WolfBobs wrote:Enthusiasts tend to look at things differently than business people do. To enthusiasts if a park isn't adding a major ride every single season it must be a failure and the corporate office hates them cause they're not getting what they're owed. But the fact that MiA can continue to operate profitably year after year with little investment should be evidence enough that the park is successful.
I think a lot of lessons were learned in the late 90s to mid 2000's about unnecessary investment in parks. Someone mentioned GL. I think the reason this park is left alone is due to the lessons learned from GL. I have a feeling before any major investment happens at this park, even a small new coaster like Tantrum at DL you'll see something older like Corkscrew removed. Not for space, but more for balance and to not tax an already limited labor pool. No point to add more and more rides to a park if the park can't find the additional help to staff them.
People make too much of "lessons being learned" IMO - I think it's simply a situation where the park comfortably makes money but has issues in basic infrastructure and availability of labor/willingness to come up with creative solutions to labor shortages. That combined with what I understand to be the belief at the executive level that expansion at MiAdv probably would cannibalize visitation at Cedar Point from a guest base that is disproportionately likely to be staying on property and burning cash like no one's business means it is safe but never, ever going to be expanded significantly.
For me, I get this. I don't automatically defer to companies and their decision making, so I'd love to know what, if any, serious market research was done to make the choices they have. But I get what's happening. The park isn't in danger. It also isn't very good IMO. To make it "good" wouldn't even necessarily require tons of work or vast outlays of cash. I'm talking about improving pay to be more competitive in the labor market, adding a second train to Wolverine Wildcat, redoing the PLCs for the Wild Mouse so the hourly capacity can exceed 100 people per hour, modifying the restraints on Thunderhawk to make them more comfortable, adding a show - ANY live entertainment, adding a flat ride or two (used even!), upping the quality of the food ever so slightly; things like that. None of that is going to happen though unless they come to believe that making the park a more pleasing experience can actually benefit them, which is a very backhanded way of saying that Michigan's Adventure merely being "good enough" is what the chain and corporation wants.
Not going to Michigan's Adventure as a sort of protest move is only so helpful if Cedar Fair already has your money. OTOH, if you don't give them the same amount because you buy a regular season pass instead to Cedar Point only and give them the feedback that the synergy is important to you in making that specific purchasing decision, then maybe they'll heed us. Maybe not - just because they're profit oriented doesn't mean they're always acting in a rational manner based on evidence. It won't happen any other way.