Empty ex-SWO side of park@(Geauga Lake)?

Thursday, April 26, 2001 2:08 PM
I was responding to a previous post and it hit me. I used to be in Y-camps and I hated going to Sea World because I wanted to go to (Geauga Lake). As of right now I am predincting Marine Side will be EMPTY!! I have ten reasons and they start with roadrunner's express and end with X-Flight. Big fat fish or Ten Coasters??? I think most people will pick coasters. Am I wrong or right??? ;)

-------------
www.geocities.com/coasting_ohio for Real/Defunct/mini coasters and parks for RCT
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 2:22 PM
I think that you are wrong. Although I'm sure that everyone will visit the coaster side of the park, why wouldn't they take some time to also visit the fish? I know that I would go to both sides if I visited the park. Besides, not everyone likes roller coasters.
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 2:34 PM
I think that the Old Sea World side will do just fine. After all up untill this summer it was a stand alone park which did pretty well. It may not have the repeatability as with the rides side but is still a nice park with plenty of things to see and do. I do however feel that without shamu it will be lacking
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 2:48 PM
All the people who went to Sea World didn't go there because they didn't know Geauga Lake existed, they did it by choice. They, in my opinion, will probably still choose to frequent the marine park. Ditto for those like me who went to GL and not Sea World. They'll both pull their own crowds, and without a doubt will have people who also mingle between them.

Remember, not all people are as concerned with coasters and amusements as those on this site are.

-------------

I refuse to add a signature. Damn, too late.
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:03 PM
I feel the same way but the old Sea world part will do just fine Im sure that in a few years that they will have a coaster in that part if the park!
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 5:12 PM
All people who goto amusement parks are NOT coaster enthusiasts by any stretch of the means!

More so than any, the majority of the population that goto amusement parks are families. Mom, Dad, and children (maybe Grandma & Grandpa to a further extent). The children may be a little older and go off on their merry way once they get to the park, but you still got the parents who either don't care for coasters, or just can't take them anymore.
Where do they head off? To the attractions... the Sea World side of things! It can only benefit more by attracting a wider audience.

I highly doubt everyone will be riding the coasters the whoooole time there (even the coaster enthusiasts). You can only take so much of waiting an hour to ride... ride for 3 minutes... get off... get back in line for anohter hour wait... ride for 3 minutes... and the cycle continues!

The break of that monotony comes from the Sea World side of it. They probably will have a decent show, and marine-life is very fascinating and entertaining to watch.

I'm sure that the stadiums that the shows are held in will be packed for most of the shows!!
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 7:38 PM
Think of BGT. It has been succesfull with rides and animals. I dont see a problem with SFWOA doing the same thing. I wish SFGAm had the same concept.

-------------
"SAVING THE WORLD BEFORE BEDTIME" Powerpuff girls
+0
Thursday, April 26, 2001 9:11 PM
I know that I will be using both sides of the park. Sure I love the coasters, but I wish that I could have gotten a decent break from them last year. Unfortunately, they took all of their OK shows and put them in little stages throughout the park and put that stupid Batman show in the Stagecoach theater. They also removed a lot of the flat rides so there was little else to do. I know that I will definitely be using both sides of the park, and I am sure that I will not be the only one.
+0
Saturday, April 28, 2001 12:08 PM
I haven't been to seaworld in 20 yrs I'm Acutually excited seeing it after so many years...I hopeing that all the little kids conagrate over on the marine side of the park leaveing the coaster lines a little more empty !
+0
Saturday, April 28, 2001 2:39 PM
I've never been to sea world OR sfo, but i will be going there because of my nice SFDL season pass! :) :) :) :) I like aquariums so I'll be there :) :) :) :) (after x flight of course)
+0
Saturday, April 28, 2001 6:32 PM
About the comment that mom and dad don't like coasters. Please don't tell my wife and I that. You see, this summer I'm taking the fam to four parks in one week with only one thing in mind... COASTERS! My daughters are 10 and 15 and they don't go their seperate ways because they know that dad will ride every coaster there( except beastie, it's lame). Please don't make such general statements that older folks don't like coasters, it just ain't true. I'm sure not all teenagers are stupid also.
+0
Sunday, April 29, 2001 9:32 AM
And don't call Beastie lame. It's better than 90% of the other kiddie coasters out there.

I know I will definitely be going to the SW side...after I visit the SFO side of course. I've never been to that Sea World so it should definitely be fun and it adds a plus for reasons to go. They wouldn't create all of those animal/ride parks out there(SFMW, SFGAdv, AK, TDS, BGT,...)if they didn't think people were going to come and it would add to business.

Hopefully, they can put a water coaster over on the SW side for next year to make sure even more people are drawn to that side.
+0
Sunday, April 29, 2001 10:00 AM
Dudes dudes dudes. SWO did fine becuase well GEUGA LAKE SUCKED. Thats the only reason it even got buisness in our area.
Q1 for Busch. WHY IN THE HELL WOULD YIU PUT A KILLER WHALE IN OHIO
Q2. WHY IN THE HELL WOULD YIOU PUT A KILLER WHALE IN OHIO.



Now back to what i was saying. SWO did fine becuase it had no real threat with geuga lake.

Then when GL became SFO then SWO had some competition. SWO bvuilt Bermuda Triangle, but that didnt do as well as 4 coasters, three of which are world class in my eyes.
Then in 2001 when We learned what SFO was going to get, Busch threw in the towel and moved on.
There i said it all thats my frikin opinion
Q#. WHY IN THE HELL IS THERE A KILLER WHALE STILL IN OHIO, YOU KNOW THERE WILL BE ONE THERE THIS SUMMER
+0
Sunday, April 29, 2001 10:38 AM
It's not too cold for killer whales to survive in Ohio. And if it was, they would heat the pool.

Remember, all the people who don't think SWO side will do well, SWO did better business than Geauga Lake and did pretty well even after SF moved in. They'll be perfectly fine especially attracting Grandma and Grampa as well as the littluns.

-------------
PKI-Wooden, Helix, and Kiddie Coaster Capital of the World!
The First and Only Gigabuzzer bigger than Millie, rising Faster than Maggie, and pulls more BS than MS ever will!!!
+0
Sunday, April 29, 2001 7:44 PM
Busch didn't put any killer whales in Ohio. They were already there when Busch took over the Sea World parks.
+0
Sunday, April 29, 2001 7:54 PM
Too cold for killer whales (or Orcas, as they are properly called) to survive in Ohio???

Ha ha ha... that's funny!

Try telling that to Marineland, Canada... who, in fact, has not 1, not 2... but some 5 orcas that call Marineland home! No, they don't swim West for the winter... they camp at the park the entire winter...

And to those whom are unfimilar with the Marineland, Canada area... it's a mere 15 miles away from Buffalo, NY and it gets very cold during the winter months... sometimes affected by the lake effect snow!!

So Intaminrocks, I wouldn't get off on too much of a rant when you think that Marineland, Canada is much more up North where it's a little colder, and we have harsher winters (believe me... we have harsher winters!)... and for the most part, our Orcas have survived here just fine (along with Beluga Whales).
Some have even had babies!!
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...