Does Six Flags Neglect Parks

Thank you so much CP ismyhome and everyone else who posted. I might just write to SFAW now! Once again, thanks for all the advice!

-----------------
I Survived Millennium Force!

1.) Millennium Force 2.) Steel Eel 3.) Raptor 4.) Mantis 5.) Magnum XL-200

SFEG takes pretty good care of Twister II, they re-built some of the track this year, but it is in need of some cleaning up, espcially around the tunnel. And actually painting that new track would be nice...

Anyways, as Mustang pointed out, money doesn't always stay at the park that it comes in at. I garantee you that parks such as SFEG have been giving money to parks like SFWOA, SFMM, and SFNE and have been recieving little of their own profit. Hell, SFEG has been loosing rides too. It doesn't seem fare, but I can't say that if I managed SF parks I wouldn't do the same that they are. It is a smart move on their part.

Beast_Rocks said: "The biggest way to bring in more money is to build new things."

That's only true if the market will support an influx of new guests. If the park is already attracting all the guests it will attract, a new ride will not affect that.

I am really against these threads that generalize every SF park in the world as being run down and crappy. How is that different from stereotypes?

-----------------
.:| Brandon Rodriguez |:.
http://www.coasters2k.com

Well, a big thing to consider with SFAW as opposed to SFMM is the local competition. SFMM has Knott's, Disney and LA in general. SFAW's closest competition is SFOT and SFFT. They probably figure why invest a ton in a park who's nearest competition is themself?

-----------------
Crito, ergo sum.

*** This post was edited by staticman00 on 7/22/2002. ***

Just Take a look at SFDL...................

Brandon R. They are not stereotypes. Hey, maybe they are. If parks are not clean and run down, what kind of impression do you think people are going to have? In order to keep guests(or coaster enthusiasts) happy parks need to provide new attractions and be clean. Six Flags does not offer every park with new attractions every year(SFMM takes all the rides). Also, out of all parks that I've been to, Six Flags tend to be the least clean. People can't help but label a park by the way it is. If you want people to appreciate your parks, you gotta do things to please the people.

Some of you talk about the competition aspect of it. If parks with no competition get neglected, than someone explain why SFGAm keeps getting coasters installed? They have absolutely no competition in the area.

The bottomline is the return on investment. It doesnt get anymore simple than that. Although the exception to the rule would probably be SFWoA. Getting 5 coasters over a 2 year period was probably just to bring the park up to standards to make a go at CP.

CF does the same thing as SF when it comes to picking and choosing who gets the new coasters. Whens the last time ValleyFair had a coaster installed? About 6 years ago?

-----------------
Ric Flair was hitting on the female host, he told her - "Space Mountain may be the oldest ride in the park, but it has the longest line." WOOOOO!

Chitown, you couldn't have said it any better.

I think you people saying that SFMM will lose business if they don't build a new coaster every year are CRAZY! That park is overflowing with the best of the best, and you think that a year without a new ride is gonna put it out of business? PLEASE! You say that parks like SFAW don't need a new coaster every year, because they'll still get the business anyway, well that holds true for SFMM as well, competition or not. And I agree that parks like SFAW need a new coaster every year way worse than parks like SFMM do, because they don't have any competition, but they don't get what they need, instead, SFMM gets more of what they don't need (coasters) and none of what they do need (flat rides). So, I'm stuck with a home park that makes more money than SFMM, but all we're doing is paying for THEIR rides, while WE get nothing, I don't think that's good business sense, I think it's favoritism! SFAW is a MESS because the people of Houston are sick and tired of SFAW being neglected, so they treat it the same way that corporate treats it, they don't care about how bad it looks, they're quite content to simply let it get worse! The patrons are following the example that's being set by the owners, just like someone else suggested. And the last that I heard, the rides at SFMM are in need of painting as badly as the rides at SFAW are, so I think that this is just where Six Flags is cutting corners on their costs. Watch the condition of the rides at a Six Flags park near you over the next few years, and I bet you'll notice that they rarely paint any of the rides in your home park either. Personally, I think that Six Flags is getting too big for their britches. They can't afford to take care of all the parks they own as well as they should, so they just concentrate on their favorite (SFMM) and let the rest of them go to the dogs. They build a few new rides for their newest aquisitions, to fool the people into believing it's a good thing that Six Flags "saved" them, and once they've established a trust with the locals, they bail out on them with all their money, and go build some more toys at SFMM, which is the only park they CARE about!

-----------------
Gay Roller Ride
http://www.gayrollerride.com
If you build it, they will come!

Iron Draggon. SFMM is not the only park that SF cares about. You just said yourself that they keep putting in coasters but lack in the flat ride department. Newsflash: Not everyone that visits parks just goes for the coasters (except us coaster nuts:) ). Basically people that dont like coasters and go to SFMM might be disappointed that the other options arent there.

-----------------
Ric Flair was hitting on the female host, he told her - "Space Mountain may be the oldest ride in the park, but it has the longest line." WOOOOO!

SFDL Has been neglected equally with SFAW. I mean, yes they got Shipwreck Falls, but I mean a standard shoot-the-chutes in 2002? SFDL hasn't seen a coaster since 99. I mean, all I want is a small coaster, even after 3 yrs. The park has had very little updates over the past yrs and are park has become the Upcharge Park of the world. Wee have somehting like 6-8 upcharges. I mean come up. That's half are rides. And whats super unfair is that the money made from those, goes right to the bigger parks. We use to get treated great before SF's took over. Then they took over, through in 1 coaster and some SF normal changes and hasn't touched the park since. I mean, even the new park in Seattle has seen more!

-------------
-ANDREW-
http://insanerides.fateback.com

It really annoys me when people complain that there park hasn't had a coaster in like 2 or 3 years. Yet, these parks still get rides. Wether they are upcharge attractions or what, they are still rides. There are parks who haven't seen a ride in 5, 6, 10 Years! SFDL has a hypercoaster for god's sake! Stop whining.

Rollergator, You can staff all the rides you want, but if there is a high turnover rate because people either go back to school or graduate to higher paying jobs, then what?

If working in your average Six Flags park was so rewarding, wouldn't we all be doing it?

-----------------
"Escuse me, can you tell me where the heck the Mystery Lodge is"?

Iron Draggon, it sounds to me like your "supposed" concearn over the less fortunate Six Flags parks is really a smoke screen for more of a bitterness over SFMM having 15 rollercoasters, same as another current park, fess up.

Where's the outcry for Valleyfair? Where is their Area 51? Uh-huh, that's what I thought.

"ROI" Learn it... Live it... Love it...

-----------------
"Escuse me, can you tell me where the heck the Mystery Lodge is"?

Okay, everyone says that SFMM has competition in Knott's and Disneyland. Well, just because they are all theme parks, it doesn't automatically make them in direct competition. The GP with families all over the states will undoubtedly make trips to Disneyland, and possibly Knott's. Many probably do not know about Knott's, but since it's a "neighbor" to Disneyland, they might as well check it out anyways. Would any of them trade their family Disneyland trip for a day at Magic Mountain? Hell no! Would any of the teenagers in the local area go to Disneyland instead of Magic Mountain?!

For instance, I live in Norcal. The two biggest parks we have here are PGA and SFMW. Many will say they are in direct competition. I wholeheartedly disagree. When you go to both parks, it is very obvious that the clientele is very different. SFMW is more family oriented, with the shows and the zoo area, and a kid's section that blows away PGA's. PGA caters more to the teenagers, as their ads say, "The most thrilling theme park in Northern California" (which is highly debatable). Furthermore, both don't even draw from the same region. Most of Marine World's customers are from the East Bay and Sacramento areas, while Great America's patrons are mostly from San Jose and the Peninsula.

Anyways, back to the subject... I think SFMW is very well maintained. The paths are usually clean, and the foliage very neat. This year, since there were no new rides added (other than the remodeled V2), so they made a lot of cosmetic changes. One notable difference is the quality of the restrooms. The last few years, they were an absolute dump, reaking with urine and feces. This year, they are much better. I mean, a public restroom at the park is still a public restroom at the park, but at least this year, I don't have to pull up my shirt to cover my nose with one hand, while using the other to swat away flies.

Just based on observation, the attendance at Marine World is way more than it has been the last few years, which was already more than Great America's. So, it only goes to show that it doesn't matter if there are new rides or not every single year. People will still come if you have a decent product.

let me guess retnzy, you live near sfmm, since you seem to be the one who doesn't complain... If you would like a news flash, sfdl as well as 2 other sf parks haven't recieved a coaster in 3 yrs. There are no SF parks that haven't recieved a coaster in 7 yrs. Being owned by a SF's park, you expect to get rides constantly b/c its a big company. When SF's took over Darien Lake, they put 1 yr in to it just to let ppl know SF's is now running things, and they have done squat for us. Before under Darien Lake, the park recieved a maximum amount of rides for the budget it had and gave no bs. If you are comparing other small parks that haven't recieved a coaster in 7 yrs, then that is just unfair. A small park has a much lower budget, I mean, SFDL is owned by Six Flags! Right near us is another small park-Martin's Fantasy Island. This park has recieved more attractions since 99 then SFDL has. I mean, MFI it is small and doesn't have a ton of money, yet they max out what they buy, even if they get a 2 million dollar cci and a drop tower. I think SFDL needs to wake up, and you can complain all you want about complaining, but try placing yourself in different shoes and views.

-------------
-ANDREW-
http://insanerides.fateback.com

I wish some of these people could go back to the 70's and and 80's when you where lucky to see a new coaster once every 7-10 years. Everyone who is complaining go back before SF bought these parks and check out the frequency rate that they got coasters before they where bought out.

-----------------
Army Rangers lead the way

While I agree that SFMM got 4 coasters because it has the attendance to support such investments, it still puzzles me. Quite frankly, one of the advantages to franchising and corporate ownership like Six Flags is so that a smaller park, like Astro World can receive some of the benefits from the success of a larger park. To reap part of the harvest so to speak.

While I can imagine that some revenue sharing happens, I would think that it would be to SF's advantage to start investing in these smaller parks. There are a couple of givens. First: People WILL go to SFMM and SFGAm, etc. 4 coasters in one year was a little excessive, especially considering the smaller parks who haven't had any major capitol improvements in MANY years.

Maybe, just maybe, SF should have put the deja vu's in 3 small market parks. This would have accomplished a number of things. First, it would have increased attendance in its smaller parks. Second, it would give SF and Vekoma a chance to test the design in a somewhat less volatile environment. Third, if they flopped, SF would have had much less egg on their faces. Notice the placement of the DV's? (Chicago, LA, Atlanta) Three of SF's biggest markets.

I'm a musician. There's this 90/30 principle that I use. If there is a part of the music that I know 90 percent, then I should spend 30 percent of my time on it. The part I know 30 percent, I should spend 90 percent of my time on it. Because there is more improvement possible in the 30 percent, my music becomes overall better. Practicing the easy parts over and over does nothing to help me with the hard parts. SF might do well to follow this principle. Investing so much in their 90 percent parks leaves them little room to grow as a whole. However, if they were to invest in their 30% parks, SF would grow exponentially by default. They cannot, of course, neglect the 90 percent parks, but as an organization, they have to pay attention to the 30%, which I feel may be lacking.

Does SF neglect parks? No. They just need to pay a little more attention to the smaller ones.

-----------------
---------
"Getting on Iron Wolf is kind of like going in a blender and pressing PUREE"

--Ever lying in wait for someone to say something stupid.

du8die...small problem with your math...if you spend 30% of your time on the part you know 90%; and 90% of yuor time on the part you know 30%, you are spending 120% of your time...anyone else see a problem there??

-----------------
Posting, "Me too" like some brain dead AOLer. I ought to to the world a favor, and cap you like old yeller...