The Interpreter Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Amazingly little to no coverage of this elsewhere: http://www.sanduskyr...ont/2087588.txt As it is written, it is VERY unclear what happened at the meeting vs. at the interview Kinzel gave the Sandusky Register thereafter. Sadly typical of that paper: Highlights (go see the article): ...The company's critics included Patrick Lysobey, a unitholder from North Royalton, who demanded to know why management is well-paid when its unitholders no longer get a cash distribution. "You guys are the ones who pretty much drove this thing into a ditch," Lysobey said. "We should be the ones being compensated. We are the owners.... * The company's plan to deal with its long-term debt, announced May 20, has been put on hold because the financial markets have been volatile. The board is studying what to do next, Kinzel said. * Shoot the Rapids, Cedar Point's much-anticipated new water ride, won't be ready for at least another few days."It's not going to happen until we're 100 percent sure it meets all our standards," Kinzel said. "We're not going to rush it." The manufacturer is doing modifications to the ride in Europe. Without giving more details, Kinzel said, "It has to do with the boats." Comment by Terpy: Debt financing has been put on hold due to volatility? I seem to remember that it was a private placement not for sale to US individual investors, not registered with the SEC and not allowed to be resold to such without such registration. Sounds to me the truth is more likely that the would be buyer of the debt (pre-placed, no doubt) took a second look and walked... My questions of yesterday, which I asked BEFORE this annual meeting, apply now more than ever: http://www.KICentral...ndpost&p=382562 The debt covenants in the existing debt continue to apply for now. A breach is near. What is to happen? Apparently this refi didn't work. Now what? How much longer will the unit holders, especially Q, put up with this Board and management? How long before current management joins Mr. Story, Mr. Snyder, etc.? Will displaced management be the only fate that FUN shares with the old Six Flags or will certain other financial maneuvers not be successfully avoided? Will there be another takeover attempt? If so, by whom? Will management support that (with a rich bailout for itself, as proposed last time?)? Or will debt holders force a resolution? Will unhappy unit holders finally oust board members? Where do all these Q's lead? This has more twists and turns than a roller coaster... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzarley Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Comment by Terpy: Debt financing has been put on hold due to volatility? I seem to remember that it was a private placement not for sale to US individual investors, not registered with the SEC and not allowed to be resold to such without such registration. Sounds to me the truth is more likely that the would be buyer of the debt (pre-placed, no doubt) took a second look and walked... Yeah, I'd bet any amount of money that you nailed this one perfectly... The debt plan is "on hold"?? How can your debt plan be on hold when its the debt that defines your entire existence right now? My prediction is that current management will be out after 2Q numbers are released. At a certain point the Board has to realize that there really is no longer a choice. Something drastic has to be done quickly to avoid breaching the current covenants and to avoid bankruptcy. (And, to be honest, it may be too late for that anyway...) Oh, and on another topic...I haven't commented on any of the Shoot the Rapids posts, but how, in this age of computer aided design (where roller coaster tracks are designed thousand of miles away to accuracy within hundredths of an inch) do you build the boats too big for your flume ride??? Honestly, no one did the math on these things before they tried to put the whole thing together? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 More on this here: http://toledoblade.com/article/20100608/BUSINESS03/6080393/-1/BUSINESS The article I linked to also mentions exactly why the cash distribution was cut. And as suspected it was because had they paid out a distribution, they would have violated a certain loan covenant. And on the subject of the Shoot the Rapids Boats, there are several things that could be going on. From the sounds of it, the most likely scenario is that Intamin used a sub contractor to build the boats. It appears as if that sub contractor did not build the boats to specs/drawings and thus they did not fit with the ride. But it still leaves me puzzled how the boats could be on site for so long and Cedar Point/Intamin not realize something was wrong until a week before the ride was slated to open. That leads me to believe that there is actually something else going on mechanically or electrically (maybe not even with the boats) with the ride. I mean, the boats for Shoot the Rapids are identical or very similar to the boats used on Pilgrim`s Plunge, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 More on this here: http://toledoblade.com/article/20100608/BUSINESS03/6080393/-1/BUSINESS The article I linked to also mentions exactly why the cash distribution was cut. And as suspected it was because had they paid out a distribution, they would have violated a certain loan covenant. And on the subject of the Shoot the Rapids Boats, there are several things that could be going on. From the sounds of it, the most likely scenario is that Intamin used a sub contractor to build the boats. It appears as if that sub contractor did not build the boats to specs/drawings and thus they did not fit with the ride. But it still leaves me puzzled how the boats could be on site for so long and Cedar Point/Intamin not realize something was wrong until a week before the ride was slated to open. That leads me to believe that there is actually something else going on mechanically or electrically (maybe not even with the boats) with the ride. I mean, the boats for Shoot the Rapids are identical or very similar to the boats used on Pilgrim`s Plunge, right? Yes, the boats are identical to the Pilgrim's Plunge boats, and that's where the problems lie. The maneuvers are tighter than the PP's course, and if my info is correct, the boats were shipped without chain dogs. I didn't believe it at first, but apparently the contractor was asked to build 10 more boats to the same specs that PP's boats were built to. It seems they forgot that there was a different lift system in place here. I've also heard that the in-boat pumps aren't getting the water out of the boats fast enough in the station, which is leading to heavier boats bottoming out along the course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cholderfield Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 I was kind of surprised to read how much Kinzel made last year, salary and bonus...I guess he didn't lose his cash distribution? http://toledoblade.com/article/20100608/BUSINESS03/6080393/-1/BUSINESS Mr. Kinzel's salary was $1.3 million last year and he was paid a bonus of $1.196 million, the first up by $50,000 from the year before and the second down by $79,000 from 2008. He also received stock awards and other benefits. Other senior executives received salary increases but bonus decreases last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted June 8, 2010 Author Share Posted June 8, 2010 BUT, that same story claims the proposed sale to Apollo was a $3.4 billion transaction. It was not. Not even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldiesmann Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 I'm wondering if Kinzel's re-election to the board was just a way to buy time until a suitable replacement can be found. It's amazing that there were enough people voting for him to get him re-elected, unless there wasn't a "no" option. I don't see Kinzel lasting much longer. It would also be fun to see what happens to his son when dear old dad is no longer in charge... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoddaH1994 Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 I'm wondering if Kinzel's re-election to the board was just a way to buy time until a suitable replacement can be found. It's amazing that there were enough people voting for him to get him re-elected, unless there wasn't a "no" option. I don't see Kinzel lasting much longer. It would also be fun to see what happens to his son when dear old dad is no longer in charge... I'm not sure if the same holds true for a LP or not, but I know that with a normal public corporation, all shareholders get to vote and they can either choose to vote for the people on the board or not vote at all. 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.