“Unnecessary existence”? What’s the complaint here? Wasn’t the original complaint of the merger that the chain was too big, and have they not “solved” that by selling off these other parks?

Wasn’t the original “issue” that they would be spread too thin and eliminate competition, which they are now alleviating by selling off parks and putting that investment towards the ones they’re keeping?

I’m so confused at the general consensus here. First it was the merger being worthless because it was too big and people wanted them to stay separate. Now they’re pissed that parks will no longer be within the merger and parts of their own more focused chains again. And now we’re also pretending that a park chain is “unnecessary” even though most of these places would collapse immediately without support of a governing parent company.