Bells Non-Parking Lot Nearly Finished

[BierGarten]

Lenders willing to lend money and having a viable business plan are not one in the same thing.  Unless you know how the loan was to be collateralized, you can't say the two have much to do with each other.  

For example, and I'm not saying this was the case, the contemplated loan may have been collateralized in first position on Bell's other rides that were together worth more than the loan itself.  A bank isn't taking much risk if they know they can sell their collateral easily and cover their loan principle.  Of course, a bank would much rather the debtor service the debt.

[dsjeffries]

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote:Originally posted by T-Town Now

If Randi Miller is involved in something, it's tainted from the word go. I don't trust her as far as I could move the IPE Building with my bare hands.

The woman is a disgrace to Tulsa.

i dunno, KK gives her a run for her money on that title.

Who?

People who dislike Kathy Taylor like to abbreviate her names with KK to stand for Krazy Kathy.  That right there accomplishes a LOT, let me tell 'ya. [xx(]  I support the mayor.  I don't, however, support Randi Miller.  Except maybe as an experiment to see if she has a brain...

[perspicuity85]

Why in the hell do they need more parking?  They could have made the site into a commercial area or attempted to attract a new amusement park tenant.  Personally, I would have put in a park with Coney Island themed rides, with restaurants and small retailers fronting the street.  It would be nice if restaurants and retailers were within walking/tram ride/sky ride distance of the rest of Expo Square.  Our county government is completely devoid of creativity or the concept of opportunity cost.  If they want to waste their own land, screw 'em.  We'll all be watching by as the fairgrounds continues to lose every reason people ever went to it: Bell's, The Drillers, and the 66ers, etc.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by BierGarten

Lenders willing to lend money and having a viable business plan are not one in the same thing.  Unless you know how the loan was to be collateralized, you can't say the two have much to do with each other.  

I gave you 5 or 6 things that troubled me about the proposition, including overt lies to the voters.  And you come back with "maybe it wasn't viable."  So what?  

The only reason that was relevant was because it enabled the county a pretense to annul the contract and boot them.  Supposedly because not doing so would later cost the county hundreds of thousands of dollars to evict them.  WHICH WE SPENT ANYWAY!!!

So what, in the hell, did we gain?

$2,000,000 in revenue lost
$500,000 to move them out
Loss of entertainment
Closed a locally owned business
Loss of a landmark (driving by the Zingo was just cool)

We gained a parking lot that is empty 90% of the time.

Please, take some detail and explain your position.  Thus far you are just picking at the periphery of the issue.  SOMETHING has to exist to make you think all of the above is worth less than a parking lot, that is is OK for politicians to lie, and that the behavior was OK and thus far you have not told me what it is. At this point, I'm just assuming you had something against Bell's or have a connection to another party involved and thus writing off your unsupported position (sorry).

[Kiah]

Too bad Expo Square wasn't within city limits when that parking lot was paved.  The County might have met minimal landscaping requirements instead of just laying down a solid slab.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by BierGarten

Lenders willing to lend money and having a viable business plan are not one in the same thing.  Unless you know how the loan was to be collateralized, you can't say the two have much to do with each other.  

For example, and I'm not saying this was the case, the contemplated loan may have been collateralized in first position on Bell's other rides that were together worth more than the loan itself.  A bank isn't taking much risk if they know they can sell their collateral easily and cover their loan principle.  Of course, a bank would much rather the debtor service the debt.

Lenders don't want to be in the carnival ride business.  They wouldn't have touched it based on collateral alone- that's not sane lending in the first place, with the possible exception of doing real estate loans at 50% of appraisal.  That's what's called a "make it and hope they don't pay" loan.

Not as easy to flip carnival rides as other carnival companies aren't going to pay a bank a premium for repo'd rides.  If Bell's couldn't cash flow out the debt service, they would not have had the commitment.

[YoungTulsan]

I've always wanted somewhere to park my car

[TUalum0982]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by BierGarten

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

Sickening.....

Yes.  It is sickening that the death trap also known as Bell's was allowed to stay in operation for as long as it did.

Tulsa World -- Wildcat Material Faulted


By Brian Barber
10/25/1997


State investigators have identified the use of an
"inappropriate" material on the Wildcat roller coaster at Bell's
Amusement Park as the cause of last spring's fatal accident and
said park officials are ultimately responsible for the tragedy.
"Bell's personnel substituted the plastic material used by the
Wildcat's manufacturer with a plastic which is not recommended for
use in an anti-rollback device," Oklahoma Labor Commissioner Brenda
Reneau said Friday.
The ride car, which carried Patrick Kurek, 14, to his death, had
only one safety device, and that device was dependent upon a
material called Nylatron, Reneau said.
"This inappropriately brittle material, inadequate for resisting
impact loads, shattered, rendering the anti-rollback incapable of
preventing the accident," she said.
Five other people were injured April 20, when the ride car
carrying Kurek slid backward down the incline and into another car.
The Nylatron insert in the anti-rollback device shattered when it
was supposed to have caught on a groove to prevent the car from
rolling backward.

1997?

I played baseball with Pat for several years and his dad was my baseball coach for 2 of them.  Very sad to hear that news.  I was 15 at the time and it made me realize life is too short and enjoy it while you still can.  He may have been acting like a jackass, we all do crazy stuff as teenagers, but he didnt deserve to die because of it.  Think back to your teenage years, did you ever do anything that could be construed as "acting like a jackass"?

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by TUalum0982

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by BierGarten

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

Sickening.....

Yes.  It is sickening that the death trap also known as Bell's was allowed to stay in operation for as long as it did.

Tulsa World -- Wildcat Material Faulted


By Brian Barber
10/25/1997


State investigators have identified the use of an
"inappropriate" material on the Wildcat roller coaster at Bell's
Amusement Park as the cause of last spring's fatal accident and
said park officials are ultimately responsible for the tragedy.
"Bell's personnel substituted the plastic material used by the
Wildcat's manufacturer with a plastic which is not recommended for
use in an anti-rollback device," Oklahoma Labor Commissioner Brenda
Reneau said Friday.
The ride car, which carried Patrick Kurek, 14, to his death, had
only one safety device, and that device was dependent upon a
material called Nylatron, Reneau said.
"This inappropriately brittle material, inadequate for resisting
impact loads, shattered, rendering the anti-rollback incapable of
preventing the accident," she said.
Five other people were injured April 20, when the ride car
carrying Kurek slid backward down the incline and into another car.
The Nylatron insert in the anti-rollback device shattered when it
was supposed to have caught on a groove to prevent the car from
rolling backward.

1997?

I played baseball with Pat for several years and his dad was my baseball coach for 2 of them.  Very sad to hear that news.  I was 15 at the time and it made me realize life is too short and enjoy it while you still can.  He may have been acting like a jackass, we all do crazy stuff as teenagers, but he didnt deserve to die because of it.  Think back to your teenage years, did you ever do anything that could be construed as "acting like a jackass"?

No actually.

[cannon_fodder]

I wholeheartedly agree that he did not deserve to die because of his actions.  No teenager or person of any age deserves to die for acting like a goof or even a jackass.  I acted the part plenty of times in my life.

My point was only in relation to using that accident as an excuse to close Bell's.

[Conan71]

I acted like a jackass as a teen, and well, probably haven't outgrown it entirely if you ask others on here. [] It's probably somewhere around a miracle that I'm even still alive after things I've done in my youth and young adulthood.

No, Pat did not deserve to die, and it was a terrible tragedy.  No one intentionally killed him.  Bell's made an error.  They stepped up and did all they could do in taking accountability for it.

No amount of money would/will ever fill the hole left in the Kurek's life afterwards.  This was horrible for everyone involved.  

[BierGarten]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

quote:Originally posted by BierGarten

Lenders willing to lend money and having a viable business plan are not one in the same thing.  Unless you know how the loan was to be collateralized, you can't say the two have much to do with each other.  

I gave you 5 or 6 things that troubled me about the proposition, including overt lies to the voters.  And you come back with "maybe it wasn't viable."  So what?  

The only reason that was relevant was because it enabled the county a pretense to annul the contract and boot them.  Supposedly because not doing so would later cost the county hundreds of thousands of dollars to evict them.  WHICH WE SPENT ANYWAY!!!

So what, in the hell, did we gain?

$2,000,000 in revenue lost
$500,000 to move them out
Loss of entertainment
Closed a locally owned business
Loss of a landmark (driving by the Zingo was just cool)

We gained a parking lot that is empty 90% of the time.

Please, take some detail and explain your position.  Thus far you are just picking at the periphery of the issue.  SOMETHING has to exist to make you think all of the above is worth less than a parking lot, that is is OK for politicians to lie, and that the behavior was OK and thus far you have not told me what it is. At this point, I'm just assuming you had something against Bell's or have a connection to another party involved and thus writing off your unsupported position (sorry).

Okay.  I'll take the arguments you have made one by one.

We lost a Tulsa landmark.  Yes, we did, a really crappy one.

We were lied to.  I will take your word as to that one.  I don't care.  Man, if I got mad every time a politician lied I would be miserable.

The county lost revenue (even worse, paid money to lose revenue).  Sometimes it costs something to gain something.  In this case, we gained getting rid of a really crappy amusement park.  Thank you county.

The county screwed a local business.  I might be wrong on this one, but didn't the county simply not renew a lease?  Isn't that just a simple business choice?  A tenant without a contractual right to renew has no grounds to complain when their lease isn't renewed.  Again, maybe it was more than a lease not being renewed, I am sure you will correct if I'm wrong.

I think it really comes down to the fact that I am not moved by any of your arguments which probably stems from the fact that I thought it was a crappy business, a crappy park and had no real belief that a new roller coaster was going to change the way that business had been run for many years.

[Conan71]

BG- logical points and you are not in a minority, AFAIK.  Bell's had started renovating rides, had added new attractions, and were adding more.  They were trying to put money back into the park.  It's a shame they did let it get as dingy as it was before starting to renovate it.  

One glaring mistake I can see they made was not charging a higher gate admission and turning it into an all-inclusive ride admission.  I think that would have raised gross revenues and kept out the gangsta riff-raff.  But, they wanted all families to be able to afford to come to the park and enjoy it.

One area I will dispute with you is this was not exactly a simple non-renewal of a lease.  There were several million dollars in fixed assets which had to be destroyed.  Concrete foundations, electrical lines and boxes, rides which were built in like Zingo.  There was a lot of sweat equity and money which was uncerimoniously broken up and hauled off.  

None of that really hit home with me till a week or so before they were finally off the property and I had seen Bob Bell and chatted with him briefly on the site one day.  Putting myself in their position, that was a pretty devastating loss for them.

[cannon_fodder]

Well, this is the first time I have had to disagree with a BierGarten.

1. Bell's was not in good shape.  Given, but the Statue of Liberty was falling apart in the early 1990's too.

2. I will not write passes for lying simply because all politicians do it.

3. I do not thinking paying $2.5 million to get rid of Bell's was a significant gain. Nearly universally I see surface parking as a loss.

4. The lease had provision that allowed it not to be renewed.  The county played by the rules.  But at the end of the day they canceled a lease that had been around for 50 years and shut down a local business because they didn't like it.  To me, that's screwing them.


You didn't like Bell's and did not care what lies or costs were involved with destroying it.  I understand your perspective but I can not agree with it, but thanks for clarifying.  I still plan on trying to get an answer from Randi on her statements.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder


Well, this is the first time I have had to disagree with a BierGarten.

1. Bell's was not in good shape.  Given, but the Statue of Liberty was falling apart in the early 1990's too.

2. I will not write passes for lying simply because all politicians do it.

3. I do not thinking paying $2.5 million to get rid of Bell's was a significant gain. Nearly universally I see surface parking as a loss.

4. The lease had provision that allowed it not to be renewed.  The county played by the rules.  But at the end of the day they canceled a lease that had been around for 50 years and shut down a local business because they didn't like it.  To me, that's screwing them.


You didn't like Bell's and did not care what lies or costs were involved with destroying it.  I understand your perspective but I can not agree with it, but thanks for clarifying.  I still plan on trying to get an answer from Randi on her statements.

You also left out the conflict-of-interest of one of the Fair Board members being the plaintiff's attorney in the Wildcat death and did not recuse himself from voting on nor making public comments about Bell's being tossed.  That left me every bit as crispy as Ms. Miller's actions.