Michigan's adventure will make an announcement soon.

Hi everyone, first post. I've been a lurker since the summer.

We live in the Chicago suburbs, 10 minutes from SFGAm, but we went to MA in 2009 because my in-laws have a lake house only an hour and a half to the south of the park. While it's small compared with our home park, we really enjoyed our day. Low prices, no crowds in early June during the week (longest wait was 10 minutes on ST), and the waterpark was really nice). It was nice to be able to hit the dry park and waterpark in the same day, and ST is an awesome coaster. We'll go back sometime.

Very interesting, jonnytips. I freely admit it was a subjective list; I simply tried to stick in all the middle-big to big cities within 200 miles or so, plus the ones crazy used to reference MA. What you're describing sounds much more precise, much more thorough, and therefore much too much work -- certainly for the likes of me. :)

I will concede that being in the midst of a big city is no guarantee of success, but being a long way from one is usually a sign of trouble.

CP is between Cleveland & Detroit, Great Adventure is between Philadelphia & NYC, Great America between Chicago & Milwaukee.

Name one park as far from a (or more than one) major population center that has successfully competed with other parks closer to the population as Michigan's Adventure. No one passes by another park when driving from Indy to Holiday World.

Conversely, VF has 2.5m people in the metropolitan area to draw from, WOF has 2m. Given the local base, I'd doubt that MiADV can surpass VF or WOF. Doesn't mean it can't grow, but absent lots of people nearby it is unlikely to match, let alone exceed VF or WOF.

^ Boblo Island, Geauga Lake, Hard Rock Park Park come to mind.

Parks that are in the middle of nowhere that seem to suceed Lagoon in Utah, Elitch Gardens in Denver, Silver Dollar City in Branson. Let alone the tourism meca of the West, Las Vegas, which is definitely in the middle of nowhere.

MiA will never be that big and all-mighty that all the coaster geeks want to come and viist for a weekend. But, there is a chance for the park since I remember the Deer Park Funland days and it has vastly improved, some for the better and some for the worst. If the park keeps receiving some love every now and then from CF, the park could improve even more. But, even a 500 ft. 10 looping woodie still wouldn't get the park much respect, because it is so hard to get to. Since, it was so brightly pointed out we are surrounded by water on three sides. I mean I have to deal with all that water everyday when I paddle my canoe to work.

Ensign Smith said:
Very interesting, jonnytips. I freely admit it was a subjective list; I simply tried to stick in all the middle-big to big cities within 200 miles or so, plus the ones crazy used to reference MA. What you're describing sounds much more precise, much more thorough, and therefore much too much work -- certainly for the likes of me. :)

Indeed. You had the right idea, and what you were hoping to accomplish with your point is definitely possible, but probably out of the scope of a coaster board ;). But perhaps the next time a new major theme park is planned, they should invest the time into something more thorough like this, rather than go down the road of failure like the few which I won't bother to name

How the hell is Elitch Gardens in the "middle of nowhere"? It's literally in the middle of a major city.

You also shouldn't' compare MiA to SDC since Branson has its own thing going.

crazy horse said:
Like I said, if it's so far from everywhere, why are they just getting buisier every year?

It's easy to get "buisier" every year when you're starting from a relatively small attendance number. I'm not saying that they don't have a little room to grow, but I think their growth is severely constrained by their location. It's not really between any major metro areas.

And since we're tossing anecdotal evidence out there... I know quite a few people from the Metro Detroit area who have gone to MiA, only to be woefully disappointed at how comparatively small the ride park is compared to CP. The value seems to be a strong selling point, but most people seem to come away from MiA without planning to go back the following year, whereas a summer trip to CP is a tradition for many in the Metro Detroit area.

Ensign Smith said:
Calculated mileage (courtesy of wildtexas.com):

Michigan's Adventure:

Chicago - Muskegon: 186 miles
Detroit - Muskegon: 197 miles
Toledo - Muskegon: 224 miles
Grand Rapids: 42 miles
Lansing: 107 miles
Muskegon - Muskegon*: 0 miles

*2009 population approx. 39,000.

Actually, it's 12 miles or so from Muskegon. In the middle of woods and fields, with nothing within miles except a golf course and a small once a week during the summer racetrack. Even for the locals, it's a bit of a long boring drive and does not lend itself to a spontaneous day at the park. That's why it feels in the middle of nowhere. Muskegon is basically just a big town and although Grand Rapids is a good sized healthy city, it's pretty small compared to SE Michigan, IL, OH, or PA. Also, the surrounded by lakes thing is a factor. You drive on expressways in Michigan and all you see for the most part is Michiganders. Basically if you're in Michigan, you are either going there or leaving from there - it's out of the way for anywhere else. Driving in other states on the other hand, the traffic increases dramatically and draws from all over the country. That seems like it would be important to a park. Tourists in Michigan are not typically thrill seekers - they are nature lovers, hunters, or just want to hang out at the cabin. Going to a amusement park would be too much work for a typical Michigan tourist. So MA will always have a market, but never a significantly large one.

What Brandon said. That logic doesn't work when the park was so below potential to begin with, and you throw out the context of what the park is currently scoring. For the number of people (what is it, a million a season?), I would argue that they've already over-built the park. That SLC would never have landed there if they could have sold it for more or it would've made sense to put it in a bigger park.

My point stands that there's no reason for more grand expansion.

Who is talking about a "grand expansion"?

Just about every year they have addad "a" new attraction or made improvements. I don't see any type of huge expansion being made all at once, but I do see them adding something new every other year or so. Eventualy, the park will grow.

And like I said, I don't put much stock in the whole"omg, it's not near a major city" argument. If a park has something I want to see/ do, I will check it out. And if I like it, I will return no matter if it's in Houston or timbuktu.

Every year we drive to busch gardens(VA) from Detroit, and we also drive to sf(NJ) because we enjoy them. Being a days drive away has nothing to do with it.

We are planning on checking out silverwood this next summer. That park is located in the middle of nowhere Idaho, but they seem to be doing just fine. They just got a new coaster last year.

crazy horse said:
Who is talking about a "grand expansion"?

Just about every year they have addad "a" new attraction or made improvements. I don't see any type of huge expansion being made all at once, but I do see them adding something new every other year or so. Eventualy, the park will grow.

I'd suggest that adding a new attraction every year is a grand expansion. Cedar Point, with over triple the attendance, is already at the point where it doesn't always make fiscal sense to add a new ride without ripping something out. MiA has enough rides & attractions to last several years without anything being added.

And like I said, I don't put much stock in the whole"omg, it's not near a major city" argument. If a park has something I want to see/ do, I will check it out.

And you're not representative of general park-goers. You're an enthusiast, and one that travels more than most. Put simply, your park-going behavior doesn't mean anything in the context of this discussion.

djDaemon said:

And you're not representative of general park-goers. You're an enthusiast, and one that travels more than most. Put simply, your park-going behavior doesn't mean anything in the context of this discussion.

Sure I do.

I am a customer, and that makes me part of the general park goers.Some people I know that are not big coaster geeks like me, still go to Busch gardens and six flags every year or every other year. Should they be taken out of the argument as well?

I do travel more than some people, but if there is something worth checking out, I will go see it. I am sure that Michigan's adventure has things that interest people, so that's one of the many reasons why they are doing so well.

It's a weak argument to say that parks that are not near a major city can't do well. Silverwood, alabama adventure,lagoon,lake compounce, are just a few. You may even be able to argue that darien lake and great escape are not easy to get to.

crazy horse said:
I am a customer, and that makes me part of the general park goers.Some people I know that are not big coaster geeks like me, still go to Busch gardens and six flags every year or every other year. Should they be taken out of the argument as well?

I suspect you know what I meant, but I'll explain anyway. :)

Most visitors to amusement parks simply go to the one or two closest parks (as you allude to), as opposed to traveling all over the continent to dozens of parks, as is the case with some enthusiasts, including yourself. That's what I mean by your habits not being representative of the majority of amusement park guests.

It's a weak argument to say that parks that are not near a major city can't do well.

You're right - that would be a weak argument. Of course, I don't see anyone making that argument. No one is suggesting that MiA can't or won't continue to do well, or that there isn't some more room for limited growth.

There seems to be some confusion about "being in the middle of nowhere." The two definitions seems to be small scope "not near other stores, malls, services or places people would go day to day" and a large scope "not within day trip distance of a large number of people."

Just for example, Lake Compounce is out in a field, but it's within day trip distance of Boston, Hartford, and Springfield. It's even within long day trip distance of NYC.

Also, in terms of whose habits matter, the relevant figure from the park's perspective is what proportion of their customer base comes from a given distance. I seriously doubt that GAdv. receives a significant portion of its revenue from people outside of NYC/Philly or possibly DC (which is a stretch). I certainly don't think their bottom line gives a rat's behind about people from beyond 5 hours driving, let alone those coming from Detroit.

Just drove by MiA today. The old kids water park structure has been taken down and land cleared and leveled. No new pieces on site where I could see them. MiA's facebook page has pics showing their progress on new water park addition.

ApolloAndy said:.
Just for example, Lake Compounce is out in a field, but it's within day trip distance of Boston, Hartford, and Springfield. It's even within long day trip distance of NYC.

It's only about 4 hours from me in Reading, Pennsylvania also. Easy day trip. :) I know, I know. I don't count.

Acoustic Viscosity said:
It's only about 4 hours from me in Reading, Pennsylvania also. Easy day trip. :) I know, I know. I don't count.

Sounds like an overnighter to me. ;)

Acoustic Viscosity said:
Regarding Compounce:

It's only about 4 hours from me in Reading, Pennsylvania also. Easy day trip. :) I know, I know. I don't count.

Unless there's a murder/police shootout on I-84, then it's more like 6-7 hours.

edit: And I agree, I'd make that into an overnighter, unless there were multiple people willing to drive, or someone like Matt, who enjoys driving all freaking night while I sleep. :)

Just thought I would let you know how they were coming on their new project. Didn't want it to turn back to the middle of nowhere part of this thread.