It just bothers me when people pass judgement on an entire park as an entity for things they have no control over. It seems very arrogant and selfish. ----------------- Is it the roar of Kumba or the kumba of Roar? Discuss!
YOU read into things way too much, perhaps what I was doing was making a joke. You seem to be a little emotional when it comes to this subject.....it really isn't the big deal you're making it out to be.....People have nothing "NEW" to look forward to this year so let 'em look to 2003 and leave them alone if you don't like it
Umm...since we are all roller coaster nuts here. Let's just all be friends!!! I am sure that all of us just are happy that roller coasters exist. Also, I for one don't care if a ride is new or old etc. I just want to ride them!!! ----------------- SFGAm 2003: B&M Flyer!?!?!
...Just realize that people bend over backwards there for you and to get totally dissed for something out of their hands is very very disrespectful. I apologize for some of the words I chose to use, but this is a recurring theme, and it seems to be mostly directed at SF parks. And in some cases, rightfully so. But for SFGAm to be guilty by association is BS in my opinion. ----------------- Is it the roar of Kumba or the kumba of Roar? Discuss!
When parks sign contracts with B&M or any other Manuf. does that mean they get some kinda of discont or there first ride or something ? Or is like a promise that that park will buy so many coasters from B&M ?
i have also heard this from very reliable scource. it was not a contract rather a plan to put two more b&m coasters in sfgam in a low number of years the first being raging bull. i am expecting it in 2003
That would be great if it's true. Though I would hate to see SFGam remove an old (but good) ride just to make way for something new. There are always rumors that one of the older rides is going to be next on the chopping block. I would hope that there could be some compromise to retain what the park already has and still add new and thrilling rides.
