Big Dipper purchased by another party, effort to dismantle and store underway

ffej said:
Jeff, Am I correct in saying that I have posted before in other topics besides Geauga lake ones ?

Did you miss the part about me not paying attention to you?

Jeff said:

ffej said:
Jeff, Am I correct in saying that I have posted before in other topics besides Geauga lake ones ?

Did you miss the part about me not paying attention to you?

+100

Well it is obvious you are Jeffrey!! You answered me. silly willy!!! And Jerry, what no stupid clueless comment about something you know nothing about?

You're on your last leg, man... you're really not contributing to anything and you're making a lot of noise.

Jeff, I really don't mean to. For the most part I was just defending myself. I am giving a different perspective on the dipper situation. I think the people that bought it should get some support from the "enthusiast" community.

ffej said:
Jeff, I really don't mean to. For the most part I was just defending myself. I am giving a different perspective on the dipper situation. I think the people that bought it should get some support from the "enthusiast" community.

Why does the "enthusiast" community (as you put it) need to feel one way or another about a private transaction between people?

well. a project is set forth to save a roller coaster. This is a roller coaster website. I guess I don't understand why it is not a good idea to try to do something to save a coaster that has made so many cleveland area families happy for longer than any other coaster in the state.

It can easily be a good idea to save a classic ride. However, when an owner treats the whole thing with a level of secrecy akin to Area 51, then you have a problem. The previous owner and his hysterical antics and level of anonymity are what killed enthusiasm for it, IMO.

To bring this full circle, I believe Kat and Harold and their many supporters can enrich that enthusiasm once again. I am willing to bet the coaster will not have trims either... :)

a_hoffman50 said:
I am willing to bet the coaster will not have trims either... :)

That would be great!! They would also have the ability to put the double dip back.

I'm curious if they'll be able to keep the buzz bars or if it will have to be fitted with ratcheting lap bars. I'm not familiar enough with the laws surrounding such things.

Does anyone know why, in the age of internet banking, he had to fedex an aluminum briefcase full of cash to the states for this to happen?

I know its impressive when you walk into a deal with a shady and anonymous dealer and plop down a briefcase full of cash, but even the dealers have moved into the age of just providing you with an account number in the Caymans to make the transfer to.

birdhombre said:
I'm curious if they'll be able to keep the buzz bars or if it will have to be fitted with ratcheting lap bars. I'm not familiar enough with the laws surrounding such things.

Depends largely on where the ride gets rebuilt. Most places here in the States, it would probably receive individual restraints....but I'm not entirely sure to what degree that's "mandated" and to what degree it's simply a matter of getting cheaper insurance rates...

Um... I think a classic coaster was saved right? Not sure with all the back and forth arguing about nonsense going on.

Well, that depends on what you consider 'saved'. I consider it that a classic coaster was purchased and is about to be stored. ;)

Yeah. Big Dipper isn't in any way "saved" yet. It now looks quite promising though.

I think this is a good opertunity to be saved. I agree that it will be saved when it is up and running again. This is better that what could have happened on sept. 15th.

Juggalotus said:
Does anyone know why, in the age of internet banking, he had to fedex an aluminum briefcase full of cash to the states for this to happen?

I know its impressive when you walk into a deal with a shady and anonymous dealer and plop down a briefcase full of cash, but even the dealers have moved into the age of just providing you with an account number in the Caymans to make the transfer to.

I didn't see any mention of a briefcase full of cash in the article. It just said that payment was delivered to the Owner's agent via FedEx. I'm assuming there would have been other documents included, such as signed agreements, which couldn't be handled with a simple wire transfer.

It was just a joke linking the anonymity of the previous owner with needing to fedex the money. Obviously it didn't translate well to the interwebs.