A company that is legitimately going to build and actually have acquired $300M is going to be in a better location than this. I literally work in and with startups (insurtech) every single day and have made a very successful career out working with them. When you're a startup having a legitimate looking front is often one of the first things that major backers push (It's one of the first things we do with the projects we fund). It's not hard to get space or address in a building that at least looks good. What have these developers done that gives you any hint that they could be qualified to do what they're proposing? It's a big jump from developing small apartment/townhomes/tiny homes to an amusement park.
Legitimate theme parks don't hold planning sessions with vendors on stairs at IAAPA (if the vendors really value them they reserve a meeting room), they don't attend on student credentials, TMs registered to individuals and not corporations, massively poor quality video and graphics (after the original cool graphics from Storytime...their post yesterday was an old photo put through a filter with a few decorations added )...the list goes on and on. From my experience there are many flags to look for in startups that are just burning through money trying to get investors...they are hitting almost all of them.
Also...you act like it's certain the land under contract IS actually them. We don't know that. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Nothing is confirmed. But even if they get land, there's still an incredibly long way to go. If they've somehow come up with $11M to buy the land...no guarantee they have plans to get the other $290M. We've seen many other parks acquire land and fail to do anything past that. It's easy to get investors to front the money to buy the land because, worst case, it's an asset that can be liquidated. Money spent beyond land is where things get extremely difficult.
Legitimate theme parks don't hold planning sessions with vendors on stairs at IAAPA (if the vendors really value them they reserve a meeting room), they don't attend on student credentials, TMs registered to individuals and not corporations, massively poor quality video and graphics (after the original cool graphics from Storytime...their post yesterday was an old photo put through a filter with a few decorations added )...the list goes on and on. From my experience there are many flags to look for in startups that are just burning through money trying to get investors...they are hitting almost all of them.
Also...you act like it's certain the land under contract IS actually them. We don't know that. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Nothing is confirmed. But even if they get land, there's still an incredibly long way to go. If they've somehow come up with $11M to buy the land...no guarantee they have plans to get the other $290M. We've seen many other parks acquire land and fail to do anything past that. It's easy to get investors to front the money to buy the land because, worst case, it's an asset that can be liquidated. Money spent beyond land is where things get extremely difficult.
