Colorado theme park files for bankruptcy after fatal fall

This is why safety has to be the #1 focus of every theme park. Sure, parks with massively deep pockets and an ancillary business divisions can absorb a crippling liability judgement like this, but most theme park operators (pretty much everyone other than Merlin, Disney, and Universal) cannot.

Safety training for employees should be thorough, consistent, and frequent. As guests, we should all applaud and praise team members and ride ops who make tough decision to deny access to guests who don't quite fit or push that bar one extra click to make sure a rider is secure. It only takes one single mistake from a ride op to create the potential for disaster, and millions of dollars of engineering and technology cannot always correct or prevent these mistakes from happening.

Is there any chance this park could be acquired by a chain like herchend, or would they have to take on the cost of the lawsuit?

If the current owners wanted out, changing the bankruptcy filing to a liquidation of assets would provide the cleanest way for a new owner to come in and operate the park. I can't imagine that any potential buyer would be interested while the company was in the Chapter 11 process.

@VelocicoasterFan - I'm not a lawyer, but I would assume that a liability like this would not simply vanish because the company sold the park. Either the balance would need to be paid by the proceeds of the sale or would carry on to the new owner. The fact that they are claiming $100-$500 million in liabilities (assume this would include the judgement) against $10-$50 million in assets would indicate selling the park would not result in sufficient funds to satisfy the judgement, therefore the new owner would likely assume any remaining liability on the judgement.

Claiming bankruptcy ranks the creditors. A civil judgment would go near the top. That place would have nothing for anyone to buy. Oftentimes assets get murky, and there is a battle for those. If the company owns the land, then that is an asset and will go to the creditors.

The fact that this judgment has been allowed to stand could very likely lead to serious ramifications across the industry. Most smaller parks and even some midsize parks do not have the assets to obtain a nine digit insurance policy, so if that becomes what is necessary to guard against any sort of fatal accident there's a high probability many independent parks could disappear in the not too distant future. As for Glenwood Caverns, I hope that they're able to survive this as they really are one of the more unique parks in the country, but I worry that this will likely be the death knell for them as I just don't see a way out when there's that much of a mismatch between assets and liabilities.

@ AJ, whereas I don't know this case inside and out, from what I did get out of the trial is that the park took a 30 to 40 page manufacturer safety manual and whittled it down to just 3 pages so their employees were severely improperly trained. If so, like the drop tower situation in Orlando (where they had the audacity to blame the ride op), they don't have any business being in the business. Patrons' safety should be the #1 priority of any park in operation regardless of stature. Again, I am only going by what I remember about the safety manual being shortened.

mbrussmco, I'm by no means saying that the park isn't at fault, just that the magnitude of the judgment is way out of line with other wrongful death cases in the industry. While the accident was caused by a cascade of small oversights that resulted in insufficient training of employees (particularly when it came to dangerous scenarios that could occur on the attraction), it was all in compliance with state regulations at the time and no involved parties were charged criminally. By comparison, the Verruckt accident (which I would probably consider the worst industry accident of the past decade) revealed massive criminal negligence on the part of the park and the attraction's designers, and that wound up being a $20 million settlement. In fact, the only award I could find larger than this was for the Orlando Freefall, which had been modified beyond parameters considered safe by the manufacturer and also came with significant criminal charges. On the other hand, most of the incidents I can find ruled as operator error have resulted in payouts under $10 million. If Glenwood Caverns had indeed been acting in a reckless manner and knowingly endangering guests I'd be all for them getting sued into oblivion, but I just don't think that's the case here.

If you want a refresher on the accident, Coaster College put out a 35 minute video a couple weeks ago going through pretty much every facet of what happened (along with a separate 10 minute video detailing the modifications made based on what was learned in the investigation).

AJ, thanks for the input. I will have to check out the video. Re: the Orlando Freefall, didn't that suit land over $300 million? I also don't remember any significant criminal charges, in fact, I thought the owners got off with a wrist slap. And yes, the Verruckt accident was beyond horrific. That ride should have never existed. I remember when they were promoting it, I kept thinking how is netting with metal supports going to be any kind of safety measure? Quite the opposite. I remember Wet N Wild in Orlando had this twisted blue tube slide that was padded inside and the rider also had to wear a helmet and I think they still had to remove it due to injuries.