Geauga Lake Monorail Closed Indefinately!

Could be.

I've said it before, but perhaps it bears repeating. To date, my kids have either been too short or unwilling to try ANYTHING added to the park since 2000, with two exceptions: the ice skating show, and the new tipping-bucket tower in Soak City. My daughter (who happens to LOVE Magnum) was ready to try Skyhawk yesterday. Until she stood under it, and then it was game over--no way, no how, no where.

We keep coming back, but I wonder how many other young families do?

Maybe they're not, but someone is, because they keep selling hotel rooms.

What were honestly wrong with the boats? Why "grossly inefficient and expensive"? I thought it personally added a little "charm" to the park. Certainly much better than a board-walk going thru the middle.

Subtle changes are nice... but when Villan is running as bad as it was, the park still has a ways to go. You can still see some subtle signs that Six Flags was still there (the ripped out S logo on Steel Venom before you go up the front spike). Yet... subtle changes won't really bring in a lot of new people, so as much as just slowly bring back a few returning guests from the glory days.

If the park really wants to make it... with their size... they have to find something that's going to attract a crowd of at least 1.5 million per year on average to turn over a profit. That certainly won't be done by making "subtle changes". New rides aren't the end-all to answers, but they certainly help (again, not referring to coasters... just a marketable thrill ride that will have a decent RoI).

I've never gotten behind the idea that a park needs to add new attractions to continue to draw.

If the park was fun in the first place, why wouldn't it be fun again with the same line-up? (and this applies to ALL parks, not just GL)

Granted you have to grow, but I can easily see a park doing just fine adding a major attraction every 4 or 5 years and using the off years to foster less noticable improvements.

Really, just 'doing' a park isn't the M.O. of most amusement park visitors I would suspect. I can think of lots of things I do multiple times that are fun and don't change between experiences. Why would a theme park be any different? If it's fun, it's fun...enjoy it.

With that said, as an enthusiast and general fan of parks, I like to hit as many as possible and if given the choice of a new experience in a park I've never been to versus somewhere I've been, I often (not always) choose the new experience and in lieu of that, a new attraction can bring me back. But I think I'm (and we) are the exception.

The whole set-up of the boats were wrong. Took forever to load and unload with the front and rear exits. *** Edited 8/21/2006 6:37:18 PM UTC by FLYINGSCOOTER*** *** Edited 8/21/2006 6:37:52 PM UTC by FLYINGSCOOTER***

---

Granted you have to grow, but I can easily see a park doing just fine adding a major attraction every 4 or 5 years and using the off years to foster less noticable improvements.

---

Well, it's been about 4-5 yrs since they've added a new dry ride.

Again, wet waterpark attractions don't necessarily appeal to everyone, especially on dreary, wet, or cooler days. Some are content with shoot-the-chutes & log rides to cool them off. Some are content on just buying a few drinks... but a waterpark shouldn't constitute as your main form of expansion year after year (if they continue to do it next year). A lot of guests prefer not to use the waterpark (I have no percentages)... and yes, I refer to Geauga Lake specifically, not parks altogether.

---

they keep selling hotel rooms.

---

True. I was in one Saturday, and they were completely full. 100%, every room in every hotel, and every campsite. And, for that matter, so were several other area hotels---my brother stayed at the Hampton Inn that night, and they were completely booked too.

For grins, I checked tonight. One room category in Castaway Bay. That's it. Not bad for a Monday in what's getting to be latish in August.

I never said that installing a huge coaster would fix Geauga Lake. I said that some smaller additions would work nicely. Flats and a darkride would be good for families. How about some more shows? I agree that the waterpark is a big draw but it isn't the only draw and expansion of the waterpark shouldn't result in the decline of the rides section. Many people go for the waterpark but not everybody.

Gonch, you bring up a good point, but it's conditional. A GOOD park like Kennywood or Knoebels could go a decade without adding something new and I'd be there every year. I don't need something different to convince me to visit those parks because they are good enough just as they are. But what about a park that has faded in the eyes of the public? A park like that could preach improved customer service and cleaner bathrooms all they want but unless people go to the park to experience those changes firsthand, it's likely not going to make a difference. What better way to get people into a park they refuse to go than building something new that they'll want to experience?

Look at it this way. I hated SFNE. I liked Superman and a few of the other rides but I thought the customer service was dreadful, the food awful and the park filthy. Maybe one day Six Flags will get things right in Agawam. If they do, I'd be much more likely to go if they had something new to get my attention. Something new (and something that I want to experience) will convince me to visit, and if I see the other improvements that were advertised, the combination of the two would turn me into a regular customer.

I suppose what I'm saying is that bad parks need new rides AND general improvements in order to turn them into those parks that don't need yearly additions.

I've decided to throw my hat into the ring here. There is something about GL that is bringing it down. It use to be a fun place to go; crowds everywhere, actual lines at rides, just the whole amusement atmosphere. But there is something at the park that is lacking. I'm not sure if you can completly blame CF for low attendance rates, but there are things that just doesnt make that park go anymore.

For instance, I always liked going to the water shows when Sea World had that side, SF bought is had shows for a bit then stopped and now CF has that HUGE stadium over there and big ole lake and its going to waste for a floating dock and to watch people chop wood...ooooooo NOT! They need to bring back the skiers, stunt people and boats.

I dont think they need to work on rides. Sure a few more rides could be nice (i say bring back the Rotor and Tilt-a-Whirl), but they need to cater to older folks by having more, entertaining shows. KW has show after show and GL has what 3 maybe 4 shows. There just needs to be some energy pumped back into that park.

And on a side note if you look at their Fall Schedule their last weekend is in the Middle of September on like the 17th for Oktoberfest. After that its closed til next season. Why would you close a park when the Halloweekends were so successful in past years? I had to work their one weekend in the haunted house for a school group and they were packed. Sure it was a Friday and Saturday, but heck even if you would open just those two days and skip the Sunday you could draw people in. And keep in mind that the colleges around the area being right as they close up, so that could be some potential profit there.

But hopefully they can figure something out to get the park back to the good ole days (like a few years ago) when the crowds were hopping and you actually had to find a parking spot and not park all the way in the back! I also say bring back Turtle Beach!

---

Well, it's been about 4-5 yrs since they've added a new dry ride.

Again, wet waterpark attractions don't necessarily appeal to everyone...

---

Neither would dry rides, I suppose. It's up to the parks to choose where and how to expand. CF has decided with GL to go the waterpark route, probably figuring that 10 coasters is plenty for a park like Geauga Lake.

You seem to be operating on the idea that waterpark expansions don't count (for lack of a better term), but given the way the waterpark side of things has seemed to boom the last few years in the industry, I'd say it does count. There are plenty of parks who've had much success with waterparks being the 'main' expansion or source for growth. I'm not sure I'd see GL as any different. It's an extra crowd draw on hot days and the park side isn't exactly shabby (10 coasters in addition to the usual flats) and should still draw on days when the weather isn't exactly waterpark friendly.

In terms of the park itself, I think SF damaged things well beyond even what those who follow such things (read: people on forums like these :) ) ever thought. I still think CF is having a bear of a time getting GL back on track. Red Zone has no idea exactly what to do with the SF chain.

I'm interested in seeing if the newest batch of parks actually sells as parks and exactly how things turn out for that operator, becuase one of two things will happen:

1. It will be a hard, uphill climb like we're seeing CF and Red Zone facing and then we can confirm that the old SF regime just really f'd things up...bad.

2. It will work out and now the others have a blueprint for making these parks work.

Back to the original topic, I really don't think the answer is slapping up some more rides. But I can at least see the point Rab is making - do a 'one-off' biggie once the time is right to draw some crowd and get the locals buzzing again. But the key is waiting until the time is right. Perhaps this is the plan and has been all along? I have no idea what the future additions to Gl are and I doubt anyone alse knows either. This is only year two of CF control. They come in, change the infrastructure, add a brand spankin' new waterpark, gets things cleaned up and running smoothly and then BAM! New major attraction to bring back the crowds and let them see all the goodness.

Sometimes stuff like this takes time. What if they had immediately built this magical attraction that would draw crowds? People would have returned to a park half the size of what it was and in a messy transitional phase - it would have all but killed things.

More important than what is added, is when it's added if you're looking at the big picture.

*** Edited 8/21/2006 7:15:57 PM UTC by Lord Gonchar***

---

Lord Gonchar said:With that said, as an enthusiast and general fan of parks, I like to hit as many as possible and if given the choice of a new experience in a park I've never been to versus somewhere I've been, I often (not always) choose the new experience and in lieu of that, a new attraction can bring me back. But I think I'm (and we) are the exception.

---

I may be the exception to your rule....in some respects anyway. I typically choose the "new experience" (i.e., new-to-me PARK) over an existing park I have already visited. There are some notable exceptions, though.

This year, I got Idlewild and DelGrosso's for the first time. Same trip, next day, >Kennywood> was on its FOURTH visit. Why? I love >Kennywood> THIS much. But now I love Idlewild too...hehe.

What makes me go back to places I've been before, even to the extent of missing out on new experiences? Excellent staff! :)

What GL needs to do is to capture more of that family business. Both CP and GL seem to be too highly aimed at the over 48" crowd although CP does have some things around for families with smaller kids.

Several of the western PA parks appear to be much nicer places for families with young kids. Both Idlewild and Waldameer have a number of attractions suitable for them and are clearly family parks rather than thrill parks (although this might soon be changing a bit at Waldameer). Kennywood, which almost doubles GLs attendance, has both thrill rides and an excellent selection of rides for the younger set. Interestingly enough, KW allows small children over 36" onto the Jack Rabbit, possibly because they don't have a junior coaster (even they do have a kiddie coaster).

GL needs to put back some of the things that Six Flags removed. The big time thrill seekers are going to head for CP so GL should make an effort to appeal more to families with kids of various ages.

Kennywood is also attractive and it looks like a fun place to be. Geauga Lake doesn't really have much of a feeling. There is something missing but I can't quite put my finger on it.

In the short term, they can get rid of Ben and Jerry's and bring back Tofts. Hey, it's good enough for Cedar Point and cheaper too!

You hit the nail on the head Arthur. As a family we went to KW/IW on a Memorial Day weekend trip. This year it was HP/DW. We go to Waldameer on Fathers Day, and we will hit CP at least once this fall. I have not even considered going to GL ever since we went when my daughter was 1 1/2 and it was SFWoA. It may have changed a bit since then but except for the one kiddie area it was a long walk between rides that she could go on. My kids are 3 and 6 now, but we manage to hit enough parks, Knoebels coming up on Labor Day weekend as well, that GL just doesn't really fit for us. Heck, we went to Erieview just a week ago and THAT was a load of fun in just about 2 hours!

Tom

Geauga Lake can beat Kennywood on price, and I would wager that including a water park would be seen as a plus to most people. But, Kennywood has a lot of family rides (dark rides, flats, etc) that keep coming back. Geauga Lake could learn a lesson here, adding a dark ride, some family flats, and better transportation (wasn't that the point of this topic, anyway?). Then, when it could hold it's own against a park like Kennywood, then you can add your big coasters and thrill rides. Chase the "My kids won't ride anything at Cedar Point" crowd, and then start to build up.

I would like to point out, I was just there yesterday, and one of the longest waits of the day was for Beaver Land Mine Ride (Dannerman needed the credit). Dominator was almost walk-on. *** Edited 8/21/2006 8:10:07 PM UTC by Arson***

Glad to see you're getting my point, but I'm not suggesting that Cedar Fair make one big addition, I'm talking about a bunch of smaller additions... at least for the time being. How about contracting Sally to build an interactive darkride? Those things satisfy two needs: the need for a darkride (if there is one, and I do believe there is) and the need for something interactive for today's video game generation. Many of the park's flats are old and that is fine, but how about two or three new ones? As much as I love coasters, I don't think the park needs another, and when they do get another one, maybe it should take the place of something like Double Loop that rarely gets a line even on a good day.

Timing is everything in this case. People are still thinking it's Six Flags Ohio/Six Flags Worlds of Adventure and the park is going to have to do a lot to rid itself of that perceived image, just as all the Six Flags parks are going to have to do the same to their perceived images. Cedar Fair would be wise to bring people in once everything is the way they want it. But in the meantime, small additions for the loyal guests probably wouldn't be a bad idea. The company would be wise to share some of their wealth with hopes that the internal "debt" will be repaid down the road.

It seems to me that the three coaster additions in 2000 did what they were supposed to do, and that is bring people to the park once. At that point it is the job of the employees and service to make their visit enjoyable. People went to SFO, and the exact opposite occurred. They experienced crappy service and slow lines, so they never went back.

Now that Cedar Fair has turned around the service part, it is time to lure people in with a new attraction, and show them how nice the park now is.

Water parks don't seem to draw people in from distant places like dry rides can. It just seems like they would rather go to their local small waterpark for a half day instead of driving. Unless of course it is something really special like at the Dells.

New attractions bring me people in once or twice, but the experience brings them back forever.

Next month I am taking one of those disgruntled visitors from 2001 back with my CP season passholder free ticket, and hopefully their opinion turns around. It definitely can't get worse.:) *** Edited 8/21/2006 8:11:39 PM UTC by Sitnam***

---

DawgByte II said:
What were honestly wrong with the boats? Why "grossly inefficient and expensive"? I thought it personally added a little "charm" to the park. Certainly much better than a board-walk going thru the middle.

---

Are you kidding me? Giant gas guzzling boats that were scarcely moving 500 people per hour? I have it on good authority that guests find the bridge far more convenient. God knows you could cross it three times in the time it took for the boats to cross once.

I work down the street from the park. I go there frequently. I've conceded in various trip reports that there are certain things they need to clean up or do better (and Villain will get the rest of its love this winter). However, no issue at that park has been a deal breaker for me. I still make lunch trips and I always have a good time.

As a local, I'm telling you that the thing holding the park back in terms of success has zero to do with the contents of the attraction. They have the product they need today. The issue is one of getting the message out. I work with people that live in Solon and they still have no idea that they that Six Flags no longer owns the park, and that the water park was expanded to the glory that it is today. They don't the gate is $25.

If I were in charge, I'd start by telling the ad agency that "What a surprise" is a horrible campaign that doesn't mean anything to anyone, and that they aren't reaching the locals, let alone the rest of the market. Either they get it right, or it's time to change agencies again.

---

Brian Noble said:
I took my brother's family to CP yesterday. His tallest is not yet 46". With the demise of the flume, there are now precisely FIVE attractions north of the railroad tracks that his son is physically capable of experiencing: two of them are shows, and one is the railroad itself. The other two? The Antique Cars (a passable replica of which exists on the Main midway) and a petting farm.

---

That's exactly why we waited till our daughter was 48" to take her back to CP after taking her when she was 3. Granted she is probably an exception to the rule, but she was ready and willing to ride some of the bigger rides that she couldn't ride because of height restrictions.

Someone mentioned KW's Jack Rabbit. Our daughter has been riding it since she was 36" and Phoenix since 42" which makes me wonder why in the heck Blue Streak has a 48" requirement. Or how Big Bad Wolf has a 42" requirement yet Draggin' Iron has a 46" requirement. Is it a CF thing or is it the state of Ohio?

What about the pricing at KW for things other than admission. Free parking (or $5 preferred parking near the gate). Reasonably priced food and drinks. Most games only $1. How many parks of that size can match that?