Confirmed Coaster for SFGAm???

As of right now, it seems that everyone is pretty much tight lipped about locations for new rides. 2 more days till those of us that are attending No Coaster Con...yay! I'm totally excited,... I'm going with my mom and dad, whooptie!, but it'll still be fun.

Don't know if there's space around by Superman, but the rumors are as follows:

-Possible Orlean's Grill taken out and put there..., but I don't see this, because that theater is still over there as well as the exit for Superman, I dunno...but it doesn't seem like a fit to me.

-Space Shuttle America land, there is a lot of open space over there, so maybe that might be a possibility?

-Hometown Fun Machine area, is this ride still there? Who knows, it seems pretty dense over there with all the trees and such, that would be a nice spot.

-Over in 1 of the 2 kiddie areas, I dunno so much about these spots, I think they would market the Mouse as a coaster of it's own, seeing that it's bigger and better than Spacely's Rockets.

It seems that Cajun Cliffhanger and PowerDive's spots will be taken up by the new flats, as well as the Ameri-Go-Round's spot. But maybe they will throw us a curve ball.... 2 More Days, dammit! :)

-Jeff-

Orleans Grill isnt where you think it is. Its right next to what used to be Powerdive a short walk away from where the theater is.

I believe the bus parking lot would be an ideal location for an expansion such as a waterpark. Heck the parking lot is bigger than the entire park.

Does anyone have any ideas about what's happening with the 150 acres on the other side of the expressway? I had heard that they would have to break ground on something with that land if they want to excercise their option to buy that land.

In my opinion the ideal use of that land would be for a new parking lot with a monorail (or something) over the expressway to the current main gate. Any expansion into the parking lot would put the entrance smack in the center of the park.... where guests can fan out instead of stampeding into the park throughout the day.

Or they could even build into the parking lot with another park or two gated separately if they so desired. Add a waterpark and a hotel or two... instant resort(of course not all in one year).

I know this isn't spelled out too clearly, but I hope it gets my ideas across.

Ralph

They dont really need another parking lot.

But! They can make a new parking lot over there, move the entrance that way, and expand the park into the old parking lot.

Or they can just save money and build directly on that land.

Oh the options the options....

Keeping in mind that I don't have any "inside information", I'd guess the following locations for the new flats:

Frisbee - former site of Powerdive
Baloon Race - former location of Amerigoround
Topspin - Probably on (or near) the former site of Cajun Cliffhanger
Reverchon Mouse - former location of (I believe) the Industrial Revolution (where the climbing walls are today)

I don't believe anything will go back in the Space Shuttle America area. There's nothing back there but go-karts, and it's a dead end. At least, I hope nothing goes back there; the entire area is an eyesore.

SFGAm needs all the parking lot it has. This includes the bus parking. You won't see them using parking for expansion because if your public doesn't have a place to park, then they aren't going to come.

-Nate

The area for Cajun isn't that big. Heck Cajun barely fit on the plot of land it had. I don't see anything going in there.

The area by the Rock wall is interesting, but it also could make the area very tight. Too many attractions in that area for it's own good. I could see a flat sit back in the little cove there. Maybe they could give it a Southwest Theme and throw it in the front part by Viper (unlikely).

We will soon find out.

You're correct that the Cajun Cliffhanger isn't large, but there's plenty of room for a Topspin and a queue. In fact, they could easily use the old Batman overflow queue, as I don't believe that part of it has been in use for several years now.

The climbing wall plot, on the other hand, is quite large. I don't know what you mean by making the area tight, as there's nothing there currently (assuming the rock walls would be moved). Deja Vu and Demon are further down the path, but the plaza in front of those rides is rarely busy. On the other side is just a bridge.

-Nate

CD318,

I saw the BTR overflow line in use on three separate visits this year (one during FFest).

As for crowding in the area near DV and demon, I think a 3rd coaster there would create crowding. If anything were to go there, I'd say it would be the Topspin...

Odds are quite high that we will get a definitive answer tomorrow. *** Edited 1/16/2004 9:08:28 PM UTC by redman822***

They still use the BTR overflow regularly, but its set up in segments. The first part is the actual queue set up on the pavement outside the entrance, which is regularly used. The second segment runs from that queue to the first overflow entrance, which is immediately to the right of the small nachos/pretzel stand. This is also regularly used. The third segment runs from behind the East River Crawler and enters on the Orleans Place side of the covered bridge, near the bridge itself. This is only used on the busiest of days. Finally, the last segment runs behind the former site of the Cajun Cliffhanger, along the BTR pond, and enters alongside the Orleans Grill. This hasn't been used in years. This is the overflow queue I was speaking of.

As for the DV/Demon area, I don't think crowding is much of a concern. As I said, I have never seen anything close to a crowding problem there and a third attraction isn't going to hurt much. Nobody crowds around for Demon. People do crowd for Deja Vu, and probably for the new coaster, but those two ride entrances would be far enough apart that it wouldn't be a problem. Additionally, that plot of land is large - far larger than what would be used by a Topspin. I'm having trouble thinking of an equally large location inside that park that could accomodate a mouse coaster and queue.

-Nate

---

aReJay55 said:

Does anyone have any ideas about what's happening with the 150 acres on the other side of the expressway? I had heard that they would have to break ground on something with that land if they want to excercise their option to buy that land.

---

Looks like I found the answer to my own question. http://www.dailyherald.com/search/main_story.asp?intID=3799887

Ralph

I really doubt that SFGAm will ever get a waterpark because that area is saturated with waterparks. Milwaukee area residents are likely to go to the dells (which in terms of quality will beat anything SF does unless they spend a whole lot of $) and there is also that nice little park in Rockford.

Granted Chicago doesnt have a waterpark near by but that is only half of SFGAm's target audience. Plus Im sure SF is looking at Chicago and seeing that:

1. The waterpark could only be open for 3 months max.

2. During those 3 months its going to rain quite a bit.

and most importantly:

3. SFGAm gets enough guests as it is and adding a major roller coaster/thrill ride is cheaper and more effective at drawing in bigger crowds.

If the waterpark was included with the general park admission, I see no reason why they wouldn't build one in the future. That alone would bring people in even with other waterparks within a couple hours drive.

You have alot of parks in the same geographical area as it pertains to the 4 seasons and the weather they produce. Valleyfair, Michigan's Adventure, Cedar Point, SFWoA, etc. They all have waterparks.

Bottomline: SFGAm could use a waterpark.

Touchdown, don't forget about Racing Rapids. That pretty much crosses off your numbers 1 and 2. And who says a new coaster or thrill ride is cheaper and more effective at drawing crowds? S:UF was neither cheap (at least $12 million), nor did it bring in enough people to offset the ~5% drop in attendance this year. The new 25-acre Schlitterbahn Galveston is costing $28 million. And that's for 25 acres!

If SFGAm could manage to add a small waterpark section like PGA's, it would be pure gold.

Im not saying that a waterpark couldnt make money in the midwest Im just saying that if I am a national amusment park chain and I decide that Im going to give one of my parks a waterpark my midwest park would be the last one to get it.

I dont know maybe Im just against SF waterparks, every one I have been too seems not good when compared to CFs, Paramounts and the seperate parks (too small, not very clean , etc.) I think that the addition of a spinning mouse and a load of flats is the right direction this year and the latter should be repeated for a couple of years too before a waterpark.

*Edit spelling I wrote this too late at night ;)* *** Edited 1/18/2004 4:04:55 PM UTC by Touchdown***

---

Touchdown said:
I really doubt that SFGAm will ever get a waterpark because that area is saturated with waterparks. Plus Im sure SF is looking at Chicago and seeing that:

1. The waterpark could only be open for 3 months max.

2. During those 3 months its going to rain quite a bit.

---

If these reasons are why Six Flags wouldn't build a waterpark. Then why is this area saturated with waterparks? They only operate the 3 months and under the same weather conditions, and yet they all seem to be doing very well.

There is no way I can see a Waterpark hurting SFGAm, it would only help. IMO

EDIT: Fixed messed up quoting tag. *** Edited 1/18/2004 5:08:23 PM UTC by CoasterDude316***