calcajun Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 There is no way. If the park was rebuilt now it would just go bankrupt. Try making some of the locals believe that. Some peeple can be so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameraman Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 They have every right to hold them to that agreement though. I say shame on Gary Story and Kieran Burke for signing such a contract. But I guess they have enough shame without that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollermonkey Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I just listened to the whole SFI conference call, I can't believe that no mention was made of 6FNO in any way. Did they sneak through some sort of buy out with the city of New Orleans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormrider Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Gah, it has to be this particular B&M ride that is the only one that has ever been dismantled? And twice in its lifetime? If it's going to go to Kyongju then I wish them good luck with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the sound Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Give it to Six Flags America! No, Give it to Warner Bros Movie World Australia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calcajun Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Quote from SFI but still no word which park. Batman: The Ride coaster, being analyzied and deconstructed at the Six Flags New Orleans property is being refurbished for installation at another Six Flags property Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airtime&Gravity Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 ^I'd guess SFFT since it is basically the only park that seems to have a chance. Almost all other parks that would benefit from it have a B:TR or SLC. SFGADV-B:TR SFGAM-B:TR/V2/Deja vu SFNE-SLC SFDL-SLC SFA-SLC SFMm-B:TR/Deja vu SFoG-B:TR/Deja vu SFEG-SLC SFoT-B:TR SFDK-SLC SFM-SLC SFKK-SLC SFSTL-B:TR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameraman Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 All I know is they signed a lease that says this: Pursuant to this lease, the Industrial Development Board automatically acquires title to and becomes the owner of all rides, attractions and other leasehold improvements funded with our $25,000,000 investment or with other amounts we invest at the park, subject to all of the terms of the lease. I'm going to see if I can find out more from the Industrial Development Board. Airtime&Gravity - How would it make sense to move it to SFFT? Seaworld has a BTR clone right down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterdude5 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 ^ I didn't know Great White was a clone? I'd say Great Escape (maybe), but they have an SLC on site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo210 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I think the only one that makes sense at the moment is Enchanted Village. Enchanted Village needs a new crowd drawer and B:TR would be a good choice for the park! Also, the Seattle/Vancover area lacks an inverted roller coaster, so I say Enchanted Village! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameraman Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I say Six Flags is trying to pull one behind the city's back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calcajun Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Yeah, I mentioned that on the local site to see if anyone would call some officials about it. I am enjoying this and can't wait to see what kinda interesting stuff comes out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Why can't this ride go to a park that already has an SLC? Think about it....it's not that much different then either Medusa at SFGadv or Scream at SFMM going in when they already had a sitdown 7-looping coaster...... --Robb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterdude5 Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 ^ Good point. They also could remove the SLC. (Thinking maybe SFNE or SFA) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraxleRIDAH Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Why can't this ride go to a park that already has an SLC? Think about it....it's not that much different then either Medusa at SFGadv or Scream at SFMM going in when they already had a sitdown 7-looping coaster...... --Robb Yeah, but there's a different selling point and enough differentiation between a 1989/1990's Arrow Looping coaster and a B&M Floorless coaster to warrant the idea of both in one park. The unique open-air coaches are different enough to set two multi-looping coasters apart. The parks market the rides not based around their 7 inversions, but emphasize their open Floorless coaches that provide a sense and feeling of being strapped in a "Flying Chair" --- gimmick or not, that's really marketable and distinct from a traditional sit-down looper. But what would be the selling point of a Batman clone at a park that already has a Vekoma SLC? A B&M Inverted coaster and a Vekoma SLC are both feet-dangling suspended track coasters that go upside-down and have non-swinging coaches that are fixed rigidly to the chasis. Aside from row-per-row seating arrangements, both types are exactly the same type of ride with not even a difference or change significant enough to be marketed as something new. It would just be a pointless move, IMHO. Even in the case of Six Flags Great America's Demon and ShockWave (both were Arrow looping coasters), ShockWave came more than a decade after Demon and was the world's biggest roller coaster upon opening. And aren't most SLC's taller than the Batman clones by a few feet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameraman Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 They could market it as a ride that doesn't suck. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scaparri Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 I think the only one that makes sense at the moment is Enchanted Village. Enchanted Village needs a new crowd drawer and B:TR would be a good choice for the park! Also, the Seattle/Vancover area lacks an inverted roller coaster, so I say Enchanted Village! As much as I agree with you that Enchanted Village could use the ride, I just don't see anything big going in there given that the park is for sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fakestar Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Maybe it's going to Georgia or one of the other parks with a normal, non-mirrored B:TR, to become the world's most ghetto Duelling Dragons ripoff. Enchanted Village doesn't sound like such a bad idea truthfully. That area is so neglected coasterwise that it would make a big splash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NitroRider Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Junk the SLC at SFA and repaint and put it there! Me want B&M that doesn't require 3 hour drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConleyKE Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Personally, I think it would fit nicely in the back of Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom and replace our SLC T2. They could refurbish the backlot, considering that The Penguins Blizard River and our Stunt Show are back there, and add some much needed themeing to this park. Kevin "I can only dream" Conley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillMontu Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Knowing Six Flags, they might just let it rot in a parking lot somewhere. That's what happened to all of Astroworld's rides, Zonga/Thriller/Tornado, and Greased Lightning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlippyTrick09 Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I was thinking along the lines of some smaller parks but what about Great Escape? Isn't that still owned by Six Flags? Thay seem to have enough "coaster" population in the park for it to fit in. I could almost see it fiting in at Enchanted Village, but it just looks to large for a park with only 4 coasters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the sound Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Junk the SLC at SFA and repaint and put it there! Me want B&M that doesn't require 3 hour drive. Hey, i have to fly 10 hours on a plane to get to my nearest B&M. So stop complaining! I've had an idea. Why doesn't Six Flags move this one to a park which already has a B:TR clone? Wouldn't that be a smart idea! C'mon, its the sort of logic Six Flags could/would use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
verticalzero Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 I have not been on this ride, but why did this B&M Inverted coaster get saved..? I think the Texas Cyclone was more important and should of been moved to a new home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scaparri Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 ^Because it's a much better and marketable ride than the Texas Cyclone, especially if you slap it with some nice Batman theming. Heck, take BTR at SFGAm for example. It's been there for 15 years almost and it's still one of the most popular rides at the park. 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