Cedar Fair announces Geauga Lake will be water park only

Disney hasn't been all gold. There was a good chance that Euro Disney would have been closed (Eisner himself said it was a distinct possibility in the mid-late 90s) if it weren't for private investment in the park. Can you imagine what the "purists" would have said if that happened?

---

Gemini says: He is a lifelong Cleveland resident who told me that he had been to Geauga Lake exactly once in his life. "But we went to Sea World several times." He told me growing up that it was never Cedar Point versus Geauga Lake. He said when they went to an amusement park, it was just always assumed they would go to Cedar Point.

---

That is exactly what it was like in my family, growing up on the east side of Cleveland. Sea World was a place we went to at least once a summer, and we went to Cedar Point several times a summer, including staying at the Breakers. We did try Geauga Lake once in the 70's, never went back as a family. We found the park very unappealing, without the kind of rides and entertainment we liked.

To us, and everyone we knew, Cedar Point was Cleveland's amusement park. Geauga Lake was like the ugly girl that only gets attention when you're drunk. Ok for a quick diversion, but nothing you want to spend a lot of time with.

I was very upset when Sea World was sold to Six Flags. The animal side died with that sale, SFWOA was not even close to providing the experience that was Sea World. And, Sea World was the Aurora park that I cared about and had family memories. Not only did Sea World die, but that sale doomed Geauga Lake also. Gone was the synergy that caused Sea World guests to also support Geauga Lake. With Sea World gone, they didn't come.

After Cedar Fair bought GL I attended the park occasionally for a couple hours at a time. It was an OK time, and I enjoyed Dominator, Villain and Big Dipper. But, that's about it. And by the lack of crowds, it was obvious that Clevelanders didn't really care about the rides side anymore. If they did, they would have came. The price of admission was right, the interest wasn't there.

Do I feel sad about the park? Not really. I feel for the people who are emotional about this issue, and who have memories, but I don't really care personally. My memories and family traditions are with Cedar Point. And I bet that would hold true for the majority of Clevelanders.

I'll probably go to Geauga Lake for a swim with my Platinum Pass next year, if I don't have a lot of time and feel like being in a water park. It's a great water park, and I'm glad it's still open. But, I agree with the person who said CF's mistake was buying the park in the first place. SFWOA would have died soon, so save your money and reputation Cedar Fair.

And, I totally feel embarrassed for the people who need to trash talk Kinzel. Mr. Kinzel is not the villain here, I don't believe CF bought the park with the intention of closing the rides side. Things just didn't work out, and at least the water park is still there. If it remained a Six Flags park, you would probably see lake front condos all the way around the lake right now.

*** This post was edited by Pete 9/24/2007 3:36:48 PM ***

Gonch - Parks aren't just run of the mill businesses. Passion and emotion work into the parks a great deal. To be successful, I'm a firm believer that your management needs to have passion for parks.

I'm actually surprised how cavalier you and Jeff are regarding the closing of the park. Would you not care if your favorite park closed? Geauga Lake was far from my favorite park, but I can at least understand how people are devastated by this and be sympathetic.

I'm also able to see that Cedar Fair had other options besides closing down the park and parting it out. History matters to some people. It's not always just about the almighty dollar. Why not put the ride side up for sale and see if a small company wants to run it next to the Cedar Fair owned and operated Wildwater Kingdom? Two parks, two gates. Sounds familiar to me. Granted the park probably doesn't need another change of ownership, but it's been around for 119 years. Why close something that's only been "struggling" for 6% of its lifetime?

How come you never hear people crying "history" when an old Vegas hotel is torn down to make way for a new one? Just curious.

And, whoa...the parks struggled for MANY of those 119 years. In all that time, I would say the only great success for Geauga Lake was from the mid-70s to the late 90s. You are talking about 1/4 of the lifespan of the park being moderately successful. In fact, you can make a pretty good case that Idora and Euclid Beach Park had better runs but closed much earlier.*** This post was edited by wahoo skipper 9/24/2007 3:45:47 PM ***

---

Would you not care if your favorite park closed?

---

No, I wouldn't. I don't have any emotional attatchment at all to any amusement park. They're fun. I pay for that fun. It's purely a business transaction. I've never gottten emotionally attached to a stripper either. ;)

---

It's not always just about the almighty dollar.

---

But it kind of is. Most of the companies that own and operate these parks do so just for the sole purpose of profit.

---

History matters to some people.

---

Some, yes. But it never seems to be those people who have any say in the decision making process. I guess it is just about the almighty dollar to the owners an operators of many of these parks and rides.

---

Not only can it be ignored, it should be ignored. Letting emotions get it the way of business is a surefire way to fail.

It shouldn't be emotional for you. It certainly wasn't for Cedar Fair and that's why they're able to make what they feel is the best business decision.

---

Ummm. . .No.

Emotions affect business. If people hate you they are less likely to do business with you. Even Munarriz waonders if "that anti-Cedar Fair sentiment will drift 80 miles westward." There is a reason CF released the news on a Friday afternoon when the season was over and it wasn't because it would maximize ROI. The way to do that would be a "last fling at GL" campaign in August. CF wants to minimize the emotional reaction of its potential customers.

And let's look at this business. Amusement parks aren't essentials. People go to them b/c they value the emotional satisfaction they get more than the $$$ they spend. Of course it should be emotional--as a strictly business decision we should never go to any amusement park, we should stash the $$$ for our retirement year. (Unless you are a wealthy web-site owner :) ) But we go for emotional reasons, seeking emotional satisfaction.

Here is a strictly business sceario for you: When CF aquired GL, DON'T build the water park. Use GL's old water park on the GL side. Expand it if you like. Sell off the Sea World side. Heck, remove coasters and add flats if you like.

That was where CF misplayed their hand.

Rob,

You made a good point, but I completely disagree that GL had a lot of value at all in the community. If it did, it would not have been the ghost town it was, and GL would not be closing.

If a consumer cares about a product or a company, they support it by buying it. The Generals Motors plant in my hometown of Defiance is vital to the community. I Buy GM cars because of that. A little thing I can do.

If people cared so much about GL, then why didnt anyone stop by every once in awhile?

---

Emotions affect business. If people hate you they are less likely to do business with you. Even Munarriz waonders if "that anti-Cedar Fair sentiment will drift 80 miles westward." There is a reason CF released the news on a Friday afternoon when the season was over and it wasn't because it would maximize ROI. The way to do that would be a "last fling at GL" campaign in August. CF wants to minimize the emotional reaction of its potential customers.

And let's look at this business. Amusement parks aren't essentials. People go to them b/c they value the emotional satisfaction they get more than the $$$ they spend. Of course it should be emotional--as a strictly business decision we should never go to any amusement park, we should stash the $$$ for our retirement year. (Unless you are a wealthy web-site owner ) But we go for emotional reasons, seeking emotional satisfaction.

---

Great. That applies to the customer in every circumstance you cited.

So what is the business owner's emotional obligation? There is none.

And I still like the stripper/hooker analogies. You're paying for emotional satisfaction. If she lets emotion get it the way it's only going to hurt her business. In fact, swap out "amusement park" with either stripper or hooker (your choice) in that second paragraph I quoted above. It works perfectly because the concept is exactly the same.

It's nice to think she cares, but do you think you'd get time with her if you didn't have the cash?

Do you notice a trend here? Me, Walt and Pete, as best I can tell the only locals in this thread, are completely indifferent about this. What does that tell you? You can imply all kinds of things, but the reality is that for us, it was never a draw, under any owner. And Pete nailed the thing I come back to over and over... SeaWorld was the shiznit.

Interestingly enough, the local Fox affiliate called me about an interview regarding some of the older rides and the park. As much as I'd enjoy a little attention whoring, I told her that I honestly had no strong opinions about it. She asked if I knew anyone else local, and I told her, no, the people who care the most don't even live in the area.

---

I believe this is a great opportunity to ask questions in respect to the future of the property and to possibly determine what lead to the final decision to close this historic park.

---

I would encourage people to go to this, but keep two things in mind. One, it's a local government meeting, and the elected folk don't answer to you. Two, don't be a rude asshole. I say that because I've seen how some people act during Q&A's at CoasterMania and what not. Don't be "that guy."

---

Even Munarriz waonders if "that anti-Cedar Fair sentiment will drift 80 miles westward."

---

What anti-Cedar Fair sentiment? The one in a few comments at the end of the Plain Dealer's only article on the subject? The one from a (relatively) small number of hardcore fans on online message boards? Does Munarriz or anyone else really think the typical Cedar Point guest even makes a Cedar Point - Geauga Lake connection?

On the first business day after the announcement, only one of the four news stations in Cleveland (ABC) has even a mention of Geauga Lake on its front page, and it's a "share your memories" link near the bottom. Are they, along with the Plain Dealer, simply ignoring the overwhelming backlash around town?

Gonch, that was the best analogy ever.
*** This post was edited by joe. 9/24/2007 5:10:23 PM ***

Since it was never stated anywhere for certain, thought I would add that CF confirmed that they do not anticipate reopening the GL Hotel or the Campgrounds.

I had never been to Geauga Lake before this summer. I went to Sea world a couple times when I was younger but never went to the amusement park. If fact I had no recollection of the park being there. So this summer Lumpy72 drug me kicking and screaming to the little park. We were heading to Cedar Point and decided to make a short stop. I enjoyed it, but no one else was there, and the park was not very clean. We were there on a weekday in June. The amusement park side was empty. We walked over to the water park side and it had people on the attractions but it was by no means busy. From a strictly business perspective I can understand why CF is closing the park. If this is what the summer looks like the rest of the year can’t be good.

Rob A:
Or maybe they saw an opportunity to eliminate a competitor by replacing it with a cheap-o waterpark and flipping the valuable land once the park's most significant assets were sent to other parks? Why that's so hard to consider is beyond me.

Why is it so hard to consider? You answered that yourself in the same post:

I see a company that spent more than $100 million on a park ...

It goes back to my earlier comment. Why bother if the killing of the park was the goal in mind in the first place?

Cedar Fair's biggest mistake in my eyes? Buying the park in the first place. The park was doomed at that point. They should have let SF take the fall - in both costs and PR.

Look at it another way entirely. How many 10-coaster, 700+ acre parks exist that pull in well under a million people a year?

Exactly. And they don't exist for a reason.

I find it incredibly amusing how Rob A. never responds to your well executed points Gonch. :)

*** This post was edited by kRaXLeRidAh 9/24/2007 5:31:59 PM ***

Geauga Lake is down to 400 acres.

If they were planning on DOWNSIZING the park, why would they EXPAND the waterpark to the other side, away from the central location of the park itself?

Yeah, because they didn't want that half.

---

Great. That applies to the customer in every circumstance you cited.

So what is the business owner's emotional obligation? There is none.

And I still like the stripper/hooker analogies. You're paying for emotional satisfaction. If she lets emotion get it the way it's only going to hurt her business. In fact, swap out "amusement park" with either stripper or hooker (your choice) in that second paragraph I quoted above. It works perfectly because the concept is exactly the same.

It's nice to think she cares, but do you think you'd get time with her if you didn't have the cash?

---

I believe you proved my point with the stripper anology.

People do not make rational business decisions when chosing a stripper. If a blonde pisses them off, they give their $$$ to a redhead.

An amusement park company or a stripper or a hooker (your choice :) ) will not stay in business without catering to the emotional reactions of it's clientele. They must consider the financial impact that emotional reactions by customers will have to the business.

Munarriz is no emotional fly--he is a cold hard "Foolish" business analyst. HE notes that emotional reactions could affect CF's business.

Why do people choose McDonalds over Burger King? Not because McD's burgers are better or cheaper, but because McD's made a business decision to build an emotional relationship with its customers with Ronald McDonald, Mayor McCheese and the Hamburger at an early age. Do adults make the rational business decision to pass up flame-broiled burgers for microwaved ones? No, they go because they give into their kids (an emotional response) who have emotionally bonded with Playland. (Also, because McD's fries are better)

Would the stripper/hooker do business with cash-bearing customers if they pissed the customers off?

Continue here, please:

http://www.coasterbuzz.com/forum.aspx?mode=thread&TopicID=47833

---

I believe you proved my point with the stripper anology.

People do not make rational business decisions when chosing a stripper. If a blonde pisses them off, they give their $$$ to a redhead.

An amusement park company or a stripper or a hooker (your choice ) will not stay in business without catering to the emotional reactions of it's clientele. They must consider the financial impact that emotional reactions by customers will have to the business.

Munarriz is no emotional fly--he is a cold hard "Foolish" business analyst. HE notes that emotional reactions could affect CF's business.

Why do people choose McDonalds over Burger King? Not because McD's burgers are better or cheaper, but because McD's made a business decision to build an emotional relationship with its customers with Ronald McDonald, Mayor McCheese and the Hamburger at an early age. Do adults make the rational business decision to pass up flame-broiled burgers for microwaved ones? No, they go because they give into their kids (an emotional response) who have emotionally bonded with Playland. (Also, because McD's fries are better)

Would the stripper/hooker do business with cash-bearing customers if they pissed the customers off?

---

I agree with pretty much all of that - except the BK/McD comparison. I do think people choose one or the other based on factors beyond Ronald & Co.

But the problem is that you're taking it to a whole different place. You still haven't explained to me how a business owner should follow his emotions when making business decisions instead of following the plan that makes the most business sense.

I'm not talking about our side of the fence, I'm talking about theirs.

With that said I'll repost my original comment that got us here regarding business owners and emotional choices:

"Not only can it be ignored, it should be ignored. Letting emotions get it the way of business is a surefire way to fail."

You've still said nothing to the contrary.