jamesdillaman Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^ NO, listen to reason. X-Flight cost 15 Million dollars to build at GL. Too much money for that park, right? Agreed. Moving it and rebuilding it at King's Island costs less than 1 Million dollars. Quote: "The move from Geauga Lake, which has about 750,000 visitors a year, to Kings Island, with more than three million visitors a year, will cost about $750,000 — far below what a new coaster would cost, Kaiser said." http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/content/oh/story/news/local/2007/02/07/pjm020807kiride.html Steel venom only cost 8.5 Million new. Moving it and reconstructing it will definitely costs under 1 million dollars, as it is not nearly the size of X-Flight. -James "OMG MiA can afford to install a cheap attraction like a relocated Steel Venom!!!!!" Dillaman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginzo Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Holiday World IS growing, there's no doubt about that. But even with its 8% attendance increase, it still to date, has drawn at the most 627,448 guests in a season. Even that's not a lot. Huh? AFAIK, they made 1 million guests in 2006. http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=19983 That's pretty damn amazing considering they're in the middle of NOWHERE. Seriously, the first time we drove out there my gf thought it was a joke. It seemed like there was no way there could be a park out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 THEY MADE $19 MIL in 2005 -- THAT'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY. There is NO WAY IN HELL, Cedar Fair will EVER spend $10 Million on a single attraction for this park. $7 Million is about as much as the will EVER see. The ROI is not there, and it is NEVER going to be there. I never said that the park is going to get a $20 million hyper coaster next year. What I'm saying is totally getting blown out of proportion. And are you guys psychic or something? What with all these predictions that the park will NEVER get bigger, and will NEVER get more people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraxleRIDAH Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 Holiday World IS growing, there's no doubt about that. But even with its 8% attendance increase, it still to date, has drawn at the most 627,448 guests in a season. Even that's not a lot. Huh? AFAIK, they made 1 million guests in 2006. http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=19983 That's pretty damn amazing considering they're in the middle of NOWHERE. Seriously, the first time we drove out there my gf thought it was a joke. It seemed like there was no way there could be a park out there. My mistake. I pulled up an article about Holiday World's attendance increase and it was from a few years ago. Should've checked twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 "Rome wasn't built in a day". All we're saying is that MiA has the potential to be a good park if it gets alot of attention. And not the SF type attention of drop 4 roller coasters in. General park improvements, a few smaller rides building in size here and there. Give it a few years and you could be surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginzo Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 My mistake. I pulled up an article about Holiday World's attendance increase and it was from a few years ago. Should've checked twice. No big deal. I wonder how much they can build that place up. They're going to need to put in another hotel before long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkchan Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 If they do put up a hotel, will it be with the help of Holiday Inn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
**McFly** Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^ Did you ever go to Sea World Ohio? Nothing like the Cleveland Zoo, two different entities. Unfortunately most of the animal area was killed by Six Flags. I agree with cjeagle35, GL would be in much better shape attendance wise if there was still Sea World Ohio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraxleRIDAH Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 You don't think Steve Wynn is up to the task? I can see it now: __W Y N N__ Holiday World Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjeagle35 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^ NO, listen to reason. X-Flight cost 15 Million dollars to build at GL. Too much money for that park, right? Agreed. Moving it and rebuilding it at King's Island costs less than 1 Million dollars. Quote: "The move from Geauga Lake, which has about 750,000 visitors a year, to Kings Island, with more than three million visitors a year, will cost about $750,000 — far below what a new coaster would cost, Kaiser said." http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/content/oh/story/news/local/2007/02/07/pjm020807kiride.html Steel venom only cost 8.5 Million new. Moving it and reconstructing it will definitely costs under 1 million dollars, as it is not nearly the size of X-Flight. -James "OMG MiA can afford to install a cheap attraction like a relocated Steel Venom!!!!!" Dillaman Obvisouly Steel Venom could be put in cheaply, I accept that. As I've said a few times already, its the operating costs that MiA wouldn't be able to handle. That ride uses tons of power, and as the park doesn't make much to begin with, to pay for all the power would severly cut into their profit. Also do you really think Steel Venom would add that much more to the park than a Gerstlaur Eurofight or a GCI woodie would add. Yes its a fun ride, but I don't think its installation would really help the park grow like one of those coasters would. I like Impulses, but I'd rather ride a long, full length coaster, that offers various elements. I just don't think a costly Impulse would be best for the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satoshi Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^Unfortunately most of the animal area was killed by Six Flags. i think Six Flags parks really needs animal areas for family fun because the slogan on the posters say like 'Let Ya Enjoy For Family Fun'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesdillaman Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^ Did you ever go to Sea World Ohio? Nothing like the Cleveland Zoo, two different entities. Unfortunately most of the animal area was killed by Six Flags. I agree with cjeagle35, GL would be in much better shape attendance wise if there was still Sea World Ohio. Yes, I loved Sea World Ohio, but that was destroyed long before Cedar Fair took over, and is a lost cause if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginzo Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 They could buy this: http://italintl.com/detail_page.php?record_id=940 I think it's the old Myrtle Beach Pavilian Hurricane. Although I'm no expert, I'd imagine that those hybrid structures move well as they're mostly steel. They'd have to dig up a few trains for it though, as those are already sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadley Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 From some conversations I was having months back I'm totally convinced GL is not concerned with the attendance. Comments that were made in the past seem to point to GL being a nice regional park that will play off CP's close proximity outside of the local attendees. They seem to be content with the idea of having 1,000,000 maybe a little over that. SF believed that if you'd build it people would automatically just show up, despite how crappy everything might be. Installing 5 coasters in two seasons, (Batman, Villain, Serial Thriller, Roadrunner Express, and then adding X-Flight the following season) because of this attitude was a big mistake. True it did bolster the attendance for a while, but for the long run...nada! CP is just stepping in and fixing the mistakes SF made, no matter how controversial they may seem. Though I wish they could've kept the animals too, it just wasn't a safe move for a company that admits, (as posted above) they have very little experience with that area. Me personally, I see so much improvement everytime I go to the park. The rides are more reliable than ever, the employees are more caring, food stands are open and well stocked/staffed, pathways are incredibly clean from what I experienced in the past. GL is on the right path, and though they'll never be a cash cow for CF...I really don't believe that's their intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollerC Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^ Did you ever go to Sea World Ohio? Nothing like the Cleveland Zoo, two different entities. Unfortunately most of the animal area was killed by Six Flags. I agree with cjeagle35, GL would be in much better shape attendance wise if there was still Sea World Ohio. I'v been to both and the Cleveland Zoo is way better than SWO. Theres alot more to do and the atmosphere is way better. BTW, the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo reached over 1 million(1,203,403 to be exact) guests for the 06 Season. Sea World wasn't much of a lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjeagle35 Posted February 8, 2007 Share Posted February 8, 2007 ^I disagree, I think Sea World definatly pulled families into the Aurora area. That in turn would helped GL, as families would make a nice stay out of it, taking 2 days to see both parks. Sea World was definatly a great draw in getting what CF wants for this park, families. Now, I've never been to the Cleveland Zoo, and I'm sure its great place, but both parks could have stayed. Sea World is a different experiance than a local zoo. Also, I do think that if Busch wanted to, they could keep their share of the market. Busch parks are run very well, and I think they could handle a local zoo. What it seems to me, is that Busch decided they couldn't run SWO, like they could the other sea worlds. In the past decade, we've seen those parks install some very high quality thrill attractions, when the parks used to be only about Shamu. But with an amusement park across the way and not having the abilitity to run year round, Busch decided to sell the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollerC Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 ^I disagree, I think Sea World definatly pulled families into the Aurora area. That in turn would helped GL, as families would make a nice stay out of it, taking 2 days to see both parks. Sea World was definatly a great draw in getting what CF wants for this park, families. Now, I've never been to the Cleveland Zoo, and I'm sure its great place, but both parks could have stayed. Sea World is a different experiance than a local zoo. Also, I do think that if Busch wanted to, they could keep their share of the market. Busch parks are run very well, and I think they could handle a local zoo. What it seems to me, is that Busch decided they couldn't run SWO, like they could the other sea worlds. In the past decade, we've seen those parks install some very high quality thrill attractions, when the parks used to be only about Shamu. But with an amusement park across the way and not having the abilitity to run year round, Busch decided to sell the park. They would have a hard time running it up here. From what I heard, they wanted to sell ever since the boat accident. Also, it's very hard to run a marine park where the temps get into the negatives sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Masked_Maverick Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 The one time I went to that park when it was Six Flags was very disappointed on how the animal side was maintained. It was dirty and a lot of the animals looked like they were sick. Busch kept that park up a lot better than SF did. Call me crazy but I think that CF made the right move by not keeping that part an animal park but turning it into a kick @$$ waterpark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingScooter Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I loved the animals. The animal side was looking a bit ragged, but the shows were great. I thought the bird show was amazing. I can see why Cf didn't want to deal with animals as they are more expensive to maintain over time than any coaster. I just found it hard to believe that 6F sold it so soon after they invested so much money into it. I've been to GL twice since the CF buyout. Under 6F we went about 16 times a season, and in the last two years, mostly for the animal shows. The shows never got boring. There's no comparison btwn the MetroParks Zoo and SW/6FWOA. They were two totally differant things. (the penguins had a nicer area at SW though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedB Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 Why have we let this get into another debate about the old animal side of the park? They're gone and never coming back. Get over it. Now back to GL improvements. Geauga Lake is in desperate need of one thing, flats. I would expect that to be their next new attraction. Getting rid of these coasters makes plenty of room for a good flat or two. However as stated earlier in this thread they could also put a decent dark ride in that spot. Would fit in nicely with their new 'family atmosphere' to. My question is what kind of flat or dark ride you would like to see. Right now I'm liking the idea of a Huss giant frisbee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coaster05 Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I have heard the dark ride thing mentioned by others and does any CF park have a dark ride? I know the Paramounts did, but do any of the CF parks before this aquisiton have any. If not why do we believe they are going to start adding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedB Posted February 9, 2007 Share Posted February 9, 2007 I can only speak for Cedar Point and Geauga Lake and they don't. As for why they would start adding them now, it may just be wishful thinking. However they do seem to finally be off their record trip and adding theming (see Maverick) so who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coaster05 Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 I am looking forward to Maverick, but I swear I am going to end up feeding someone there own colon if they keep rambling on about how amazing the theming looks. Adding rocks and older buildings to a ride located in the only themed area of the park does not make CP into Disney. Until I see it I am not ready to add CF to theme park catergory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedB Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 ^ Don't believe I said any of that. CP and Disney are not comparable. I'm just saying this is a big change for CP and Cedar Fair in general after publicly saying before that they don't do theming and don't plan to. And I'm hoping that this change is a sign that they will start doing more things they used to not do, such as dark rides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingScooter Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Why have we let this get into another debate about the old animal side of the park? They're gone and never coming back. Get over it. quote] Maybe the reason for this is some believe that bringing animals back might boost attendance figures. It could happen. I wouldn't be so quick to say 'Never'. SW was there a long time, making good money until the boat accident. Future technologies might make future seaworld type parks more profitable in northern climates. Twenty years ago, if anyone would've told me about indoor snow skiing i would've said they were crazy, yet now they have them in desert climates. 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