Mean Streak Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Yes we have seen PTRs from Six Flags America. This is six Flags second attempted at a park in the D.C. area. I say it was not the best idea because they went 11 years with out any coasters and from 2003-2010 barley any rides were added besides a new kids area. Two Face the Flip side is now off the property and is Ultra Twister was never built. I say it was not the best idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voxelmatic Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Can you explain how in the world it would be a bad idea? Everyone in the D.C. area who has been there thinks that it isn't the best, but they still have a good time. Sure, the operations aren't the best, but why in the world would that make the park a "bad idea?" They have a good collection of coasters, a lot of variety in the rides they have, and some amazingly (and some not so) themed areas. And hey, if it makes money, it works for Six Flags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Streak Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 It is like Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom people stopped there to ride rides and moved on. It should have been put up for sale in 2006 because it was failing but they needed a D.C. market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalCoasters Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Kentucky Kingdom lost popularity and closed due to SF management removing rides and not replacing them. Coupling that with the fact that they had a bad PR incident and the Fair Board to deal with, SF decided to pull out. It had nothing to do with a failing market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Streak Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 Still look at Six Flags America during the first few years of the permier area they cared then they stopped caring. They left 2 face in SBNO until the after season of 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalCoasters Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 They over-invested in the park at the start, and that is why they haven't given it new additions. Two Face is a Vekoma Inverted Boomerang, which are infamous for having loads of issues. They may not have had the capital to invest in the needed repairs or to investigate a solution. When it was clear that the ride was a money pit, they removed it. Since they over invested, rather than spreading the investments out, the park suffered from lower attendance. The park itself must be doing fine since they just opened a new (sort of) ride, with decent theming. So no, the park was not a bad idea, it's just that the management of the chain left a bit to be desired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 1) Invertigos in general are junk. They're known for being unreliable and stalling in the cobra roll. I'm not surprised Two Face was removed. 2) Premier bought way too many properties in the 90s on top of morphing into the SF chain as we know it today. Buying up parks for the sake of buying up parks isn't really a good idea. SF figured flagging everything and then throwing 2-3 years worth of coasters on top of the newly flagged parks was a good idea. We all know how that plan turned out. 3) Ultra Twister was damaged in shipment, so SFA couldn't build it even if they wanted to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Streak Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 Still they have land on which they can expand to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voxelmatic Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Still they have land on which they can expand to. They do, but why expand so soon when they need to work on the rest of the park first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaronupsidasium Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 According to Wikipedia, Six Flags was bought by Premier Parks, not the other way around. Premier already owned Adventure World and the other parks. I've assumed that Mark Shapiro had been trying to sell SFA as park or as real estate which is why they didn't build any major rides between 2003 and 2010. Since Adventure World/SFA is technically my home park (haven't been there in 8 years), the early Premier management added a new ride each season and the park was pretty fun and exciting to go each year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Streak Posted October 5, 2012 Author Share Posted October 5, 2012 According to Wikipedia, Six Flags was bought by Premier Parks, not the other way around. Premier already owned Adventure World and the other parks. I've assumed that Mark Shapiro had been trying to sell SFA as park or as real estate which is why they didn't build any major rides between 2003 and 2010. Since Adventure World/SFA is technically my home park (haven't been there in 8 years), the early Premier management added a new ride each season and the park was pretty fun and exciting to go each year. The Premier ear was 1998-2005 but if they wanted to sell it why would they redo Hurricane Harbor and add in the only original flying dutchmen to stay at it's original park? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netdvn Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The flyer and water park expansion were added long before SF decided to sell parks off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollercoaster Rider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The flyer and water park expansion were added long before SF decided to sell parks off. The waterpark expansion was in 2005. Six Flags sold parks beginning in 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollercoaster Rider Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 According to Wikipedia, Six Flags was bought by Premier Parks, not the other way around. Premier already owned Adventure World and the other parks. I've assumed that Mark Shapiro had been trying to sell SFA as park or as real estate which is why they didn't build any major rides between 2003 and 2010. Since Adventure World/SFA is technically my home park (haven't been there in 8 years), the early Premier management added a new ride each season and the park was pretty fun and exciting to go each year. The Premier ear was 1998-2005 but if they wanted to sell it why would they redo Hurricane Harbor and add in the only original flying dutchmen to stay at it's original park? Batwing was not the only original Flying Dutchman. There was also X-Flight/Firehawk that was added the same year in 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHcoasterki Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 The spelling mistake in the title is making me cringe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simaticable Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 The park itself was not a bad idea. I could see that Six Flags looked to gain some money from tourism in D.C by buying the property. The only bad idea was the choice of coasters that were placed within the park. Most of the coasters are either carbon copies of others, relocated from different parks, or just forgettable. Given if another company bought the park before Six Flags did, the park could be better off than it is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double0Kevin Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 The spelling mistake in the title is making me cringe... This whole topic is making me cringe. Why wasn't this just posted in the SFA Discussion thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRHcoasterki Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 ^ Good point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzoole Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Why is it being discussed at all? I'm pretty sure this same discussion can be read on every tenth page of the SFA thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSum1_55 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Well, now, to say SFA is a bad idea is almost the same as saying SFDK was a bad idea. Seven coasters were added between 1998 and 2001, while the park would not receieve its next coaster until 2008, and even that was gone within three years. Eleven years went by before SFDK saw a fully new, signature attraction, the same amount of time SFA waited. If the park is turning a profit, it is fine in the eyes of the chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmerleeberry Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Even though I bought a Six Flags season pass this season, I never did go to Six Flags America (I bought the pass at Six Flags New England and used it at Six Flags over Georgia, Six Flags St. Louis, and Six Flags Great America). In fact, the only time I ever bought a Six Flags season pass at Six Flags America was so I can use that pass to enter the other Six Flags parks whenever I'm traveling. During the years I've visited Six Flags America, I often found the park to be less enjoyable compared to the other Six Flags I've been too and the other amusement parks I'd visited. I wonder if the reason could be how many of the rides are run ( such as Mind Eraser - they take too long to load and unload each train), or the fact that so many rides were taken out (some due to being a maintenance nightmare) and not replaced, or it could be the park's layout itself ( many parks have circles in which one area leads into another, but Six Flags America have many dead ends. ). But I have seen this park getting it's act to together in recent years, with the addition of Whistle Stop Station and Apocalypse: The Last Stand. Plus, they'll be adding another water body slide next season. Still, it'll take a few more additions before this park can return to its former glory and have me excited once again for a revisit. PILLOW IS ON VACATION, SO I'LL USE MY FORMER SIGNATURE "I'm not perfect; I just love to ride!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mean Streak Posted October 6, 2012 Author Share Posted October 6, 2012 Well, now, to say SFA is a bad idea is almost the same as saying SFDK was a bad idea. Seven coasters were added between 1998 and 2001, while the park would not receieve its next coaster until 2008, and even that was gone within three years. Eleven years went by before SFDK saw a fully new, signature attraction, the same amount of time SFA waited. If the park is turning a profit, it is fine in the eyes of the chain. SFDK had the animal shows to get attendence from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double0Kevin Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Well, now, to say SFA is a bad idea is almost the same as saying SFDK was a bad idea. Seven coasters were added between 1998 and 2001, while the park would not receieve its next coaster until 2008, and even that was gone within three years. Eleven years went by before SFDK saw a fully new, signature attraction, the same amount of time SFA waited. If the park is turning a profit, it is fine in the eyes of the chain. Typical "if it's not a coaster it's nothing" mentality. SFDK got Zonga on '03, Shouka in '04, Ocean Discovery in '05, Tava's Jungleland in '06, Rebrand and Thomas in '07 and then Tony Hawk in '08. All significant investments that attracted families that bring in money. How was that park a bad idea again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrlittle Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 The spelling mistake in the title is making me cringe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XYZ Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 The spelling mistake in the title is making me cringe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts