hillflyer wrote:Someone told me, “Look out, you put anything about bringing back history on that site (TPR) and they’ll attack you like wolves on a bleeding sheep”. It's so bad, even people that would like to say something positive are afraid to say anything for fear to be reprimanded or banned from this site for God’s sake.
You know we can see you've been on this site for eight years and have made over 500 posts, so I'm confused at why you're acting surprised at the response here. One of the things I love about TPR is the regulars here keep it real, and that's all anyone has done in this thread. Sorry if its not the response you hoped for, but when you put something out there its the risk you take.
Perhaps instead of posting here, you should be out educating the actual residents of Long Beach?
Have a friend who is a coaster enthusiast who lives in Belmont shore who had no idea this concept was still around since the last time you made headlines in 2013 with an LA Times article.
To answer your questions:
1. I don’t live in Long Beach. I’m not putting my name behind a cause in another city that has absolutely nothing for me to believe in besides a cool model. 2. If you are serious about this project, you wouldn’t consider this feedback to be bashing. If theme park nerds are having doubts and asking questions about the funding and operation, what the heck do you think the actual city council/planning commission/coastal commission/actual residents of Long Beach are going to ask?
hillflyer wrote:So the questions I need answers to:
1) What harm it is to YOU, (financially, emotionally, physically) to at least give a wave to someone who’s spent two decades on every facet of this project when you have not lifted a finger? 2) How does bashing the whole concept help (‘because that’s all I know how to do” is not an answer).
1. There is no harm to me. There could be harm to the credibility of the project, when city council is getting all these calls/emails/letters from people who are not their constituents and have no stake or say in anything that happens in their city. 2. No one was "bashing" the project as a whole. There was skepticism, from me and others, and some legitimate criticism of the website, but no "bashing." In fact there even was some positive response on page one.
The fact is that, as you presented this project, it's nothing more than someone's pipe dream. No statement of investors, no real plan other than "rebuild the coaster." The key phrase there is as presented. There may be more to it than you've led on, but with what was shown, you can't blame people for being skeptical of something like that.
And again, I have to stress how little a city council is going to care about input from those outside their jurisdiction. They don't serve us, they serve the voters in that city.
-Mike Total Coasters: 150 Top 10 Steel: Maverick, Skyrush, Intimidator 305, Fury 325, Banshee, Millennium Force, Raptor, Superman: The Ride (SFNE), Top Thrill Dragster, Big Bad Wolf Top 10 Wood: The Beast, El Toro, Phoenix (Knoebels), Boulder Dash, Thunderbolt (KW), Mystic Timbers, Comet (Hershey), Hercules, Shivering Timbers, Jack Rabbit (KW) Top 5 Hybrid: Steel Vengeance, Twisted Timbers, Goliath (SFGAm), Wicked Cyclone, Great White
hillflyer wrote:But please explain to me, what harm it is to YOU, (financially, emotionally, physically) to at least give a wave to someone who’s spent two decades on every facet of this project when you have not lifted a finger?
20 years and nothing to show for it. I didn't have to lift a finger on this imaginary project and I'd have the same results after 20 years as this, nothing.
You only want people to post responses that you want to hear and then cry about how awful you've heard this forum is because people don't agree with you. Ridiculous.
hillflyer wrote:I have NOTHING to lose by at least trying.
No one suggested you did... But you had to know going into this that there was a possibility that the plan wouldn't be warmly received. You've been here long enough and been active enough to understand how these forums work and to recognize that in this environment (or any other forum), you open yourself up to a gamut of responses, positive or negative. It doesn't mean TPR as a whole doesn't support projects--far from it. But the people here that have responded have done so with historical precedent and realism in mind... Just because you think it is a cool idea, it doesn't mean that others don't. I think it would be neat to see the project come to fruition. But I'm also realistic enough to look at industry trends, many of which have been chronicled on these very forums, to recognize that this most likely won't happen based on the information you've presented.
hillflyer wrote:Nobody’s trying to sell anything here. Not trying to scam anyone. But please explain to me, what harm it is to YOU, (financially, emotionally, physically) to at least give a wave to someone who’s spent two decades on every facet of this project when you have not lifted a finger? Not one single bit of kudos to Larry for his brilliant recreations and efforts.
What harm is it to you that others have presented their opinion that this won't likely happen? No one responding here appears to be as invested as you... So what is it that you have to lose by being in the minority here? It is your opinion or hope that it will happen. Others can think differently. That's the beauty of these forums.
hillflyer wrote:Perhaps some of you are more comfortable being on the “popular side” that has the odds, afraid to be wrong, afraid of your name being dragged in the mud. Afraid of being laughed at on social media if you take a chance and support something fun and crazy. If you don’t want have anything to do with it, than shut up.
You don't have the right to demand that others fall in line and entertain this lofty concept as plausible just because you want to wish it into existence.
hillflyer wrote:What ever happened to the spirit of the coaster enthusiast?
Just because people don't believe that a man's model will be built into a full size coaster, it doesn't mean that the coaster enthusiasm is dead. It just means that you're letting this one situation dramatically cloud your view of a MUCH larger landscape... You're taking this all way too personally.
hillflyer wrote:That’s like saying, “I’m not going to spend $10 on a movie ticket unless I know if I like the ending first.” Potential investors, and they do exist, are waiting for the City of Long Beach’s decision but would love to see support!
It's more like, I'm not going to dedicate time and resources to the one person trying relocate Geauga Lake's Big Dipper with one pickup truck.
hillflyer wrote:Nobody cares if you’re of the OPINION that this won’t happen. I’m very aware of the odds, but let the people INVOLVED in this process (the city of Long Beach and Larry) battle this out. It’s not your work, it’s not your dream.
Someone told me, “Look out, you put anything about bringing back history on that site (TPR) and they’ll attack you like wolves on a bleeding sheep”. It's so bad, even people that would like to say something positive are afraid to say anything for fear to be reprimanded or banned from this site for God’s sake.
The members of this forum have supported many efforts to revitalize historical elements of the amusement industry... Dreamland Margate, Conneaut Lake Park, Coney Island, Cypress Gardens/Legoland Florida, Splash Adventure/Alabama Adventure and Kentucky Kingdom are all successful efforts that have received justified support because they had financial support, governmental support and a business plan in place to succeed. The narrative you're inventing for this one concept does not in any way represent how the members of these forums fairly judge projects that succeed and those that never get off of the ground.
hillflyer wrote:1) What harm it is to YOU, (financially, emotionally, physically) to at least give a wave to someone who’s spent two decades on every facet of this project when you have not lifted a finger?
You seem to be the only one emotionally harmed by this discussion... Maybe it is best to let it lay.
I am impressed to find out about this coaster and to think about what it was like to be there. It makes me want to check out Coney Island more, experience that kind of combination of coaster and nostalgia and location. I'm also impressed by the technical work towards the coaster and I bet the model is impressive in person. However I'm skeptical of the current proposal, maybe it takes more imagination from what you have, but the location seems unsuitable. I don't think it would be credible for hundreds of enthusiasts to go "that's great!" to the board over what you are showing, and that's all MOST of us could do for you. I don't know if the perfect time and place for this coaster will happen again. As an exact repro it seems it would have to be part of a larger retro project, as a concept/starting point it would need to be complementary to a more modern ride.
Third post ever, and first in many years, but figured I'd jump in since I am a professional planner (albeit on the East Coast)...
I'd like to know if any of the studies that have been completed and submitted to city officials are publicly available as well. I think if you're trying to drum up support for this thing, providing that information would be helpful. It would give a considerable amount of legitimacy to your argument. Instead of saying that a great deal of information has been given to city officials, maybe show us that information as well. If there's been economic analyses, cost benefit analyses comparing other alternatives for redevelopment of the harbor, survey data showing public support for bringing the coaster back, anything like that, giving us access to it might help build support. Or at the very least, allow for additional conversations.
Second, your mention of Mayor Garcia's call for proposals for redevelopment seems to center around a parking lot known as the "Elephant Lot," which among other things is used as a paddock for Indycar's Grand Prix of Long Beach. The pier proposal has nothing to do with that plot of land, so I'm not sure how it is relevant to the Mayor's desire for redevelopment. If the City wants proposals for a specific area, it'd be helpful to your cause to stick to that specific area. Also, it's unclear why the officials you said to contact are just one councilmember (I'm assuming for that particular area) and the Assistant City Manager. Why just those two, and especially why not the entire council? I don't know the development approval process for Long Beach, but in a situation like this I would expect that this would require at least one vote of approval from City Council, if not more...
Downtown redevelopment is all the rage today, and I feel comfortable speaking for many on this board in saying that a coaster as a centerpiece of downtown redevelopment would be something we'd all like to see in our own cities. Larry's work (not just the model, although wow, it's fantastic) should be commended and I think the members of this board feel that way. But I am 99% certain that other proposals for this area would bring the city quite a bit more money than a roller coaster and other supporting attractions that few, outside of long-time residents of Long Beach, have ever even heard of. My point being, I'd just like to see more information as to WHY this proposal should receive support, which means I'd like to see data, especially in the context of other development proposals.
hillflyer wrote:I understand, perhaps I'm being too pushy...
...and too rude, and totally obnoxious.
If you want our forum to get behind you 100% you're going to need more than what you've presented already. And keep in mind that we aren't a bad resource to have think positively about your project given that we have 2.5 million followers on social media and we did absoultely help the Orlando Skyplex project get their approval.
But coming on our forums with a lack of any sort of real business plan, facts, investors, or anything that someone with even a small amount of business background would want to see, and then being rude and obnoxious to those people on top of it when you get called out for not having those things is quite simply not going to bode well around these parts.
It's great that you may have hopes and dreams, but the people on TPR want to back "reality" and know that hopes and dreams are about is useful as thoughts and prayers.
So please, go back and come up with something substantial that we could get behind and when you are able to present that... GREAT!!!
Until then, you're not going to get much positivity here without a dose of reality.
Last edited by robbalvey on Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:19 am.
These pages are in no way affiliated with nor endorsed by SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Cedar Fair, Legoland, Merlin Entertainment, Blackstone, Tussaud's Group, Six Flags, Universal Theme Parks, the Walt Disney Company or any other theme park company.
photos and videos on this website were taken with the permission of the park by
a professional ride photographer.
For yours and others safety, please do not attempt to take photos or videos at
parks without proper permission.
You need a sense of humor to view our site,
if you don't have a sense of humor, or are easily offended, please turn back
Most of the content on this forum is suitable for all ages. HOWEVER! There may be some content that would be considered rated "PG-13." Theme Park Review is NOT recommended for ages under 13 years of age.