Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Marineland of Canada (may) be closing/sold

cocoa said:
^the london resort?
Click to expand...
Really feel the absence of ParkFans's rolling-eyes react when I'm using other forums.

I've heard various rumors of the possible buyer. "A German park operator", Hershey, Herschend (who, I hear, have visited Marineland multiple times). I still strongly believe it has to be a privately owned company, or else more would have leaked via shareholders and such.
 
CanobieFan said:
I mean, wasn't there a pretty longstanding rumor that Merlin was eyeballing it? Pretty much just to start it over as a Legoland or something
Click to expand...
Looking at this thread, I see people saying, "I could see Merlin being interested", "I wouldn't be surprised if it was Merlin", "please not a Legoland". Not really a rumor, so much as people chattin' about it.
 
TPoseOnTantrum said:
Was at Niagara Amusement Park today, had a nice chat with some heads there today. Word from Mainland is that ALL of their maintenance and ride operations staff have been let go. Not much of a surprise really but it is what it is.

Also a certain company you're all likely to recognize (and probably guess) was snooping around there a lot last year. NDA's are still tight on who actually bought the place, will be interesting to see if this plays out.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to see this post and then see everyone speculating merlin. I can't imagine merlin taking a park that has no fuctional rides and ride staff to buy an animal park. I don't know what the future holds for this park, but I DO know that with some TLC and capital this park has a real chance to go from stop by while there to a legit need to visit park. It just takes someone willing and able to invest the proper amount of money this park needs. All that said I'm resigned to the fact this park will never come close to reaching it's potential. Call it my internal pessimist but the amount of capital required to really turn this park around is more than I can see any major operator being willing to invest.
 
Last edited:
Youngster Joey said:
It's interesting to see this post and then see everyone speculating merlin. I can't imagine merlin taking a park that has no fuctional rides and ride staff to buy an animal park. I don't know what the future holds for this park, but I DO that with some TLC and capital this park has a real chance to go from stop by while there to a legit need to visit park. It just takes someone willing and able to invest the proper amount of money this park needs. All that said I'm resigned to the fact this park will never come close to reaching it's potential. Call it my internal pessimist but the amount of capital required to really turn this park around is more than I can see any major operator being willing to invest.
Click to expand...
Marineland has so much extra land that will never realistically be utilized for the park. Selling/leasing/whatever some amount of that land could go a long way to providing the necessary capital.
 
Fiender said:
Marineland has so much extra land that will never realistically be utilized for the park. Selling/leasing/whatever some amount of that land could go a long way to providing the necessary capital.
Click to expand...
they've spent decades refusing to sell the park/land to anyone looking to build homes/apartment complexes/hotels. I can't see that changing now.
 
They should just keep the land they have. Maybe plant a forest in parts they aren’t using. If they do that, they would never need to buy more land ever again.
 
davidm said:
^ New owners though, so surely they would not think the same?
Click to expand...
If the old owners were adamant, I believe they could have stipulated in the sale that none of the land could be used for non-amusement park purposes.
InvertsAreMyJam said:
They should just keep the land they have. Maybe plant a forest in parts they aren’t using. If they do that, they would never need to buy more land ever again.
Click to expand...
I brought up selling the land in the context of "in case they needed money to develop the park". Doesn't matter if they have hundreds and hundreds of acres if they can't afford to do anything with it.
 
Fiender said:
If the old owners were adamant, I believe they could have stipulated in the sale that none of the land could be used for non-amusement park purposes.
Click to expand...
I mean they could have, but then why would new-owners who wanted to do that even buy the place!
The old-owner died anyway so whatever he wanted is immaterial now.
 
davidm said:
I mean they could have, but then why would new-owners who wanted to do that even buy the place!
Click to expand...
The land is highly valuable, and could be used for any number of purposes; housing, amusement, commercial, etc. It doesn't need to stay an amusement park, much as many of us would like it to (animals notwithstanding).
davidm said:
The old-owner died anyway so whatever he wanted is immaterial now.
Click to expand...
I believe the old owner's wife is still alive, and she (and her Will) has been adamant that the park remain a park.
 
Ha, well I will defer to your obvious better understanding of Canadian probate legislation, but I still think that it comes down to $$$MONEY$$$ and that means anything can (and often does) happen! :)
 
The original owners family were adamant they would only sell to somone who would keep the park and not turn it into real estate. Whether that remained true we'll have to wait and see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top