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

Kentucky Kingdom (SFKK, KK) Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

I don't think I've seen anyone mention the best news of all. We will never ever again have to hear anyone say, "Doesn't Six Flags have exclusive rights to the iron horse technology?"

 

i'm more interested in not hearing six flags say they have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really?! The coaster is great, but the name, I can't stand. They now have 3, that's right,3 coasters named after some kind of storm!!!

They have Thunder Run, Lightning Run, and now Storm Chaser?!?! I was hoping for something like Revenge of the Twins, but this?!?!?! I'm clearly not amused.

 

The weather in the Kingdom of Kentucky sucks and they want to make sure you know about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really?! The coaster is great, but the name, I can't stand. They now have 3, that's right,3 coasters named after some kind of storm!!!

They have Thunder Run, Lightning Run, and now Storm Chaser?!?! I was hoping for something like Revenge of the Twins, but this?!?!?! I'm clearly not amused.

 

The weather in the Kingdom of Kentucky sucks and they want to make sure you know about it.

 

I like it that they've coordinated the names of their coasters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

I think it's tough to compare the decisions of KK and CP as they are in completely different generations of existence. I do think KK is going about this the right way. Distancing themselves from Twisted Twins when marketing this new ride.

 

I think Cedar Point would profit more however on the demolition of Mean Streak and creation of a new ride or two in the existing Mean Streak footprint. Their reputation of "The World's Best Collection of Roller Coasters" wouldn't suffer by an RMC rework of Mean Streak, but it wouldn't be enhanced. I think New Texas Giant really is driving their desire to not rework Mean Streak. The fact that they would more than likely be getting a clone of someone else's ride would be a shot to their collective egos. I know they have some clones there now, but they haven't installed one in quite some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

I think it's tough to compare the decisions of KK and CP as they are in completely different generations of existence. I do think KK is going about this the right way. Distancing themselves from Twisted Twins when marketing this new ride.

 

I think Cedar Point would profit more however on the demolition of Mean Streak and creation of a new ride or two in the existing Mean Streak footprint. Their reputation of "The World's Best Collection of Roller Coasters" wouldn't suffer by an RMC rework of Mean Streak, but it wouldn't be enhanced. I think New Texas Giant really is driving their desire to not rework Mean Streak. The fact that they would more than likely be getting a clone of someone else's ride would be a shot to their collective egos. I know they have some clones there now, but they haven't installed one in quite some time.

So what if one park is in earlier stages than the other, they both want to make the most money possible. KK and CP would both go through pretty much the same thought process, just different budgets.

 

If RMC Mean Streak happens theres no chance its a clone of Texas giant. The rides are very close in layout but they have some distinct differences. Plus, RMC has upped their game sense NTG. They can build what ever would fit on the structure and the end product will be nothing like NTG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

I think it's tough to compare the decisions of KK and CP as they are in completely different generations of existence. I do think KK is going about this the right way. Distancing themselves from Twisted Twins when marketing this new ride.

 

I think Cedar Point would profit more however on the demolition of Mean Streak and creation of a new ride or two in the existing Mean Streak footprint. Their reputation of "The World's Best Collection of Roller Coasters" wouldn't suffer by an RMC rework of Mean Streak, but it wouldn't be enhanced. I think New Texas Giant really is driving their desire to not rework Mean Streak. The fact that they would more than likely be getting a clone of someone else's ride would be a shot to their collective egos. I know they have some clones there now, but they haven't installed one in quite some time.

 

 

Iron Streak could be similar, yet different from New Texas Giant. At a minimum it would probably have a couple of inversions.

 

CP has put a lot of new (and improved) rides toward the front of the park. Upgrading Mean Streak would add a great ride at the back. It might even be better than Maverick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

I think it's tough to compare the decisions of KK and CP as they are in completely different generations of existence. I do think KK is going about this the right way. Distancing themselves from Twisted Twins when marketing this new ride.

 

I think Cedar Point would profit more however on the demolition of Mean Streak and creation of a new ride or two in the existing Mean Streak footprint. Their reputation of "The World's Best Collection of Roller Coasters" wouldn't suffer by an RMC rework of Mean Streak, but it wouldn't be enhanced. I think New Texas Giant really is driving their desire to not rework Mean Streak. The fact that they would more than likely be getting a clone of someone else's ride would be a shot to their collective egos. I know they have some clones there now, but they haven't installed one in quite some time.

...It might even be better than Maverick.

...say what now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

How does this clear up the myth? It all depends on the size/design of the make-over and the size/design of the new coaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Exactly. Other factors include how easy it is to lay the new track. Mean Streak is such a tangled POS that the labor costs would likely be the largest factor in not making it over. That and its really not a good layout to begin with. The same can be said for Ghostrider, it would not be easy to fly in steal on that ride. So in a way, if that rumor is true in regards to a CF bigwig making that statement, its plausible to be correct in regards to their specific projects.

 

In the case of Twisted Twins, the biggest hurdle there is that they are working in the flight path of the airport, cranes can only be extended so high without a permit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey here's another myth this new ride should hopefully clear up. Awhile back in the CP thread it was stated that one of the Cedar Fair higher-ups said that CF crunched the numbers and found that an RMC make-over doesn't actually cost less than building a new coaster from scratch. I always thought this sounded dubious, but I'd say now it's even more suspect. You can't say the only reason to do the make-over is for marketing, profiting off of a ride that already has some level of notoriety, because KK isn't marketing this as the return of Twisted Twins. They're marketing it as a completely new, unrelated ride. So if it really was cheaper to bulldoze TT and start fresh, I'm pretty sure that's what they would have done.

 

How does this clear up the myth? It all depends on the size/design of the make-over and the size/design of the new coaster.

 

Assume for a moment that we're comparing apples and apples. KK wants an RMC that's this long, with this many elements. They have the option of remaking TT, or starting from scratch. They decided to remake TT. That would strongly imply it was the cheaper of the two options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They wont have to pour footers, clear land, and half the structure is there. Sounds cheaper to me

This thing's only 2,700 feet long and cost $15,000,000 to have RMC work its magic. Still sound really cheap?

Did you read what the release even said? It said it would cost 15 mil for an entirely new coaster, but they're "saving" money by reusing some of the structure. I think it's safe to assume that if they're "saving" money, they're spending less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It happens to every company. They usually offer prototype or early models a lot cheaper, mainly because a park is taking a major risk by buying it. What if it doesn't work? What if it I a maintenance nightmare? What if it doesn't make the park a return? Those are just a few of the big risks taken.

 

Now that we've seen the high quality and high rating products that RMC offers, their price goes up because people will drop big money to have a world class attraction. Plus there's supply and demand. I'm sure for say 6 million dollars, every park would want RMCs either ground up or rebuilds. But, price has to go up so that only parks willing to pay bigger money can pony up the dough for it. RMC can only handle so many projects at once. Plus it wouldn't surprise me if Six Flags gets discounts from RMC for the amount of rides that they construct for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be lying if I said I wasn't slightly disappointed Twisted Twins will no longer be a dueling coaster. However, this is major for this park and will bring attendance up drastically. I'm sure this will be a favorite in the park and is worth me visiting again after all these years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it wouldn't surprise me if Six Flags gets discounts from RMC for the amount of rides that they construct for them.

 

They probably had/have a contract with RMC. So, yeah, it makes sense if they were to get a discount. It's probably "we'll pay $xxx million upfront if you design x amount of coasters within x caliber over x many years".

 

This could play out well for both of them. Since RMC gets a big lump sum upfront, and Six Flags can get whatever they want, whenever they want with practically no budget constraints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kentucky Kingdom isn't spending 15 Million to redo TT. On the website there is a statement from Ed Hart stating it " would" cost as much as 15 Million to build this New:

 

Since we’re all about creating exceptional thrills at Kentucky Kingdom, Storm Chaser fits the bill. Storm Chaser would normally cost as much as $15 million all-in but we’re saving money by using some of the existing superstructure from Twisted Twins. However, because of the new configuration, taller lift hill, and many other innovative features, we are essentially redesigning and building a new coaster. When’s the last time you dropped ten stories while doing a barrel roll?” – Ed Hart, President and CEO of Kentucky Kingdom

 

I'm still very excited for this Coaster and can't wait til next year. It will definitely be a BIG hit for the park.

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/