http://www.cedarfair.com/ir/press_releases/index.cfm?current_root=15&mode=story&story_id=281

Well worth a read. Also its mentioned that Great America has not lived up to their expectations so far, and that they actually had an impairment charge due to Great America`s poor performance.

Again, as I have stated elsewhere, they consider their four "biggest parks" to be the ones that are adding WindSeekers this year. They are only adding $75 million in capital expenditures in 2010, and that the WindSeeker rides account for about $20 million of that. (Valleyfair, Worlds of Fun and Dorney are all getting revamped kids areas).

The company also announced that they will be paying an $0.08 cash distribution to all unit holders on March 15th. They are continuing to negotiate terms on restructuring their debt to possibly pay a higher distribution rate.

How many straight quarters have they seen per caps decline? You'd think they'd get the point by now.

I'm happy to read about all the positive results of 2010, but with a nearly 8% increase in attendance you'd think they'd be concerned rather than "pleased" that in-park per capita spending decreased at all, even if it was only less than 1%. They had more guests spend less in your parks than the smaller number of guests from the previous year and they are "pleased" that it's only a little less. Anyone else see something wrong with that?

I know the economy has been tough and season pass holders tend to spend less money in-park, but I guarantee that a lot more season pass holders and non season pass holders would eat in the park if the prices were brought down to a more reasonable level and the quality of that food improved. It's a hassle to leave the park and walk all the way out your car and either eat in the parking lot or drive somewhere else and if the offerings in-park were more reasonably priced and more appealing, I'd be willing to bet that in-park per capita would go up. And by keeping guests in-park and with more money in their pockets they'd have more time to look around in the stores and more cash to spend on apparel and pay-per-rides.

It's all basic economics.

If you read the full release, it kind of alludes to the fact that they have seen an increase in season pass sales. The reason why there might be a decrease in per capita spending is that the per capita spending also includes admission. Naturally, when a pass holder (who lets say visits Kings Island three times a season) visits multiple times, it means they aren`t spending the full $49.95 gate price to enter. And if they bought their passes in the fall when the price was $70, then they effectively paid less than $25 to get into the park. So that could be part of the contributing factor to why they aren`t too concerned about the decrease in per capita spending. Does that make sense?

If that is the case, that they have seen more pass holders last year, I still do not understand why they don`t offer an across the board discount to pass holders, like 10% off of food purchases? Why would this be a good thing? Because it would entice the pass holders to spend more money on their park visits because they think they are getting a good deal, or at least maybe that $4 Coke will seem somewhat reasonably priced when it is only $3.60. Anything that could encourage a target market to spend more money in the park would be a plus, when most pass holders aren`t going to be spending and entire day in the park to begin with.

Yeah I get what you're saying, I did read the whole thing and noted the increase in season pass holders, but wrongly assumed that ticket sales were considered in-park spending so I can see what you're getting at.

I still stand by what I said about reasonable prices and improved quality of food leading to more guest, both pass holders and general admission, spending more time and money at the park. I also agree with your idea to offer discounts to pass holders. It would make a lot of sense to entice an increasingly large group to spend more money at the park, and a discount would be a good place to start.

http://www.wksu.org/news/story/27583

Well worth the read...

Two questions:

1) What exactly is an impairment charge?

2) Is that the first time that the company has publicly stated that they are trying to sell CGA?

An impairment charge is a charge taken against a company's assets, usually for reduced value due to the fact an asset (tangible or intangible) is no longer worth the value that it had been carried on the company's books.

The company has strongly hinted that it wanted to divest itself of Great America in the past, but, to my knowledge, never in so blunt a fashion.

Not surprised one bit, I figured that attendance was up at the Island this year, it seemed busier more consistently. Also, there was a severe lack of rainy days this past summer as well.

Note, it is an attendance record for Cedar Fair as a whole, not for each or every park...most parks had their individual attendance records years ago...Cedar Fair now has many more parks than it did pre the Paramount Parks acquisition. Ah, the wonders of careful writing of claims in marketing and/or finance.

Cedar Fair Posts Record Revenue But Still Loses Money:

http://morningjournal.com/articles/2011/02/16/news/mj4117380.txt

Do you see Cedar Fair recovering from debt anytime this decade?

Yes, but I strongly suspect a change of control will accompany that....the question is when and by whom...

The Motley Fool weighs in:

...Cedar Fair will still have to win the trust of its unit holders. They're the ones that voted to strip CEO Dick Kinzel of his chairmanship and nearly voted to pass a proposal that would have forced the company to emphasize the restoring its once chunky yield over paying down its debt. Investors are still miffed at how Cedar Fair was willing to sell itself cheap in a thankfully botched buyout proposal last year.

However, now that Cedar Fair's units are gaining ground and the company is delivering record performance, it's about time for angry owners to cut management some slack and begin enjoying the turnaround.

http://www.msnbc.msn...ss-motley_fool/

The Motley Fool weighs in:

...Cedar Fair will still have to win the trust of its unit holders. They're the ones that voted to strip CEO Dick Kinzel of his chairmanship and nearly voted to pass a proposal that would have forced the company to emphasize the restoring its once chunky yield over paying down its debt. Investors are still miffed at how Cedar Fair was willing to sell itself cheap in a thankfully botched buyout proposal last year.

However, now that Cedar Fair's units are gaining ground and the company is delivering record performance, it's about time for angry owners to cut management some slack and begin enjoying the turnaround.

http://www.msnbc.msn...ss-motley_fool/

I don't see Q giving in anytime soon, or at least till they get what they want!