Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Cedar Point (CP) Discussion Thread

p. 2030 - Top Thrill 2 announced!

Recommended Posts

I'm just leaving this cleveland.com article here for discussion:

Cedar Point won't raise fence in response to death of man struck by roller coaster

 

What exactly would raising the height of the fence do, other than make it slightly more of a nuisance for someone who's dead-set on intentionally breaking the rules to do so?

 

I totally wanted to feel lie someone who's incarcerated while standing in line!

 

/goes to Six Flags instead

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, nothing pisses me off more than people suing for stupid reasons. . .

 

I'm curious if you even read the most recent article posted. In the article it clearly says that the father of the victim has not yet decided if they were going to sue the park. (Probably because the father knows that there is not really a case.)

 

From the article:

 

The elder Young, also of East Canton, said his family has not yet decided whether they will sue Cedar Point for any responsibility the park may have had in his son's death.

 

I bet they will NOT end up suing the park because they will go to a lawyer and find out that they have no case against the park, because the park was not in the wrong. It was their son who ignored the warning signs and climbed the fences into a (clearly posted) restricted area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article:

 

"Certainly my son shouldn't have gone over the fence. There's no doubt about that. But then I believe the fence shouldn't have been so easy to get over."

 

I'm without words

 

I think the mom should jump the fence and awaken the mighty Raptor. He's waiting patiently, watching for his next prey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet they will NOT end up suing the park because they will go to a lawyer and find out that they have no case against the park, because the park was not in the wrong. It was their son who ignored the warning signs and climbed the fences into a (clearly posted) restricted area.

Hey, lawyers get their fees either way. I wouldn't be so surprised; I'm sure there's more than one ambulance chaser out there looking to profit off this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh trust me, living in Memphis i have learned people can sue you for ANYTHING, don't be surprised if they get a little money. Also, lets hope the media doesen't sway the opinion of the sheep of this country to demand higher fences.

 

Edit: Just realized how hilarious "sheep demanding higher fences" sounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this same thing happened at Six Flags Over Georgia (for the second time on Batman ...SMH), the park increased signage to something like every 10 feet and the sign warns of electrocution and things that are just unnecessary and unpleasant to have to read while walking into the park. I am glad Cedar Point is standing their ground. By changing things, the claim that it wasn't good enough before becomes more arguable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's easy for someone to sue and get money, even in this case. Why? Because it often costs the defense less to pay out a settlement than what it would to fight the case in court. There is probably money in this case, but likely not enough to bother with after the lawyer gets their cut.

 

Edit: Also, Cedar Point isn't standing their ground to prove a point. They're not making any changes, because that would imply their safety measures weren't adequate in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, just maybe, hypothetically speaking just for this conversation's purposes go, can't a company place an order from said manufacturer in 2010 for a coaster that will open in 2015, and then place another order from the same manufacturer in 2012 for 2017. Two separate, independent purchases. No package deal. Again, just two separate purchases that came about after the park agreed on plans. Stop pulling sh*t out of your a** and calling it truth. Unless you have proof of these package deals then don't imply they exist.

 

Simply my opinion. Haven't you ever heard of buying in bulk? It does businesses wonders. Of course no one knows for sure what the official process is. I have no idea what they do, I just go to the parks and enjoy the hell out of their amazing rides. It's a possibility they do things that way, I just don't think they do based on other successful business models, and past trends dating back to the 70s. In this interview, Jason McClure stated that Cedar Point is always at least 3-5 years ahead, which is exactly what I said. Meaning that by 2012 Cedar Point knew they were adding at least both Gatekeeper and Rougarou. With how large of a project Valravn is, having to remove the turnpike cars and a large theatre, and relocating Calypso and the bumper cars, wouldn't it make sense that a project of that size is agreed upon fairly well in advance? And hell, at that point, you already have B&M in your building discussing Gatekeeper and Rougarou, why not just book all 3 while you're at it? BOOM, package deal ( ).

 

In this article, Matt Ouimet states that Knotts has at least a 5-year plan, and wants it to be 10. Wouldn't it only make sense that the chain's flagship park and resort destination, Cedar Point, have just as intricate of a long-term plan? Pure speculation.

 

 

 

I still stand firmly by my opinion that it's not uncommon for parks/chains/whatever to sign multi-ride deals from the same manufacturer over a certain period of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh trust me, living in Memphis i have learned people can sue you for ANYTHING, don't be surprised if they get a little money. Also, lets hope the media doesen't sway the opinion of the sheep of this country to demand higher fences.

 

Edit: Just realized how hilarious "sheep demanding higher fences" sounds.

 

It only takes so long before people start going through the fence instead of over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still stand firmly by my opinion that it's not uncommon for parks/chains/whatever to sign multi-ride deals from the same manufacturer over a certain period of time.

Can you provide us some examples? To support your facpinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still stand firmly by my opinion that it's not uncommon for parks/chains/whatever to sign multi-ride deals from the same manufacturer over a certain period of time.

Can you provide us some examples? To support your facpinion?

 

Can you provide a reason why this is such a blasphemous and unheard of concept?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you provide a reason why this is such a blasphemous and unheard of concept?

 

Ohhh!! I can provide a reason for this one!!

 

Because we like to KNOW things not just assume things. People like "proof" of something, because not all of us like to assume. . . Because you know. . .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still stand firmly by my opinion that it's not uncommon for parks/chains/whatever to sign multi-ride deals from the same manufacturer over a certain period of time.

Can you provide us some examples? To support your facpinion?

 

Can you provide a reason why this is such a blasphemous and unheard of concept?

Because there's no proof of anything at all and you're arguing this opinion to death with nothing to back it up. You don't have any solid evidence that what you're arguing is actually how real world business transactions happen in the industry, and when people ask you why you think such a thing happens you're saying "it just makes sense." Why are you so set on being right? It's really not a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still stand firmly by my opinion that it's not uncommon for parks/chains/whatever to sign multi-ride deals from the same manufacturer over a certain period of time.

Can you provide us some examples? To support your facpinion?

 

Can you provide a reason why this is such a blasphemous and unheard of concept?

Because there's no proof of anything at all and you're arguing this opinion to death with nothing to back it up. You don't have any solid evidence that what you're arguing is actually how real world business transactions happen in the industry, and when people ask you why you think such a thing happens you're saying "it just makes sense." Why are you so set on being right? It's really not a big deal.

 

I couldn't care less about being right or wrong. I'm bored and trying to have a more interesting conversation on an internet forum during the offseason, than 160 pages of boat hashtags (#NeverForgetTheBoat). Isn't that the point of a forum? To speculate and converse each others' opinions? I have a lot of respect for cedarpointguru, because he was making good, valid points and stating his honest opinion. Key word, opinion. I've admitted that I don't know how it works, and I've respected other opinions. I'm sorry that it makes sense to me, but it does. I was honestly hoping to get some other counter points on why that wouldn't be a good idea and have a friendly debate like adults, but it's just been all bickering about no sources, instead of any actual counter-arguments and additional opinions. Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Okay, here's my counter-argument then.

 

You say that Cedar Point (and large budget amusement parks in general) are 3-5 years ahead in planning stages at all times. I agree; that's a generally accepted fact. If you've seen the Devin Olson Gatekeeper documentary (which you should watch, it's a great piece), you'll remember Rob Decker saying Gatekeeper went from nothing to essentially an agreement within the span of IAAPA 2011. It's arguable whether or not this is the whole truth, but for discussions' sake we'll assume it is (it's cutting it close but still possible).

 

If they had a multi-ride deal with B&M for Gatekeeper and Valravn (as you're arguing) then that means the outline and agreement/contract was signed during IAAPA 2011 as well. If that's the case, Rob's story was false. He says he asked Walter (of B&M) what they have that's new, and they gave him the wing coaster. The Dive machine has been on the table since 1998. If they're designing each coaster chronologically, why would they design Gatekeeper and Valravn at the same time, within the span of a few days? I don't buy that.

 

As for all your previous examples using Cedar Point (namely with Arrow and Intamin) it becomes even more apparent that this is impossible. The best reason that comes to mind is that Dick Kinzel was inspired by a 1988 Arrow 150+ foot tall non-inverting steel coaster for Magnum's design. That deal would have had to have been signed in 1986 or earlier for Iron Dragon to be a possibility, which alone makes Magnum impossible since the concept didn't come out until at least 1987.

 

With the Intamin projects in the 2000's, it's safe to assume that MF, Wicked Twister and Dragster would've been in the same deal. I do remember reading that talks for Maverick began as soon as Dragster opened.

This deal would have had to have been signed in 1999 or earlier. At this point in time, Intamin had never made a hydraulic launch coaster (the first being Xcelerator in 2002). I have no proof of this, but don't you think Intamin wouldn't have signed a deal for the tallest coaster in the world with launch technology that had yet to be proven successful until at least after they determine if Millennium Force was successful?

 

And was Cedar Point really ready to invest $60 million in Intamin coasters at once (MF, Wicked Twister and Dragster) before seeing they even worked? From my perspective, it seems that Cedar Fair waits until a manufacturer's product is a success before singing the papers for the next one. My proof? Wouldn't we have seen *something* else from Intamin after I-305 and Shoot the Rapids, which were conveniently built in the same year? I think it's safe to assume they had been taking all of these projects one at a time, only signing up for the next upon the previous products' success. It would seem a little fishy that I-305 and Shoot the Rapids would be two lone projects on their own after this supposed chain of Intamin rides across the chain in the 2000's.

 

 

Sorry for the long, nerdy post, everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, nothing pisses me off more than people suing for stupid reasons. . .

 

I'm curious if you even read the most recent article posted. In the article it clearly says that the father of the victim has not yet decided if they were going to sue the park. (Probably because the father knows that there is not really a case.)

.

Ummm I did read that, the fact that the father is considering suing is why I said that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my strictly amateur opinion: You buy things in bulk that are manufactured in bulk at a relatively low cost: toilet paper, soda, ink pens, yogurt, etc. You don't buy in bulk $15-20 million dollar pieces of equipment like roller coasters that each have their own unique location, design, engineering process, and fabricated parts. They're priced according to how much they cost the seller to design, manufacture, and build. My guess is that there's very little room for "buy 2, get the next half price!" bulk discounting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my strictly amateur opinion: You buy things in bulk that are manufactured in bulk at a relatively low cost: toilet paper, soda, ink pens, yogurt, etc. You don't buy in bulk $15-20 million dollar pieces of equipment like roller coasters that each have their own unique location, design, engineering process, and fabricated parts. They're priced according to how much they cost the seller to design, manufacture, and build. My guess is that there's very little room for "buy 2, get the next half price!" bulk discounting.

Good points, though what Six Flags has done with RMC, Sally, and now appears to be doing with S&S begs to differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/