Does Six Flags Neglect Parks
Fierce Pancake - thanks for proving my point that the park received four coasters in ten years. As far as the populace of Houston is concerned those four coasters are new, regardless of if they came from another park or not. Since I haven't been to SFAW since 1992 it certainly does sound good to me...that's four coasters I haven't ridden that I hope to add to my track record on my next visit, most likely in 2003.
Coincidentally, 1992 was also my last visit to BGW. Guess how many coasters they've received in that time frame? Three, or one every 3.33 years. So one could argue that, regarding new coaster installations, SF corporate is treats SFAW much better than Busch corporate treats BGW.
Bottom line: don't like the park, don't go. Its that simple, and it will end all your frustration over returning to a park that never seems get anything new [or at least doesn't get anything new as often as YOU would like].
Matthew
-----------------
"Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book. Inside of a dog its too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
Fierce Pancake - thanks for proving my point that the park received four coasters in ten years. ...that's four coasters I haven't ridden that I hope to add to my track record on my next visit, most likely in 2003.
Like I said, one of those coasters has been SBNO for years, so it's not likely that you will ride all four. Another of those rides has a 50/50 chance of being removed next year, so you may not get that either.
Coincidentally, 1992 was also my last visit to BGW. Guess how many coasters they've received in that time frame? Three, or one every 3.33 years. So one could argue that, regarding new coaster installations, SF corporate is treats SFAW much better than Busch corporate treats BGW.
Hardly. What did BGW get: B&M world class hypercoaster and a world class inverted? Both brand spanking new. It's not QUANITY that matters man, it's QUALITY. You can't compare a rusted over stand-up ride that's been shuffled around from three parks, can only one run train, and looks like it's in flat scary condition to a gleaming high capacity B&M ride. Some of the rides that ended up at Astroworld are on their last legs and corporate realizes they are here to die, hence no allocated budget for paint and repairs. Serial Thriller, the Vekoma SLC is the only NEW ride Astroworld has received since 1984's installation of XLR-8. That's not to say old transplanted rides can't be kept in good running condition and thrill guests, but these attractions that have been around the block so much are hardly the latest innovations in theme park technology that guests are looking for.
Further, I challenge you to demonstrate that Anheiser Busch is less dedicated to the upkeep and appearances of their park than Six Flags is to Astroworld. It's not all about coasters, but the whole park experience.
Bottom line: don't like the park, don't go. Its that simple, and it will end all your
Astroworld's attendance has steadily declined just about every year since 1993 when Batman The Ride was added. The public perception is the place isn't being kept in good shape because more rides are being removed than added and very little is even getting painted (painting rides costs many thousands of dollars that Gary won't allocate in the budget). So yes, that's what people are doing, staying away.
In any case and completely random, I thought the park was fine. I really enjoyed it, especially Texas Cyclone. I didnt think the park was dingy and the employees sure were nice. But I must have gone to some *other* AstroWorld...
jeremy
-------------
"To get inside this head of mine, would take a monkey-wrench, and a lot of wine" Res How I Do
Astroworld peaked about 2.1 million in 1993, and currently the attendance is in the 1.7 ballpark based on 2001 numbers. It's basically dropped half a million in the last decade. This year they are certainly not breaking any records either, crowds are pretty light except for certain Saturdays. Adding Serial Thriller in 99 improved the numbers slightly, but not as dramatic as they were hoping. It kept the park level for a year and now it's dropping again.
*** This post was edited by Fierce Pancake on 7/30/2002. ***
And about the budget thing. Yes the money goes back to Oklahoma, but the subsequent budget will always reflect the revenue produced the year before. PERIOD. It may as well never go back to OK because the park never gets more than they put in (except when the park gets flagged). Again i go back to WOA. Since it was purchased some time around 96 the park has recieved significant capital improvement every year until this year. And every year the park had seen good revenue growth. 2001 rolls around the company merges two parks, the park management implodes and all numbers are terrible, as such all plans are put on hold.
Moral of the story, capital improvements=percieved success of the mother company for that year(which for those of you who aren't following means the bottom line).
And i still think that the company neglects all of their parks. The regional pitch is a solid idea but the model in which the parks are run is flawed.
-----------------
Lake Compounce-So Fresh and So Clean Clean
Exactly, Vertigo. The kiddies were spoiled by Six Flags in the late 90s / early 2000's and now that things have slowed down they get pissy if "their" park doesn't get what "they" demand each year. This thread is the equivalent of them laying on the grouund, arms and legs flailing around, and screaming "I WANT IT NOW! GIMME GIMME GIMME!"
Enjoy what toys you have, be thankful for it, and be happy when you get a new toy. If you don't like the toys you have, don't play with them!
-----------------
"Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book. Inside of a dog its too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
It's funny, but I hope this puts everything in context. Since Premier bought Six Flags, I think that SFAW has been neglected. Also, I think that since Premier bought Six Flags, all the parks have been neglected. Some might have new rides, but most of them look a little shabby, There are not as many sweepers or Security gaurds as there used to be. Ticket Booths are rarely staffed fully and I just don't feel as comfortable now as I did at any Six Flags parks. (Trash, Paint, cleanliness, customer service, etc.) Visiting Six Flags is like going to McDonalds and ordering a value meal. Pretty much the same wherever you go. (Can I have the Number 3 with the SLC please?)
-----------------
Mike
www.mikerobinson.net
[needless quotation removed -J]
*** This post was edited by Jeff on 7/31/2002. ***
It's the simple principle that six flags only invested a hyper which by the way I'am very,very,grateful for. But C'mon it seems like Six flags made it seem like they were going to add this and that and it just has not happened.
Mamoosh said:
Exactly, Vertigo. The kiddies were spoiled by Six Flags in the late 90s / early 2000's and now that things have slowed down
Astroworld certainly wasn't spoiled by Six Flags in the late 90s/early 2000's. We traded one much beloved good coaster for something mediocre and painful, we lost many attractions, and nearly everything's been run into the ground operations and appearance wise. That's spoiled? Frankly Astroworld was a better park before Premier Rides took over in 1998, they have done just about NOTHING significant to improve the place since then (ie. anything that cost more than a couple thousand bucks). Less rides, more upcharge attractions, no paint, high staff turnover.
The last three years in the park have been inarguably neglectful at SFAW. Every other major park in the chain has gotten something haven't they ? Even Elitch and Kentucky have. We can't even get the budget to paint and fix what we've already got! Is that too high an expectation? At least Time Warner treated the property like it was worth something, because Premier certainly hasn't. It's not like the locals here don't know any better, if they travel just a couple hours each way to visit Fiesta or Six Flags Over Texas and see how those parks are being taken care of it becomes very obvious SFAW is getting the shaft.
-------------
TOGO!*** This post was edited by PT300 on 7/31/2002. ***
*** This post was edited by PT300 on 7/31/2002. ***
Mike - of course my analogy was extreme, I was using hyperbole to make a point, and I certainly wasn't referring to you.
I have no problem with your comparison of Six Flags to McDonalds - I've used it often myself - but you gotta remember there are millions of people who love McDonalds, just as there are millions who love Six Flags parks. Both fill a niche in their respective industries. But it makes no sense for someone to constantly complain about either's service or products and yet continually patronize them, does it?
I don't eat at McDonalds often but when I do I don't go expecting to the kind of food or ambiance found at, oh, Outback Steakhouse. If I did then I'd be disappointed on EVERY visit. Likewise when I go to a Six Flags park I don't expect to have the same experience I do at Holiday World or Knoebels. I also don't expect McDonalds to have introduced a new menu item every time I go.
I am not a Six Flags fanboy. The chain is far from perfect. I buy a season pass for Six Flags each year because I probably make 4-6 visits to the chain nationwide each year, take my neices and nephews to SFMM at least once a year, and the pass pays for itself. But I don't buy their merchandise and I usually don't eat at their parks, and when I do go there I have a pretty good idea what kind of experience I'm in for.
-----------------
"Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book. Inside of a dog its too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
darienlakefan - show me where Six Flags said they had promised to ad more to the park than what they have. You can't. All you can show me is other people's RUMORS of what MIGHT be added.
PT300 - I'm not referring to kiddies in any specific geographical area, I'm referring to those here on C-buzz who feel that if the chain doesn't add what THEY want each year then somehow corporate is screwing the park *AND* them as well.
-----------------
"Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book. Inside of a dog its too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
First off, let me add to Hostyl's comment that I do not purport to be a financial guru either. If I had all the answers would I be spending my time arguing with people on this board? Nothing against anyone here, it's just that I am throwing out ideas that seem to me like they would work, or are at least worth a good look. I don't claim to be the god of finances SF needs to solve all money problems it ever had, but I doubt anyone has been getting that impression. ;)
Jeff, I don't think anybody disagrees that SF's strategy revolves around the regional market. But I don't think they should just ignore the wider market either. People go on vacations for lots of reasons, and many of those reasons could bring them to the places you listed. Maybe (Probably? :)) I'm just stupid but I really don't see any backing whatsoever to that argument about where people go for vacation -- please forgive my ignorance and explain. And I don't think we're talking about a huge-money coaster like a Nitro or Goliath here -- just some reasonable improvements and a really good coaster every now and then like SFStL's Boss or a S:ROS. Of course SF should spend more money where they will make more money, but that doesn't mean there's not decent money to be made at the smaller parks.
Hostyl, the way I see parks they need to have something good or unique to be worthwhile. I enjoy flat rides and woodies and such, but I've ridden plenty of them and if I'm taking time out of a short trip to go the park has something that I think is worth going for. If it has quite a few rides but none are really great (IMO) then I'm not going. Take Magic Springs, for example. I'm a couple hours away -- easily close enough for a day trip -- but I haven't been there all year because they don't have a ride that grabs my attention. Who knows how many people like me are out there, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who looks at parks like that.
My co-worker has family in MN (which is why he goes there instead of a more common "vacation" spot, Jeff) and has been to Valleyfair before, but doesn't want to go and ride what he's already been on (I don't know how many times he's been there). And granted, the HW example doesn't apply too much because that park is so far above most if not all SF parks. Sorry for trying to drag HW in to a SF discussion.
Agreed, SF's bottom line is everything. And agreed that people really can't say much if they're paying up and stuffing money in SF's pockets while clamoring about the neglect of their park. That just supports the idea that a park may not need improvements to keep its attendance and thus its profit up. While I think the big money should and will no doubt continue to be spent in the big market, big money areas, SF stands to lose potential profits if they ignore the small areas too much and just assume regional folks are the only ones who care about those parks.
-----------------
PLEASE READ: This post wasn't meant to offend or anger anyone; I apologize in advance if it does. So please don't post a reply just to rant about it. :)
Do people travel? Yes. Do they travel to many of the markets Six Flags serves for a vacation? No.
StandUpFan said:
"Maybe (Probably? ) I'm just stupid but I really don't see any backing whatsoever to that argument about where people go for vacation -- please forgive my ignorance and explain."
Even if people did travel far and wide to these places, analysts all agree that one bad year can hurt business big time. But don't take their word for it, ask the folks in Orlando. Mass layoffs, deep discounting promotion and far reaching marketing has been the norm for them in the past year or so. Why? Because those are destination parks. That's where people go on vacation, not Kentucky Kingdom. The regional parks were mostly flat or had minor losses in attendance, but not to the extent Orlando did.
The airlines are saying right now there's a 15% decline in people flying over last year. With the nations' psychology being what it is today, people also don't want to go far from home. Then to top it off, unemployment is high and money is tight. Do you go to Orlando or go someplace "So Big, So Close?" The answer should be obvious.
Let's say someone like an Elitch Gardens does build a 300-foot coaster. Enthusiasts aside, is the average person in Cleveland or Boston going to fly there to ride it? Of course not. We have these great rides at Six Flags Worlds of Adventure and Six Flags New England, respectively. That's a whole lot of expense to ride a big coaster and go home.
The big markets like LA, New York and even Cleveland (because of the massive population to be found within three hours) have competition and many millions of people within driving distance. They must build and build often to survive.
-------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com, Sillynonsense.com
"Let's stop saying 'don't quote me,' because if no one quotes you, you probably haven't said a thing worth saying." - Dogma, KMFDM
-----------------
Lake Compounce-So Fresh and So Clean Clean
-----------------
"Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book. Inside of a dog its too dark to read." - Groucho Marx
Denver has a steady population and it is growing very very fast. But the problem with us not being a big market is because the people don't visit Denver to go to an amusement park. People who go to Denver for vacation most often visit the mountains and most often don't even stay in Denver, whereas people will travel to places like Ohio because of all the parks. And it will most likely always be that way.
StandUpFan said:
"Hostyl, the way I see parks they need to have something good or unique to be worthwhile. I enjoy flat rides and woodies and such, but I've ridden plenty of them and if I'm taking time out of a short trip to go the park has something that I think is worth going for. If it has quite a few rides but none are really great (IMO) then I'm not going. Take Magic Springs, for example. I'm a couple hours away -- easily close enough for a day trip -- but I haven't been there all year because they don't have a ride that grabs my attention. Who knows how many people like me are out there, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who looks at parks like that.My co-worker has family in MN (which is why he goes there instead of a more common "vacation" spot, Jeff) and has been to Valleyfair before, but doesn't want to go and ride what he's already been on"
I'll stipulate that people will only go to parks that have something that interests them, but how many members of the general park going public would NOT be interested by a boomer or a good old woodie. My girlfriend's (as GP as it gets) favorite coaster at HersheyPark was Sidewinder for pete's sake, primarily because she'd never been on something like that before (Ultra Twister and Greezed Lightin' the closest). So what I'm saying is that a "traveler" who is not interested the current line up, most likely wont be interested in the new ride. Therefore, it is my belief that the amount of *extra* non-local people a park could get would not compensate for the cost incurred for the new ride. Instead, a better stragety (sp?) is to market to you core audience (locals) and whatever you get on top of that is gravy.
As for your co-worker, one could almost make the claim that he is a "local" not a traveller. I live in DC now, but my folks still stay in Chicago. I've been to SFGAm enough to not miss it if there isnt something new. I have somewhat of a 'locals' mentality regarding the park. I'm even a little bit like that with Cedar Point (as is the rest of my fam). But do you believe there are *that* many people that fit your narrowly defined criteria? Enough to alone justify a new ride?
And now a semi-enthusiast comment, how do you know something is good (or not) till you ride it? For example, what makes you think the Arkansas Twister isn't every bit as good as The Legend (blasphemy, I know)? I can think of several coasters I've enjoyed thoroughly that I never heard anyone say was great (Hercules, Kraken, Mr. Freeze w/ OTSR, TG:TJC, Ultra Twister) and I've heard coasters praised to no end that I thought were middling (NITRO, Hulk, Titan, BOSS). So it's hard to say that a park doesnt have anything "good enough to warrant a visit" without riding it. Now perhaps it's not enough to justify a standalone trip. I know I'm not intriguiged enough to go to Knoebel's without some other added incentive. But if I was *right there*, I'd go.
lata,
jeremy
-------------
"To get inside this head of mine, would take a monkey-wrench, and a lot of wine" Res How I Do
Mamoosh said:
Thanks, Jeff, for explaining it....yet again.
If I was more organized I'd write a book. Apparently no one teaches basic business anymore in school or college.
-----------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com, Sillynonsense.com
"Let's stop saying 'don't quote me,' because if no one quotes you, you probably haven't said a thing worth saying." - Dogma, KMFDM
Closed topic.
