What is the big deal against park chains (e.g. Premier Parks) cloning their roller coasters? The general feeling that I have gotten from the list is that parks receiving clones of rides (e.g. B:TR) is a bad thing. Personally, I think that it is a good thing that these parks have similar rides. Remembering that when they were founded, Six Flags parks were supposed to be *Regional* parks. In fact, later they started making the claim that no one is more than a days drive away from a Six Flags park. I guess for people with excessive disposable income and can visit a lot of different parks, each park having a totally different experience would be a bonus. But for people like me, who live on the East Coast, I would love to see PKD get a clone of PGA's stealth, because, to put it frankly, Santa Clara is too #@%^ far away! I agree that each park should have a "signature ride" but having a lot of the other rides similar (or cloned) really doesn't bother me. What do you all think?
T H O
I personally don't like clones because I like to travel one different park every summer to ride some new rides. While 2Hostyl makes a good point that a lot of people can not afford to travel to many different parks and clones are the only way to ride certain rides. I disagree with clones being the only way to ride a coaster like Stealth, without traveling to Paramount's Great America, but wouldn't you rather see your home park build a different flying coaster? I would rather parks do this because people who do travel to different parks can get some new rides. That way if you ever do make it to Santa Clara, you can ride Stealth and get a different ride than the one in your home park. That is the reason I would like to see parks build less clones. I want them to expand upon an idea and do something new.
Absolutely right, pkitex87!! I will be making my first out of state trip with roller coasters as the prime destination in less than a month. I am purposely avoiding getting on a clone of things I have already been on before. As far as other Paramount parks getting a clone of stealth, why not make it bigger, faster, longer etc.? After all, that's what it's all about, right?
The one exception with clones would be the Wild Maus rides. I would like to see a Wild Maus on every street corner in the U.S.!!
Oh maybe I'm starting to see what you mean a little bit. Kinda like, it would be okay for every Six Flags park to have a B:TR if each one was somehow different. Like say the one at SFGAm would be the orignal and then like the one at SFMM would have a batwing (why this element isn't in the B:TRs is beyond me), the one at SFGAdv has interlocking flat spins, etc.. Okay that does seem to make a little sense to me. How about then, the late 80's Arrow mega-looper craze. Are Shockwave (SFGAm 87), GASM (SFGAdv 88), and Viper (SFMM 89) really that different of rides? Each sucessive coaster was higher, longer, faster than its predecessor, but essentially the same layout. Comments are welcomed =]
But Roadkill I dont think most of the "chained" parks want you to travel across the country to go to their parks. They just want you to go to the one that is closet to you. They only offer the "season pass good at multiple locations" to get you to buy the pass. Truth be told, most season pass holders only go to a different park once, maybe twice a season. The parks make their money by you coming back and buying their concessions (food etc.) Why else would Six Flags let you bring friends free. Because they know you're likely to eat/drink. Anyway, it seems that the larger chained parks have only ONE "flagship" park to attract people from long distances (SF=Magic Mountain, Paramount=PKI, Cedar Fair=CP). The rest of the parks are there for the locals, not people from across the sevens seas.
Yes, but riddle me this, If the "chained" parks did have less clones, I would be going to my home park AND a trip cross country- this also equates more money to them, multiple visits, multiple parks, multiple food. For example, I have a 6 Flags pass for SFO, yet next week I will travel to Chicago for SFGA for the different coasters. If SFGA only had SFO clones, then that park would not be a priority and they would be losing out on my food budget etc... Not to mention my brother's admission price (he wouldn't be going there otherwise). 6 Flags in essence is reeling me in.
the amount of business they would gain from cross country visitors is INCREDIZBLY small compared to the overall picture that is dominated by local visitor from surronding areas. Think about park decisions in a business sense before a visitor's wish sense. a park is a business not a genie!
Cloning rides makes good sense, particularly for Premier (and I'm sure Vekoma doesn't mind). When you recycle a design you don't have to pay for the R&D again. That means major cost savings.
My only complaint is that the Vekoma rides aren't that great to begin with, so I could do without the countless boomerangs and SLC's. If they installed more of the B&M Batman: The Ride models, I'd be all for it because the one I've been on is an excellent ride.
There are, I've noticed two kinds of Six Flags parks. Some of them never will be more than regional destinations while others are flagships. Of the flagships, I've only been to Great America, but I would also include Magic Mountain and Texas among the signature parks. Some, like Ohio and America, don't really have the potential to be long-distance destinations, I feel. The one that does have an open market, lots of room and a great deal of potential is Darien Lake. It has no significant competition, it just needs more rides.
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
I would love to see more clones.
I think it would be the bomb man,just to go to like PKI and ride the Beast,Vortex,and SOB,and after hitten those coasters you could hit Volcano,Stealth and the FSS.
Oh man talk about a dream come true.:)
I really think that would work as long as the park has 3 or more signature coasters.
I really don't see a problem in clones at parks as long as there are other signature rides in the park that are different. (In other words, I don't want ALL clones.) I don't see any problem with B:TR in the Six Flags parks. In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing one at every Six Flags park.
One thing I would like to see change, even though I know it makes things easier for Six Flags, is the name game. There are how many Vipers, Ninjas, Batmans, Supermans, Flashbacks, Shockwaves? If they would just stick with one name per ride, like all Batman named rides are the B:TR inverted caosters. All of the Flashbacks are the Boomerang models, etc. It's just kind of confusing juggling all of these few names around for so many DIFFERENT coasters.
O.K. To please the masses that dont like the same name used on different coasters than tell Premier to treat the names like the motion picture industry does. Example, Shockwave, Shockwave II the sequel, Shockwave III the sequel to the sequel. The point I am making is does it really matter? When you visit a park do you really care what the name of a ride is? It doesnt change the ride itself. If I went to a park and all of there rides were named exactly the same I would not care.
Soggy said: "...The one exception with clones would be the Wild Maus rides. I would like to see a Wild Maus on every street corner in the U.S.!! !"
Kind of like Walgreen's? I think then you would end up hating them, having so many. Maybe we can solve both problems by replacing a few Walgreens in each city with a Wild Maus. That way there would be far less Walgreens (less than 1 billion), and more roller coasters!
------------- V2, Deja Vu... how can it be better? Add Viper! Oh, wait. It's already there!
Jeff, I have to disagree with you about SFWoA. That park is in a prime location to pull in many guests from far away, just because CP is down the road. I see it like SFMM: they're not trying to get people to come out there just for that park, they're trying to catch the spillover from Disneyland and DCA. And it's a good idea IMO. Very few people are going to go out there and not hit more than one or two parks, especially if a world-class park like SFMM is right there. Same with SFWoA -- people come from all over to visit CP, and even more would come with another great park next to it, so SFWoA has a huge market of travelers in that area. Who is going to travel a long way to CP and not hit SFWoA while they're there?
And I agree with MambaMatt about the names. They should at least keep the names on the same type of rides. Then it's easier to talk to people and easier to see what the park has. I wouldn't hate the park if they didn't do that, but it seems like such an easy thing to do...
StandUpFan: I made that post in June... obviously the game has changed significantly since that time.
I'm not sure I would change my opinion that much, though. Are people going to fly in from the south or the west to go to Six Flags Geauga Lake? I doubt it. I'm not even convinced they're going to pull from Detroit. I guess we'll see.
------------- Jeff Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com