^ This. Exactly this. Ouimet’s resume would make me feel more confident in this merger than Zimmerman’s.
The only thing I hope we adopt from Six Flags is the idea of kicking IROC to the curb.
I think the Six Flags brand is really only a tarnished brand in Cedar Fair markets. It will take a lot less to rehabilitate the Six Flags brand than it would to *establish* Cedar Fair as a brand. Calling the company Six Flags makes all kinds of sense, and trading as FUN tells us what's really going on.
As for "original" Six Flags parks, I think you forgot one: Six Flags over Mid America (Six Flags St. Louis). Of the Six Flags parks I have visited, that one has been my favorite, actually.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
/X\ *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /XXXXX
You don't have to be optimistic, it's pretty clear that is what will happen. Six Flags corporate, what's left of it, will disappear. They can call it a merger from the transactional sense, but this is Cedar Fair acquiring Six Flags without having to outright pay for it.
But Bassoul is still involved. His “expertise” has run Six Flags down to its current state. Is he going to be a figure head only with no corporate power? Maybe so. He is about filling his own pockets. Not stockholders.
This popped up yesterday. https://seekingalpha.com/ne...-regulator
So Six Flags shareholders have to be allowed to vote on the merger, but Cedar Fair unitholders don't? I wonder why that is? I guess I should know that as a Cedar Fair unitholder. Now that I think about it, I don't recall a vote when CF bought Paramount either.
"You can dream, create, design and build the most wonderful place in the world...but it requires people to make the dreams a reality."
Cedar Fair partnership agreement, unitholder vote is required if there is a Change in Control. Merger doesn't result in a Change in Control if Cedar Fair unitholders own at least 51% of the post-merger entity equity. From merger announcement, Cedar Fair unitholders will own 51.2% of the post-merger entity.
Without the prior approval of Partners whose aggregate Percentage Interest constitutes at least 66 2/3% of the aggregate Percentage Interest of the Partners, the General Partner shall not approve a transaction or a series of related transactions which (i) results in a Change of Control, or (ii) results in the sale or exchange of all or substantially all of the assets of Cedar Point Park.
“Change in Control” shall be deemed to occur if: (a) any person or group (as such term is defined in section 13(d)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as then in effect), other than the Partnership or any trustee or other fiduciary holding securities under an employee benefit plan of the Partnership, shall acquire, directly or indirectly, beneficial ownership (within the meaning of Rule 13d-3 and 13d-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as then in effect) of more than twenty percent (20%), on a fully diluted basis, of the economic or voting interest in the Partnership’s then Outstanding Units, other than the acquisition of Units from the Partnership or by virtue of a merger or consolidation to which the Partnership is a party, (b) a merger or consolidation of the Partnership with any other Person, other than a merger or consolidation that would result in the Units of the Partnership Outstanding immediately prior thereto continuing to represent (either by remaining Outstanding or by being converted or exchanged for voting securities of the surviving or resulting entity or its parent corporation) more than fifty-one percent (51%) of the voting interest of the partnership interests or other voting securities of the Partnership or such surviving or resulting entity outstanding after such merger or consolidation, or (c) the liquidation of the Partnership or an agreement or agreements for the sale or disposition by the Partnership of all or substantially all of the assets of the Partnership.
Paramount was an acquisition not a merger.
You must be logged in to post