Family buys more than 100 acres in Broken Arrow for upcoming 'amazing venture'

[tulsabug]

There's a new article from the Tulsa World on the future Bell's park here - https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/will-bells-be-different-in-broken-arrow-family-says-god-luck-are-on-their-side/article_e3ce83f6-56de-11ec-8c0a-078a2bcf9fef.html

In it the TW mention the owner of the property is a 1031 Exchange in California (named Coast 1031 Exchange Inc) so someone is using the new Bell's property as a tax deferment where someone who had just sold $4m worth of property needed to buy another $4m worth of property quickly to avoid capital gains taxes. A quick google found the company named Coast 1031 Exchange Inc which is pretty much just an intermediary that facilitates this tax shelter - https://www.coast1031.com/. It also means that the owner of the property really doesn't have a horse in this race - they just needed to find a property equal to or greater in value to the one they sold and they had a limited time to do it so it's doubtful they are an investor of any sort in Bell's. In the article Robby Bell won't mention names of the property owners and on the subject of where they're getting the money for the new park "We have financing. Let's just put it like that,". Guess we'll see where this is all going.

[DTowner]

There's a new article from the Tulsa World on the future Bell's park here - https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/will-bells-be-different-in-broken-arrow-family-says-god-luck-are-on-their-side/article_e3ce83f6-56de-11ec-8c0a-078a2bcf9fef.html

In it the TW mention the owner of the property is a 1031 Exchange in California (named Coast 1031 Exchange Inc) so someone is using the new Bell's property as a tax deferment where someone who had just sold $4m worth of property needed to buy another $4m worth of property quickly to avoid capital gains taxes. A quick google found the company named Coast 1031 Exchange Inc which is pretty much just an intermediary that facilitates this tax shelter - https://www.coast1031.com/. It also means that the owner of the property really doesn't have a horse in this race - they just needed to find a property equal to or greater in value to the one they sold and they had a limited time to do it so it's doubtful they are an investor of any sort in Bell's. In the article Robby Bell won't mention names of the property owners and on the subject of where they're getting the money for the new park "We have financing. Let's just put it like that,". Guess we'll see where this is all going.

Given Robby Bell's history of periodic "announcements" of a return of Bell's, I wouldn't get my hopes up on this project until something is actually being built.

[shavethewhales]

There's more to it. I have been led to believe that his backers own other properties and are using Bell's to spread out their investments. I'm not sure why they are hiding behind a third party and keeping everything so hush-hush, but maybe they are waiting to see how Bell's actually performs before tying their names to it.

Robby isn't good at any of this, but obviously they got the money from somewhere, so there's a plan in motion. It concerns me that after 15 years he still hasn't learned much about professionalism or local politics/public relations. He should be reaching out to the neighborhood with specific plans or at least a solid concept that addresses their concerns. He should be more open about what he is actually building and when.

That Tulsa World piece isn't unfair, but it does him no favors and he clearly gave them nothing to work with. This is a guy who had to work a crappy job at a school after loosing the original Bell's, so that tells everyone how shaky the whole thing is.

I am still led to understand that he is not building everything at once, but his public statements at the media event make it sound like he's building this huge complex all at once. I think there's going to be a lot more disappointment and ridicule when the first "phase" opens and it's just a few kiddie rides off a gravel parking lot. Basically Schwick's all over again...

I think there's a good chance the backers of this project eventually take it over and push Robby out. He's skating on thin ice for sure.

[tulsabug]

There's more to it. I have been led to believe that his backers own other properties and are using Bell's to spread out their investments. I'm not sure why they are hiding behind a third party and keeping everything so hush-hush, but maybe they are waiting to see how Bell's actually performs before tying their names to it.

Robby isn't good at any of this, but obviously they got the money from somewhere, so there's a plan in motion. It concerns me that after 15 years he still hasn't learned much about professionalism or local politics/public relations. He should be reaching out to the neighborhood with specific plans or at least a solid concept that addresses their concerns. He should be more open about what he is actually building and when.

That Tulsa World piece isn't unfair, but it does him no favors and he clearly gave them nothing to work with. This is a guy who had to work a crappy job at a school after loosing the original Bell's, so that tells everyone how shaky the whole thing is.

I am still led to understand that he is not building everything at once, but his public statements at the media event make it sound like he's building this huge complex all at once. I think there's going to be a lot more disappointment and ridicule when the first "phase" opens and it's just a few kiddie rides off a gravel parking lot. Basically Schwick's all over again...

I think there's a good chance the backers of this project eventually take it over and push Robby out. He's skating on thin ice for sure.

Here's what I don't get - why don't these backers just build an amusement park themselves and cut the Bells out of the equation now? What does Bell's actually have at this point? A bunch of old and outdated rides that are worn out and need major money to be made whole again and a name that really only plays to people over 30 at the youngest? I can't even find they own the trademark to Bell's. Why not just register the trademark (or buy it if Robbie actually owns it - I just couldn't find any record of it at uspto but there are a lot of Bells-named things)? Or just call it something else? I don't understand why any partner with money needs the Bell's portion of this unless there's some blackmail pics or something. Plus - if these backers are ready to put up 10s or 100s or millions - why let Robby out there talk silly and kneecap the whole thing? Heck - no matter what Robby says at this point he has 15 years of crying wolf that's turned everyone off to anything he says.

[shavethewhales]

Bell's has a strong brand. That was the point of "selling tshirts" a few years ago. They were trying to prove that people still remember and miss Bell's. Most of the other "announcements" were just teasers basically just saying that they were still working towards the dream of reopening the park. The only major misstep was the Schwick's debacle where he announced Bell's being "back" and tried to crowdfund a bunch of stuff that he simply didn't have the ability to setup. To be fair, he did setup and operate a few rides for at least one summer, so Bell's was sort of "back" for a bit. He never got the money from crowdfunding that he thought he would get, nor did the crowds ever really show up for the three small kids rides and the inflatable slide, so he probably lost money by the end of that little episode.

As for the motivations of the investors, there aren't a lot of opportunities to invest in a new amusement park, and Robby and his family have decades of experience for what it's worth. The city is excited for the opportunity. All he needs is an ounce of competence and this business will print money. It's probably true that some of it is them simply moving money around for tax purposes, but I think they see some potential here for this to turn into something like Cliff's in New Mexico or OWA or something small and profitable like that. Heck, Kemah Boardwalk down in south Houston is amazingly popular with only a small handful of rides and a compact wooden coaster. Of course, the dozen popular restaurants and an aquarium help with that.

I don't think they really have any assets of value that I know of. Maybe a couple kiddie rides unless Schwick's kept them after he got kicked out. I know he left behind a ton of stuff at Schwick's. Heck, there's a few pieces still rotting out in the gunboat district in one of the random empty lots he dumped stuff on. He will probably buy a bunch of stuff off the secondary market. You too can start an amusement park with less than a million dollars if you are selective:
http://www.italintl.com/used_list.php
https://rides4u.com/equipment/used

[TheArtist]

Bell's has a strong brand. That was the point of "selling tshirts" a few years ago. They were trying to prove that people still remember and miss Bell's. Most of the other "announcements" were just teasers basically just saying that they were still working towards the dream of reopening the park. The only major misstep was the Schwick's debacle where he announced Bell's being "back" and tried to crowdfund a bunch of stuff that he simply didn't have the ability to setup. To be fair, he did setup and operate a few rides for at least one summer, so Bell's was sort of "back" for a bit. He never got the money from crowdfunding that he thought he would get, nor did the crowds ever really show up for the three small kids rides and the inflatable slide, so he probably lost money by the end of that little episode.

As for the motivations of the investors, there aren't a lot of opportunities to invest in a new amusement park, and Robby and his family have decades of experience for what it's worth. The city is excited for the opportunity. All he needs is an ounce of competence and this business will print money. It's probably true that some of it is them simply moving money around for tax purposes, but I think they see some potential here for this to turn into something like Cliff's in New Mexico or OWA or something small and profitable like that. Heck, Kemah Boardwalk down in south Houston is amazingly popular with only a small handful of rides and a compact wooden coaster. Of course, the dozen popular restaurants and an aquarium help with that.

I don't think they really have any assets of value that I know of. Maybe a couple kiddie rides unless Schwick's kept them after he got kicked out. I know he left behind a ton of stuff at Schwick's. Heck, there's a few pieces still rotting out in the gunboat district in one of the random empty lots he dumped stuff on. He will probably buy a bunch of stuff off the secondary market. You too can start an amusement park with less than a million dollars if you are selective:
http://www.italintl.com/used_list.php
https://rides4u.com/equipment/used

No need to buy old used stuff, you can get some really nice new stuff from China for really cheap. I was actually surprised at how inexpensive and nice looking a lot of the stuff is you can get from China, and get it customized with unique designs, steampunk, ocean, fairytale, classic, country western, etc.  

And if there are investors wanting to fund a theme park, I could design and run one that would blow you away for a fraction of the cost.  I have been interested in building a big DECOPOLIS someday and have been a big student of Disney for ages, soaking up every detail, working at Disney, going every year, reading books, classes, manuals and biographies, learning everything from what color the sidewalks should be and why, to the scale of the buildings, how to lead people through the parks, storytelling, safety, keeping everything spotless and perfect, what makes the money, etc.  And I am an artist, and have begun to learn a bit about running a business.

Want to be careful what I say, but when the news came out that he was building Bells, met with him at the site through a mutual friend that is working with them to see if there might be a way to collaborate to some degree or another. Suffice it to say, yea, our ideas and the way we were thinking were WORLDS apart.  I tried to be supportive, but at the same time didn't want to give away the knowledge and talent I have accumulated over the decades. I mentioned some points to try and help and he was like "Thats a great idea, never thought of that, I think we need to invite you to our next meeting." Then he would say something about one of his ideas and I would do a mental "face palm".  There are good, talented people around him trying to get him to move towards the way I would do things (and they told me they were trying)... but from what I could tell at that point, WAY too big a chasm to get him anywhere near where I would think things need to go for me and DECOPOLIS to be involved.

One thing I noticed is that his thoughts at the time were to be only open for part of the year, centered around getting lots of teens into the park and have a bunch of teens working the park during summer and spring break etc.  And then be closed for several months of the year. And 2 of my thoughts were... 1. All those people wanting to support Bells are those now middle age folk "nostalgia" and aren't going to be thrilled to be in a place mostly populated by teenagers.  2. Believe it or not, did you know approximately 70% of the people who go to Disney World are adults without kids? Which means the approximately other 30% are adults/families... with kids.  AND, most of the kids that are there are NOT teenagers. So again, his concept audience and mine were worlds apart. Even at DECOPOLIS, teens don't buy much (except for the nerds that love our nerdy, storytelling, rocks and fossils, Harry Potter & Star Wars stuff lol) Its mostly adults (who are kids at heart) and the little kids and those buying for the little kids including grandparents.

 You should try to cater to as many age demographics as possible IMHO, including teens if you can but they are a tricky audience more interested in their phones and clothes/shoes, but even then they tend to "run off" the other customers because others don't like to be in an environment that teens would be super interested in, nor do they enjoy  being in a place populated mostly by teens (especially if the teens are in the majority and unsupervised lol). And if you do have a lot of teens you have to "manage" the environment in a way that enables the adults and little kids to feel comfortable and have things to enjoy as well. I guarantee you one thing I would do would be to put in place a system whereby everyone had to have an ID to enter or be accompanied by an adult with an ID. If you cause any trouble, you are out and would not be able to enter again for X number of years.

Another thing was mention of rides being up close to 71st. And I said "Actually I would put parking with lots of trees around/in it here to act as a buffer to the neighbors on that side, and you don't want your guests looking out across a busy street 71st at ugly suburban strip malls, a Wal-Mart, etc. disrupts the illusion of them being in a magical, wonderful place apart from the rest of the world." (This was me catering to them saying they did want to create more of a "theme" park than the old Bells was) And, saying that this is the kind of thing they would do would IMHO helped with some of the neighbors concerns.

Anywhoo, we had VERY different ideas on what to do, how to do it, and who the main audiences should be. It may very well work for him, but it was just not the direction I would want to go.

But, he is the one getting millions of dollars and I am not so.... I can't talk too much lol.

[shavethewhales]

I totally get it. It's kind of unfair that they get to be in the amusement park game despite having absolutely no relatable skills, or even business skills in general.

I also have big dreams of getting into the business someday. I've been a member of the American Coaster Enthusiasts for almost two decades now (since I was a kid), and am a licensed engineer going for an MBA. Maybe we should team up Artist - your creativity and guest interaction skills and my engineering and business degrees.

Bell's was a big part of why I came to love roller coasters, so I have big hopes that something will work out, but I know by now not to get my hopes up.

Just saw a Tulsa World mention that there's going to be a community meeting this evening regarding Bell's. No officials present that I know of, so it will be mostly bitching/organizing by the local home owners who are imagining the worst. Once again, if Bell's was smart they'd have already addressed these concerns and would even be attending the meeting if invited. They don't have any political savvy at all and seem to be playing the legal route here. They are technically within their rights to develop the site as an amusement park, and although a few lawsuits might fly, they should be able to fend them off pretty easily just based on zoning and urban planning grounds. The neighborhood is fighting a boogeyman at this point since no one really knows what Bell's is actually building. It puts the city in a crappy position because they want to welcome Bell's and generate "tourist" revenue, but also have a duty to do the best they can by their residents. If Bell's is not careful, this will sour their relationship with the city that has so far been trying to help them along to some degree. Bell's absolutely should be at least hiring a spokesperson to do the talking for them.

[ELG4America]

It failed once in Tulsa, why would we expect it to work in BA?

Hope I'm wrong.

[patric]

It failed once in Tulsa, why would we expect it to work in BA?
Hope I'm wrong.

https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/community-members-turn-out-to-oppose-bells-amusement-park-development-in-broken-arrow/article_2dc7a2e0-5f4e-11ec-9b93-e75e3588c65e.html

The Tulsa World dropped its paywall this week, so you have until Dec. 26 to read it for free.

[shavethewhales]

The fact that they didn't allow Tulsa World into the meeting is very suspect. Lost a lot of credibility there. They should be inviting the media in with open arms to air their grievances so they are heard as loud as possible. Now they just seem like dumb grouches that don't want to actually communicate, just complain. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Here's another article from a news agency that was actually allowed in: https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/community-meeting-discussing-concerns-on-bells-proposed-development-in-broken-arrow-location

To me it still sounds like they are arguing against their own imaginations. Bell's has not submitted plans, so the allusions to "Las Vegas" and "neon lights" are dumb. Also, LOL at painting the area like a peaceful quiet retirement area when it is on one of the busiest roads in BA and right next to the highway with a major commercial area. They all acknowledge that it's a developing commercial area, they are just specifically against an amusement park because they imagine a roller coaster right outside their window. In reality, the roller coasters would be farther back on the property if they ever get built. As far as traffic goes, while there may be some days with heavy traffic, it's going to be that way anyway and if a Costco or something like that gets built there instead it's the same difference.

Bell's is still dumb for not addressing these concerns directly by now.

[tulsabug]

Apparently the torches and pitchforks opposing Bell's came out at the Broken Arrow city council meeting last night. Everything from "more crime! lower property values!!! less taxes for the city!!!! think of the kids!!!" So this is going well.

article - https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/this-is-not-the-place-opponents-to-bells-amusement-park-proposal-speak-at-city-council/article_d6ab21bc-7870-11ec-85fd-1360611e9e9f.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1

TW paywall but open it in an incognito window to bypass that.

[shavethewhales]

Yeah, it's a lot of really vague fears and overblown nonsense, but Bell's isn't helping the situation at all by not responding and clarifying their plans and intentions.

Leave it to the BA boomers to make everything about crime and traffic despite living next to commercial districts and the damn highway. Most of their statistics that they are pointing to are ridiculous and don't take into account the difference between crime that takes place in the parking lot of various amusement parks vs the surrounding neighborhoods. I have a hard time believing that Silver Dollar City makes the area around it more crime-ridden as they implied, but I'm sure they have police come to the park all the time to respond to unruly guests and vehicle break ins.

If Bell's came out with a preliminary plan showing how noise/traffic/etc was being considered, even if nothing was remotely final, that would help. Robby Bell was physically at the meeting, but it sounds like he didn't say anything? Not sure what he thinks he is doing. Again, it doesn't sound like he has learned anything in 15 years.

[swake]

Yeah, it's a lot of really vague fears and overblown nonsense, but Bell's isn't helping the situation at all by not responding and clarifying their plans and intentions.

Leave it to the BA boomers to make everything about crime and traffic despite living next to commercial districts and the damn highway. Most of their statistics that they are pointing to are ridiculous and don't take into account the difference between crime that takes place in the parking lot of various amusement parks vs the surrounding neighborhoods. I have a hard time believing that Silver Dollar City makes the area around it more crime-ridden as they implied, but I'm sure they have police come to the park all the time to respond to unruly guests and vehicle break ins.

If Bell's came out with a preliminary plan showing how noise/traffic/etc was being considered, even if nothing was remotely final, that would help. Robby Bell was physically at the meeting, but it sounds like he didn't say anything? Not sure what he thinks he is doing. Again, it doesn't sound like he has learned anything in 15 years.

Real plans take actual planners and money. I'm guessing Robbie has none of that.

[tulsabug]

Real plans take actual planners and money. I'm guessing Robbie has none of that.

It's starting to look more and more like the money behind the land isn't the silent partner but just someone using it for a tax shelter like we already talked about. I'm starting to wonder if there is an actual silent partner or this has all just been the Bells trying to act like they have something in the works to draw a partner in. Seems if there was some actual money behind it then whoever controls that money would be taking steps to protect their potential investment like, you know, hiring a professional management company to keep all the ducks in a row. But, again, if someone with money wanted to blow it on an amusement park it would be cheaper and easier to just build one from scratch without Bells being involved. Or, heck, buy the IP and whatever rides aren't total trash from the Bells.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

I was talking with a friend the other day about this, and we had some interesting thoughts on it. We were talking about the financial backing and whether it made sense or not and we both agreed that it just doesn't pencil out to try and resurrect rides and equipment that has been sitting for almost twenty years and the fact that the newest of the rides were almost thirty years old and older before they were dismantled. My point was the cost of inspecting, repairing and cost of parts if they can be found would be way more than just building new rides.

We talked about the NIMBY issues and think that quite a few are blown out of proportion, but are concerns.

The biggest thing that we agreed on was the history that Bell's has. It's got the name recognition of course but it also has the history of having issues with the county over tax issues, lease payments, and the unholy alliance between the count and Murphy Bros. The park ever since the early 80's was always looking run down and it seemed they did just enough maintenance to keep things going.

We mainly agreed good luck to Bell's but serious doubts that it will happen. It's been 16 years so far, let it go.