Yamez Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 2b. SROS is still the best ride between the two parks as far as I'm concerned. When I had a season pass to the park 4 years ago I personally thought SROS' helix's were extremely uncomfortable. I don't think its all that great to be honest and I think that Dominator is a FAR better ride than SROS. But differing opinions and all that. I just prefer KD over SFA, and BGE over KD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowboard83 Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Finally, I really hope the new additions to SFA (Thomas Town and the possible new coaster(s) really help Six Flags America compete with Kings Dominion and maybe even Busch Gardens Europe. Why would I not? SFA is actually closer to my house, but I would rather go to Kings Dominion due to the very wide quality gap between the two. Six Flags feels a bit run down and old to me. This is the same way I felt about Kings Dominion before Cedar Fair took over. Since then (including 2010) KD has gotten 3 water rides, 2 flat rides, a re-themed kiddie section, and 2 major coasters. If the new management at SFI can pull something similar off, I could realistically see myself going to SFA more than once or twice a year. Wow...So you consider 2 hand me down mediocre (at best) flats, a hand me down coaster (albeit a very good hand me down), and a waterworks expansion that Paramount had actually finallized, and name changes, that made the parks rides sound like ghetto rip off rides, to be the things that make KD pull out so far ahead...along with a retheming of the kids area..that kids wont get because the characters are 50 years old...because CF was too cheap to extend the contracts with Nick... Hate to say that the kids area rethemed is likely to kill some family appeal...sure kids will still have fun...but the rides may lack more luster. Look at the scooby doo dark ride...thats a downgrade to whatever they change the theme to.. Kids now days like scooby doo, hence the new version of the show, and nick...hence the popularity of the network... Loony tunes, while old as well, is still much larger than the Snoopy and gang. Thomas town is a home run, while it may take a while for the families to get drawn back in. The word must spread. True, the 2011 coaster may well be Chang, but its not certain. SFA has put in 2 water rides in the time period you stated, along with a facelift to most of the park (paint, new fixtures)...something that kd could use themselves. So really, SFA matched KDs waterpark investment. They worked on Skull mountain so it would become more reliable, and put in new theming on it as well (probably more expensive than KDs flats). SFA has also completely redone employee attitudes, which, arguably, is a larger investment and challenge than adding some attractions. SFA investments recently have been blanket coverage for the whole park, while cutting some losses, yes. Two-face staying in operation was making the park look like it didnt care about rides that looked "unsafe," while yes I agree there were things that could have been done differently. Blame media and public exaggeration for that, not the park. So when is KD going to redo their parking lot? ITs gotta be one of the worst parking lots anywhere. What about their bathrooms? horrible as well. I am thinking that the only thing that really sticks out at KD is Intimidator out of everything you mentioned. I feel once SFI is out of bankruptcy, we could be looking at SFA emerging very quickly, to at least KD's so called quality in many people's minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Man, now I am glad I got out of this argument in its beginning stages. Now, there are so many opinions and replies my I get a headache reading them all. What I notice is people keep going back to the point that a B&M Stand up was planned for Six Flags America, but they decided for Kings Dominion's Flying Dutchman which KD passed on. Problem with this argument is Batwing opened in 2001, so from 2001-2009 how can anyone assume a contract was not made between Busch Gardens and Six Flags America? If anyone had solid info. that proved there was not a contract in these 8 years, wouldn't it have got out by now? The deal with Paramount Parks and Vekoma was that Paramount Parks had exclusivity on the Vekoma Flyers provided they purchased "x" amount of these coasters in a certain time frame. When Paramount Parks did not purchase another flyer, SF/Premier Parks stepped up immediately and purchased two flyers. One went to Six Flags World of Adventure (Geagua Lake) and opened as X-Flight. The other of course is Batwing. Let's at least get the history lesson correct. What would a contract between BGE and SFA have to do with anything? There has been speculation for a very long time that BGE has an exclusivity clause with B&M that prevents B&M from selling new coasters to KD and possibly even SFA. The problem is it's been all speculation with no proof. Neither park has installed a new B&M. In my opinion, I believe that there may be in fact an exclusivity clause with BGE and B&M for the simple fact that Cedar Fair has dropped B&M hypers in 3 of the 5 former Paramount Parks. They've put in Behemoth at Canada's Wonderland, Diamondback at King's Island, and are currently installing Intimidator at Carowinds. KD is getting an Intamin Giga. Why hasn't there been a new B&M in the past fifteen years at KD if there isn't an exclusivity clause between BGE and B&M? Why hasn't SFA purchased a B&M? They installed seven coasters over a six year period. Three Vekomas, a GCII, an Intamin, a Zamperla, and a Premier Rides coaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Wow...So you consider 2 hand me down mediocre (at best) flats, a hand me down coaster (albeit a very good hand me down), and a waterworks expansion that Paramount had actually finallized, and name changes, that made the parks rides sound like ghetto rip off rides, to be the things that make KD pull out so far ahead...along with a retheming of the kids area..that kids wont get because the characters are 50 years old...because CF was too cheap to extend the contracts with Nick... Hate to say that the kids area rethemed is likely to kill some family appeal...sure kids will still have fun...but the rides may lack more luster. Look at the scooby doo dark ride...thats a downgrade to whatever they change the theme to.. Kids now days like scooby doo, hence the new version of the show, and nick...hence the popularity of the network... Personally, I'd rather see all the rides and coasters returned to Geauga Lake than have it closed forever. It won't happen but you have to always remember where you came from. Geauga Lake for me was a magical place. Not so much on the Disney level but before the SF branding and Cedar Fair getting a hold of the park, Geauga Lake wasn't a huge corporate park. It's a shame there aren't more parks like Geagua Lake around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolliger&Mabillard Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Why hasn't there been a new B&M in the past fifteen years at KD if there isn't an exclusivity clause between BGE and B&M? Why hasn't SFA purchased a B&M? B&M's cost a LOT of money...While your on these questions, there aren't too many Paramount or Six Flags parks that got many B&M expansions...Just because these parks haven't received a B&M isn't adequate enough to say "BG paid us not to sell to you" How much could Busch have paid B&M not to sell ANY coasters to SFA and KD? $100 million? I don't think they'd have paid that type of number just to say "if you wan't to ride a Beemer here's the only place you can". I honestly think B&M would have made more money just selling rides...and that's because their rides are expensive, which is what looks like why these parks haven't got any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Why hasn't there been a new B&M in the past fifteen years at KD if there isn't an exclusivity clause between BGE and B&M? Why hasn't SFA purchased a B&M? B&M's cost a LOT of money...While your on these questions, there aren't too many Paramount or Six Flags parks that got many B&M expansions...Just because these parks haven't received a B&M isn't adequate enough to say "BG paid us not to sell to you" How much could Busch have paid B&M not to sell ANY coasters to SFA and KD? $100 million? I don't think they'd have paid that type of number just to say "if you wan't to ride a Beemer here's the only place you can". I honestly think B&M would have made more money just selling rides...and that's because their rides are expensive, which is what looks like why these parks haven't got any. So the $25 million KD/Cedar Fair is shelling out for Intimidator isn't a lot of money? As far as the exclusivity debate goes, check out this link. It was previously discussed on another site at length and it gives you some details behind the deal: http://www.ultimaterollercoaster.com/forums/cgi/forum1.cgi?read=201152 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolliger&Mabillard Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 ^ 1. I never said i305 was cheap, so pulling up one example isn't enough to sway your arguement. 2. I read the posts on the link you provided, which STILL provides NO concrete evidence that this alleged exclusitivity contract exists. Until someone can PROVE that this contract is the determining factor as to why these parks haven't bought B&M's, you can't say that it is. With that said, here is a small list from the top of my head of parks that were CORPORATELY OWNED, of DECENT SIZE, and either has not bought B&M's, or went YEARS without them: Six Flags Darien Lake Six Flags Astro World Six Flags Mexico Canada's Wonderland Kings Island Universal Studios Hollywood Ca. Great America Vallyfair! and those are the ones that just come to mind... Heck, I have no proof to say it doesn't exist, but no one can prove that it does. And the sole arguement of people that are swearing this thing does exist, they say these two parks don't have B&M's...I just named EIGHT corporate parks that either have none or have gone for a while without them. Is there some type of contract to prevent them from it too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDCOASTERFAN Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 Man, now I am glad I got out of this argument in its beginning stages. Now, there are so many opinions and replies my I get a headache reading them all. What I notice is people keep going back to the point that a B&M Stand up was planned for Six Flags America, but they decided for Kings Dominion's Flying Dutchman which KD passed on. Problem with this argument is Batwing opened in 2001, so from 2001-2009 how can anyone assume a contract was not made between Busch Gardens and Six Flags America? If anyone had solid info. that proved there was not a contract in these 8 years, wouldn't it have got out by now? The deal with Paramount Parks and Vekoma was that Paramount Parks had exclusivity on the Vekoma Flyers provided they purchased "x" amount of these coasters in a certain time frame. When Paramount Parks did not purchase another flyer, SF/Premier Parks stepped up immediately and purchased two flyers. One went to Six Flags World of Adventure (Geagua Lake) and opened as X-Flight. The other of course is Batwing. Let's at least get the history lesson correct. What would a contract between BGE and SFA have to do with anything? There has been speculation for a very long time that BGE has an exclusivity clause with B&M that prevents B&M from selling new coasters to KD and possibly even SFA. The problem is it's been all speculation with no proof. Neither park has installed a new B&M. In my opinion, I believe that there may be in fact an exclusivity clause with BGE and B&M for the simple fact that Cedar Fair has dropped B&M hypers in 3 of the 5 former Paramount Parks. They've put in Behemoth at Canada's Wonderland, Diamondback at King's Island, and are currently installing Intimidator at Carowinds. KD is getting an Intamin Giga. Why hasn't there been a new B&M in the past fifteen years at KD if there isn't an exclusivity clause between BGE and B&M? Why hasn't SFA purchased a B&M? They installed seven coasters over a six year period. Three Vekomas, a GCII, an Intamin, a Zamperla, and a Premier Rides coaster. Makes no sense because,new or used Dominator would not have been installed at KD if such a contract existed & even then said contract might've only applied to their hypercoasters seeing as AC was BGE's big new ride of the time. SFA never got their B&M simply because Burke & Co. chose to give those rides to parks like GRAM,GRADV or SFMM during their "let's spoil these three parks rotten at the expense of the others" phase,they supposedly were gonna get SFNE's floorless but the county wouldn't approve the vehicle design due to emergency evacuation procedures so that's how we allegedly lost that ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airtime Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 they supposedly were gonna get SFNE's floorless but the county wouldn't approve the vehicle design due to emergency evacuation procedures so that's how we allegedly lost that ride. Where did you get that from? So they approve Two Face instead? A ride that has absolutely no evacuation system on the lift at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HCLcoasters Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 ^^ Dominator wasn't a new ride. It was moved and the contract wouldn't cover that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 they supposedly were gonna get SFNE's floorless but the county wouldn't approve the vehicle design due to emergency evacuation procedures so that's how we allegedly lost that ride. Where did you get that from? So they approve Two Face instead? A ride that has absolutely no evacuation system on the lift at all? Gotta love all the internet rumors, eh Airtime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiminn6 Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 ^1. I never said i305 was cheap, so pulling up one example isn't enough to sway your arguement. 2. I read the posts on the link you provided, which STILL provides NO concrete evidence that this alleged exclusitivity contract exists. Until someone can PROVE that this contract is the determining factor as to why these parks haven't bought B&M's, you can't say that it is. With that said, here is a small list from the top of my head of parks that were CORPORATELY OWNED, of DECENT SIZE, and either has not bought B&M's, or went YEARS without them: Six Flags Darien Lake Six Flags Astro World Six Flags Mexico Canada's Wonderland Kings Island Universal Studios Hollywood Ca. Great America Vallyfair! and those are the ones that just come to mind... Heck, I have no proof to say it doesn't exist, but no one can prove that it does. And the sole arguement of people that are swearing this thing does exist, they say these two parks don't have B&M's...I just named EIGHT corporate parks that either have none or have gone for a while without them. Is there some type of contract to prevent them from it too? 1. Six Flags Darien Lake is now Darien Lake and its really not big at all. It was one of Six Flags's small parks that's part of the reason they sold it. 2. Universal Studios & IOA are basically the same park.. and IAO has 3 B&M's. Infact I heard B&M was going to build HRRR but was too busy.. ^Just pointing it out there. Anyways lets get back on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 ^Only 1. Darien Lake was under the SF name for a while and still never received a B&M. 2. I'd blow somebody if we had IOA at Universal Studios Hollywood. Alright, now let's get back on topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 Unless a contract is actually proven between Busch and B&M, chances are, the contract doesn't exist and that its just an internet rumor based on Busch's love for B&Ms. The main reason why KD and SFA probably haven't added a B&M coaster for a long period of time probably has to do with the park either not wanting a new B&M or their parent companies not investing a B&M into the park. Why hasn't there been a new B&M in the past fifteen years at KD if there isn't an exclusivity clause between BGE and B&M? There are many factors that can play into the reason why KD and SFA haven't gotten a B&M... - The parent company doesn't want to invest a large coaster like a B&M into the park - The park cannot pay off something the size of a B&M - CF felt that Intimidator 305 would best fit in KD so they opted bringing a giga to KD instead of a hyper. - Intimidator and Shoot the Rapids was part of a deal with Intamin where a possible discount was involved. Maybe two rides for the price of one! - KD wanted to go the extra mile and decided to turn down an offer for a hyper in exchange for a giga. - A combination of many different factors If there really was a B&M exclusivity contract between Busch, a lot of money would have to be exchanged in order to cover lost sales. And B&Ms aren't very cheap to begin with compared to other companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carolinacaniac Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 Could also have to do with B&M's self-imposed height limit with the KD Intimidator being 305 feet tall. Isn't the limit for B&M around 230 or so? -Gary T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 - The parent company doesn't want to invest a large coaster like a B&M into the park - The park cannot pay off something the size of a B&M - CF felt that Intimidator 305 would best fit in KD so they opted bringing a giga to KD instead of a hyper. - Intimidator and Shoot the Rapids was part of a deal with Intamin where a possible discount was involved. Maybe two rides for the price of one! - KD wanted to go the extra mile and decided to turn down an offer for a hyper in exchange for a giga. - A combination of many different factors Taking the tone of other posters on this site, PROVE IT!!! Simmer down. I'm just busting your chops. I don't agree with any of the points you made but this conversation is probably best suited for the KD thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 ^ Can you prove that B&M and Busch have an exclusivity contract??? I just put out other possible reasons why KD/SFA hasn't built a B&M in years. Granted it might not be true; however, the B&M exclusivity contract could be a fake as well. At this point you never know. At this point, its all rumors. There's no fact involved. I don't agree with any of the points you made Why not? Instead of busting my chops why not develop your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 - The parent company doesn't want to invest a large coaster like a B&M into the park Yet they are spending $25 million for I305. I'm sure Volcano wasn't a cheap investment either especially with all the set backs the project had. RCDB does not list the cost as they sometimes do when they have the information. - - The park cannot pay off something the size of a B&M See above. - CF felt that Intimidator 305 would best fit in KD so they opted bringing a giga to KD instead of a hyper. Doubtful. They probably chose a giga over a hyper because their nearest competitor built a similar ride nearly a decade ago. Not saying it's not plausable that two parks so close to each other wouldn't install similar coasters, but, I don't think anyone would argue that I305 is going to be KD's signature attraction when it opens. If an exclusivity contract does not exist, why not go with the company that has a flawless safety record compared to the company that's constantly being sued every time some is ejected from their rides. CF has plopped B&M Hypers in three of the five former Paramount Parks. Obviously CF is happy with what they're received in Behemoth and Diamondback, why wouldn't they continue this trend, IF an exclusity contract does not exist. - Intimidator and Shoot the Rapids was part of a deal with Intamin where a possible discount was involved. Maybe two rides for the price of one! IntaRide (Intamin) is a business. They strive to make the most money for themselves just as every other company tries to do. KD's $25 million investment is hardly a discount for a coaster of this proportion. CP's Shoot the Rapids is a $10.5 million investment. That's a lot of cash for a water ride. - KD wanted to go the extra mile and decided to turn down an offer for a hyper in exchange for a giga What makes you think Intamin even offered a hyper to CF/KD? With the success of Millennium Force, I think CF had a giga in mind for KD all along. It's not like Intamin pulled this idea out of a hat. How'd that conversation go? KD- "Intamin, we want a record breaking hyper coaster" Intamin- "We're so glad you chose us." KD- "We want something tall, something steep, and filled with airtime. Oh yes, we also want OTSR." Intamin- "Have you considered making a splash in that market and going up a hundred feet to a giga model?" KD- "That's a great idea. Yeah, let's do that instead." Obviously that's a little over the top. Were you in the room when KD decided to "exchange" a hyper for a giga? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolliger&Mabillard Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Were you in the room when KD decided to "exchange" a hyper for a giga? Were you in the room when the Busch-B&M contract was signed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 ^yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolliger&Mabillard Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 ^Then would you kindly elaborate the details to end this back and forth squabbling once and for all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-RadG Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 - The parent company doesn't want to invest a large coaster like a B&M into the park Yet they are spending $25 million for I305. I'm sure Volcano wasn't a cheap investment either especially with all the set backs the project had. RCDB does not list the cost as they sometimes do when they have the information. Volcano was $20,000,000. Which when it was built, no B&M Hyper was at BGW, so Paramount could have pushed B&M to make them a Hyper for roughly the same price, but instead went with Volcano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDCOASTERFAN Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 ^Only1. Darien Lake was under the SF name for a while and still never received a B&M. 2. I'd blow somebody if we had IOA at Universal Studios Hollywood. Alright, now let's get back on topic Sadly SFDL was one of those parks that didn't recieve much investment from SFI following the 99 season when their superman coaster(the original mind you) was installed....they also installed the top spin that SFA was supposed to add that had been sitting on site next to JJ when the park opened in 99 but added octopus instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEAPUgrad Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Actually no I wasn't in the room when said contract was signed. I just wanted to get you off my back. You've been riding me for some tme. Fact of the matter is our community is built around rumors and hearsay. You won't find many theme park insiders on these forums. And if you do, they have to sign confidentiality clauses at the start of their employment. Everyone knows someone "in the know" and everyone has different sources. The people who have told me about an existing contract are some of "those people" who are always in the know about what's going on behind the scenes. They may have previously worked for a manufactuer, may run well known websites, may be high ranking members of certain clubs etc. Whatever the case may be, there are people in the community who seem to always be in the know. I'm not in the know but I have quite a few friends who are. When they tell me stuff like that, I take their word for it. Years and years of friendshipa and trade secrets come true, I usually believe them. Doesn't mean that they are always right. Many of these people have said that SFA will be getting a new steel coaster in 2011. I have received first hand knowledge of that information as well. Can we get this thread back to SFA? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolliger&Mabillard Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 ^The topic will resume shortly, But before that, I'd just like you to know: It's nothing personal. Most of the base of this group have either worked at a park, or still work at a park. In doing so you can occasionally come across sensitive information that can get you in SERIOUS trouble (perhaps even legally) if you were to make that information public before the park would like to, or at all. That's not my problem at all. If you happen to catch wind of things ahead of time, (as I occasionally do someties) that's fine and dandy, and if you want to let rumors fly from that information and drop hints so be it. However, it becomes problematic when you claim to "know" information and state it for fact, yet are reluctant to reveal the information, it becomes hard for others to accept that same information as "FACT". Example: Coaster Nerd 1: Six Flags America is getting a new ride in 2011. Coaster Nerd 2: Really? Where did you hear that from? Coaster Nerd 1: I can't release that information. Point is, there is a thin line between a claim you have sources for and DECLINE to cite them and a claim you HAVE NO EVIDENCE of. However to the reader, there is no difference. Point is, if YOU specifically have insider information that you would wish to make public, you shouldn't explicitly say them, as people WILL question where the information came from. and if you can't or choose not to state where it came from, then you can't disregard anyone else's claim. You may know in your mind what the circumstances are, but if that information is not a common base for the arguement, you can't dismiss anyone's analysis, yet you have done that for the past several posts. Again, this is NOT in any hostility or flaming in any way, nor are there any hard feelings. Heck I don't even know you! I'm just saying for the sake of the argument if you want to state facts, back them up. If you have facts but choose not to cite where the fact came from, don't use it as "fact". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now