are just not my type of park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 And my guess would be that you would think the same thing about Dollywood right? A couple hours and then you`d be bored? I made my first visit to Dollywood a few weeks back at the end of December. I went with fellow member Cory Butcher. We spent three hours at the park the first night and most of the next day at the park. We took in most of the shows at Smoky Mountain Christmas, and really enjoyed the atmosphere of the park. Even though they have a small handful of rides, we both had fun. In fact, three shows we watched consumed 2.5 hours of our time (and that was actual show time, not sitting in the theater before the show started!) In fact, I can`t wait to go back to Dollywood later this year with my season pass, even though they are not getting anything new in 2009 (well, I guess you could say they are getting a slightly reconfigured parking lot, but that doesn`t really count). Another example is from when I went down to Disney World in September. My sister and I watched the Festival of the Lion King show at Disney`s Animal Kingdom. It was a wonderful production, and well worth our time. There is a lot more to parks than just roller coasters and thrill rides. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you will be able to better enjoy amusement parks and the big theme parks and appreciate all that they have to offer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer1972 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 no Dollywood is a pretty fun park i have to agree with you i am just more of a thrill seeker. Not trying to offend anyone i am just stating my opinion. You are also right about me realizing that there are more than just thrill rides. But i am only 15 and i will get used to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigellinus Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 ...i am just more of a thrill seeker. And so...AC, Griffon, Alpe, BBW aren't enough?!? Sheesh... "My head hurts!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzarley Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 The $4B price tag kind of surprised me too... However, the Orlando resort (which accounts for the lion's share of the revenue) generates year-round, so I guess that needs to be taken into consideration when coming up with the purchase price. It certainly wouldn't surprise me if BEC goes on the low end of the estimates due to the economy. (As opposed to the sale of Paramount Parks which went on very high end of its estimate--I'll give CBS credit--they sold at the very best time...) According to "Disney War" (or maybe it was "Keys to Kingdom"...one of the many Disney expose books) Disney came very close to buying Sea World back when Harcourt Brace Jovanovich was selling it back in the late 80s. However, they ultimately decided that there wasn't anything Sea World had that they couldn't build even better themselves, so they walked away from the purchase. (Which, led to the "Living Seas" at Epcot...hardly a substitute for Sea World in my book! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast1979 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 What was it Cedar Fair Payed for the Paramount Chain? 1.25 Billion for KI, Carowinds, KD, KBF, CW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRider Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 That was $1.24 Billion for Kings Island, Kings Dominion, Carowinds, Canada's Wonderland, and Great America. Knotts was already a part of the Cedar Fair chain so you have your Calafornia parks mixed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faeriewench Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 ...i am just more of a thrill seeker. And so...AC, Griffon, Alpe, BBW aren't enough?!? Sheesh... "My head hurts!!" Kraken? Soon to be Manta? I adore the Busch and SeaWorld parks.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RingMaster Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 And which one of you people neglected to mention Kumba, Montu, and good ol' Nessie (along with Journey to Atlantis in Orlando)? And you call yourselves Busch Gardens/SeaWorld lovers.... I guess you have to have more than 7 coasters (nine+ and the thrill seekers will actually bother to speak of said amusement park's name in the same sentence as Cedar Point/Six Flags) in the same park in order for thrill seekers to spend more than an hour or two in its confines. PS: And they all have to be either Beemers or Intamins or it doesn't count. PPS: Oh, and they all have to be over 200 feet or else it's not considered a thrill ride. PPPS: I forgot to mention they also have to be on flat ground (preferably surrounded by gravel) for maximum thrills. No trying to use the landscape such as hills, valleys, or water to the ride's advantage (tunnels are fine). .....okay, now I just got too carried away. I'm gonna go ride Nemesis on YouTube now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Butcher Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Ringmaster, I could not have said it better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faeriewench Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 RingMaster...you know as well some people do I prefer SeaWorld to Busch Gardens anyday xD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 20, 2009 Author Share Posted January 20, 2009 Disney? Observations: http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/01/20/d...-shamu-it-will/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 I doubt we see "McDisney" happening as the end of the article states. There are a lot of reasons why Disney would be interested in the Busch parks, including having another park in the Orlando area for guests to visit, all while staying on Disney property. Its hard to say if Disney will be willing to fork over the hefty sum of money that inBev is reportedly asking for the parks. But like the article stated, it would be a fine time for Disney to take over some of its primary competition here in the states. But then again, what changes would Disney make at the parks? The article also mentions Six Flags as a potential suitor, but as the article mentions, they are in NO shape to be taking on any more debt right now. In fact, there current debt load may already have done them in as it is. Of all the park operators out there that will uphold the beauty and integrity of the Busch parks, I would think that Disney would be the best match. But that comes from me, who has never set foot in a Busch park before. The article was definitely a nice read, and it will be interesting to see how this exactly unfolds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Butcher Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 But then again, what changes would Disney make at the parks? This is indeed my biggest worry. It is well known that I truly adore Busch Gardens Africa, and that I absolutely adore Walt Disney World in the exact same breath. I am worried that Disney would come in and do a complete re-band. There is nothing in my mind wrong with the Disney model of entertainment in their theme parks, but I also think there is nothing wrong with what creative decisions that were made with the Busch Parks. I just like both, and wish that somehow both entertainment models could coexist in the same company. A "Disney Gardens" would be great in my mind, the characters could come over to the Busch parks, and maybe rides like what one finds in the Animal Kingdom would be great additions. I would not like to see the Disney Plastic (As wooferbear would undoubtedly coin it) make its way to the Gardens' however. It works well in the Disney Parks, but many people would love to enjoy both theme models as I surely would. I hope whoever gets the Busch parks keeps some of the same real world, majestic theming of the Busch parks, and does not dive to far into fantasy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 20, 2009 Author Share Posted January 20, 2009 The plopping sound you hear is WooferBearATL fainting as he reads the following. Cory, the fears you have expressed about what Disney would do if it acquired the Busch parks are eerily familiar. They are the same, exact sentiment many of us felt when Paramount Communications bought the KECO parks and Kings Island. We knew a lot of what Taft and KECO had worked so hard to create would disappear and be replaced with a generic movie studio theme. In many ways, we were right. In other ways, it was far worse than what many of us feared. Paramount missed many an opportunity with the parks. I still wonder what would have happened had Taft never sold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Well, had Taft not spun off the parks into KECO, and held onto control of the parks, they would still be under different ownership today. Taft Broadcasting was bought by American Financial and Carl Lindner in 1987. Then Taft became known as Great American Broadcasting before becoming known as Citicasters. Citicasters was sold to Jacor, which was later bought by Clear Channel Communications. Clear Channel is in the television and radio business. In 2008, it jettisoned its television wing to Newport Television, although it still controls the radio channels. I know that history is a little complex, and there are no longer any traces of the original Taft Broadcasting. So had Taft not spun off the parks, they likely would have eventually been sold off to another party anyway by this point in time. How the parks would have been different had Paramount not stepped in, we will never truly know. Just like we will never truly know how low the parks could have sunk if CBS had not sold them to Cedar Fair but had owned them as long as Paramount/Viacom had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 20, 2009 Author Share Posted January 20, 2009 Gee, thanks, Robbie. I've been Terpied! Yes, some of us know all that. Put another way, what I wonder is what would have happened if those who had the vision and foresight to build Kings Island from scratch, and poured their heart, dedication and devotion to the park business into it, had retained control, instead of selling to the likes of Carl Lindner and Paramount Communications.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faeriewench Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 *tries to picture the believe show with a finding nemo or little mermaid theme* o_e *crawls under a rock* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted January 20, 2009 Author Share Posted January 20, 2009 Let me help you. Shamu in mouse ears.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faeriewench Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Terpy... thats even worse >_> disney be dumb to change a show like that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WooferBearATL Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 The plopping sound you hear is WooferBearATL fainting as he reads the following. Cory, the fears you have expressed about what Disney would do if it acquired the Busch parks are eerily familiar. They are the same, exact sentiment many of us felt when Paramount Communications bought the KECO parks and Kings Island. We knew a lot of what Taft and KECO had worked so hard to create would disappear and be replaced with a generic movie studio theme. In many ways, we were right. In other ways, it was far worse than what many of us feared. Paramount missed many an opportunity with the parks. I still wonder what would have happened had Taft never sold. I would absolutely cry if Disney purchased the Busch parks. After I was done crying, I'm certain I would become violently ill. Interp.... You are so right. Gee, thanks, Robbie. I've been Terpied! Yes, some of us know all that. Put another way, what I wonder is what would have happened if those who had the vision and foresight to build Kings Island from scratch, and poured their heart, dedication and devotion to the park business into it, had retained control, instead of selling to the likes of Carl Lindner and Paramount Communications.... Some of us know it. Some of us even lived it. <G> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigellinus Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Just like we will never truly know how low the parks could have sunk if CBS had not sold them to Cedar Fair but had owned them as long as Paramount/Viacom had. And see, I thought CBS' under-care for the parks was because eventually they were going to be sold, and thus having no long-term intention of keeping them resulted in the few dire years?!? So is it fair to say that if CBS had legitimate interest in a long-term position (hypothetically speaking) their years of management might have also been different than what they were? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.