Why did Marriott sell off the parks and which park was sold first?
It sounds like Six Flags was interested in Gurnee, but not Santa Clara. Was Gurnee more successful than Santa Clara?
Does anyone know the story behind this?
Marriott out of the theme park business
-
Santa Cruisin
- Yankee Clipper
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
As I recall, they decided to exit the theme park business and looked to sell both parks at the same time. Six Flags was interested only in the Gurnee park back then. Santa Clara faced being turned into an office park. The City of Santa Clara came to the rescue, however, and bought the park. Then they hired Kings Entertainment Company (KECO) to manage the park. The park was later sold to KECO, but the land underneath it remained the property of the City. During those years, the park was named simply "GREAT AMERICA". KECO was later acquired by Paramount and the park became Paramount's Great America.
Although I don't know for sure, I understand that one reason that Marriott wanted out of the theme park business was the fact that the off season was not a big money maker, obviously. They looked at ways to offer year-round operations of varying degrees. In Santa Clara, they had a year-round season that did not turn out well because the weather did not cooperate. When the observation towers and IMAX theaters were added, news reports commented that Marriott installed these attractions with an eye towards building a set of attractions that could operate all year.
Regarding Gurnee versus Santa Clara, to my knowledge, the Gurnee park always had higher attendance figures.
Steven
Although I don't know for sure, I understand that one reason that Marriott wanted out of the theme park business was the fact that the off season was not a big money maker, obviously. They looked at ways to offer year-round operations of varying degrees. In Santa Clara, they had a year-round season that did not turn out well because the weather did not cooperate. When the observation towers and IMAX theaters were added, news reports commented that Marriott installed these attractions with an eye towards building a set of attractions that could operate all year.
Regarding Gurnee versus Santa Clara, to my knowledge, the Gurnee park always had higher attendance figures.
Steven
-
Santa Cruisin
- Yankee Clipper
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:04 am
- Location: Santa Cruz, California
Selling off Great America fit in with Marriott's business strategy which has been to focus on its hotel branding. In fact, I don't even believe Marriott actually owns any of the hotels anymore--hotel ownership has been transferred to a independent real estate trust (Host Marriott) and even the food service business from which the company originated has been sold off to another company (I forget the name but it's based in the UK). Marriott's goal seems to be to franchise the brand name and in a lot of cases they don't even have the contract for the hotel management any more. This is concurrent, by the way, with the way the other large hotel corporations operate (Hilton, Sheraton, etc).
Sorry, this is probably a discussion for another board entirely but did you know Marriott also owns the Ritz-Carlton brand name? A lot of changes since they built Great America!
Sorry, this is probably a discussion for another board entirely but did you know Marriott also owns the Ritz-Carlton brand name? A lot of changes since they built Great America!
Yes, Marriott has changed tremendously since the GREAT AMERICA days. Back then some of the main Marriott businesses other than the hotels included:akorbel wrote:Sorry, this is probably a discussion for another board entirely but did you know Marriott also owns the Ritz-Carlton brand name? A lot of changes since they built Great America!
Marriott's GREAT AMERICA
Bob's Big Boy Restaurants
Roy Rogers Restaurants
Farrell's Ice Cream Parlours
airline catering
They also were involved in a cruise ship business. I believe it was called SunLine.
Steven
profits
I was able to get ahold of a report for stock holders that came out in '83 when I was doing some work out of the main offices. It showed that the profit per dollar invested in amusement parks was paying back far less than what was put into hotel. Although they were not losing money, they were not making as much as they could by putting the investment into thier hotels. Being a publicly held company they have to do what is best for the bottom line. Which was sell the parks and build a few more hotels instead.