New coaster at Canada's wonderland. Why?

Timber-Rider said:
An air conditioned 3D or 4D theater would be very nice!

Or maybe just an indoor restaurant - or some place to simply sit down to drink your pop (see Holiday World).

So what if we gave you Hyper Sonic or Big Dipper? Win Win!

Timber-Rider said:
When I see this other park getting two hyper coasters in less then 5 years, I'm not really mad, it's more of being sad. Why not throw some love to MA.

Evidence of stagnant-at-best attendance despite large additions would be your answer. If you add a big new coaster (Thunderhawk counts, even though I'd be supremely "meh" about it too if it were added to my local park), and attendance doesn't grow because of it, there's not a whole lot of motivation to add another one.

That's not to say that they couldn't use a decent flat ride or two (I'm still kinda surprised that they don't seem to be in danger of becoming beWindseekered), but I just don't think the market exists for them to get a return on investment from a big new marquee thrill ride addition. Hence, no big new marquee thrill ride addition, year after year.

^Parks sometimes try to add a GREAT ride to attract people. Sometimes it works:

Texas Cyclone - 1976
Batman - SFGAmerica, 1992

Raven - 1995
Zippin Pippin - 2011

Probably many more noteworthy additions in between all those. Adding a Vekoma SLC is a nice addition, but it's very clearly NOT an outstanding addition - even to the general public.

It's interesting we're having this conversation. I know Jeff has said in the past that Thunderhawk was too much coaster for Michigan's Adventure, and yet, what put that park on the map? That place wouldn't be anywhere today if it wasn't for Shivering Timbers. That's a lot of coaster for what, at the time, was a VERY small park. Also, Michigan's Adventure's attendance over the past 5 years has been anything but stagnant. They've been consistantly breaking records from the previous years. With all that said, I am surprised Demon Drop wasn't moved here. Michigan's Adventure needs a drop ride. One word sums up this place....POTENTIAL!

It may have potential - but the potential is less than that in Toronto. Agreed it would be nice, but money talks.

There is only so much potential though. They seem fine stretching out large investments over a longer period of time.

Clearly not a "business decision" discussion....where's Batwing Fan SFA when I need him?

Seriously, we're comparing CW with MiA in terms of investment potential? Ludicrous!

CPcyclone said:
I know Jeff has said in the past that Thunderhawk was too much coaster for Michigan's Adventure, and yet, what put that park on the map? That place wouldn't be anywhere today if it wasn't for Shivering Timbers.

Yes, that point still stands. It already had Timbers, and it raised the game for the park at a time it didn't have a signature ride. Now they add Thunderhawk, and what impact does it have? A minor and temporary boost in attendance? It was too much ride for the park, and they're going to be stuck with the maintenance budget for it until the zombie apocalypse.

Jeff said:
what impact does it have? A minor and temporary boost in attendance?

You could very well be correct. But, since Cedar Fair doesn't release individual park attendance numbers. Can we really say that with certainty? If it weren't in new, I would agree it would probably have been to much for them.

But, seeing as how it was a relocated coaster from Geauga Lake, the upfront cost couldn't have been too bad. It was $10M new at Geauga Lake. I've got to believe that the relocation was less than that.

And as most of us are aware, the biggest cost for a steel coaster is paid up front. Where as the biggest cost for a wood coaster is in the long term maintenance. Depending on the maintenance cycle, you basically have a new coaster every 10-15 years. Maintenance on either one of the woodies has to be way more than what Thunderhawk's is.

Jason Hammond said:
But, since Cedar Fair doesn't release individual park attendance numbers. Can we really say that with certainty?

Yes.

As for the thread topic, sorry OP, they are right in that Canada's Wonderland is getting this because the park needs and can support it. You don't want your Michigan's Adventure to become a Geauga Lake...

But, no matter how many people say it's fine, I still get a very meh / annoyed feeling about CW getting Leviathan, especially so close after Behemoth.

Saying parks have many steel or wooden coasters is not a good comparison to Behemoth / Leviathan. A good comparison would be if Cedar Point built an Intamin Millenium Force, 200 feet. It was a hit. So, a few years later they built Intamin Super Millenium Force, which is 300 feet. Same exact manufacturer, trains, restraints, track, feel, lift and general elements..just 100 feet higher.

It just doesn't make sense; they kind of just made Behemoth obsolete in a way. I do feel that this may have originally been scheduled as an Intamin creation (which would have been very acceptable...very different experience), but CF had a change of heart somewhere. But, if they were going to go with B&M, why not make it a floorless, flyer, or something with gradual inversions...something fresh for the park that makes me scream in my head, "I'll be there 2012!"

Instead, I see Leviathan, and I feel like I already rode it with a set of trims on the first hill (Diamondback). I also fear Leviathan slowly cannibalizing Behemoth, rather than the 2 strongly co-existing.

It makes perfect sense, and the general public won't even pick up that they're the same manufacturer (they're not the same trains, either). You're thinking about it in the bubble.

I get most of what Jeph is saying. That's how I kind of thought about this addition at first too. But think about how busy the park is, and how long the line for Behemoth already is. This ride is going to help, not hurt.

But why not a floorless or an Invert?

Jeph said:
Same exact manufacturer, trains, restraints, track, feel, lift and general elements..just 100 feet higher.

Well, they do use different trains. Which might be enough to make it different to the general public...

But I would also think that a big portion of the general public might believe that Canada's Wonderland actually designs/builds it's own rides, and so saying that it's the same manufacturer is only annoying to park/coaster enthusiasts.

There might be a lot of people that say it's just "like" Behemoth, or a bigger version of it, but not in a bad way. There definitely were people at CP in the first years of MF that said it was just like Magnum, but faster. But I would think that any two tall rides would do the same...

As for why this type of coaster over another type, not sure. They already have 3 coasters that are "under the track" and 6 coasters that go upside down (two of them with "arrow" style tracks; but those don't "count" as the same coaster type?). Maybe a 2nd fast coaster actually IS the variety they're looking for?

Today I wouldn't even put Raptor and Mantis in the same sentence without "is totally different from" in-between, but when I was a teenager we couldn't help but compare them because they had similar-looking track. We didn't necessarily know they were the same manufacturer, but we weren't so stupid and harp-darp as to not recognize the box-spine track, which made us draw the comparison. And my friends back then (and I) certainly were not 'enthusiasts' by any stretch of the imagination.

On rare occasions, I still hear this comparison today among people who don't go to the park often: "I like Raptor better than Mantis." Umm... OK. And I like Maverick better than Wicked Twister. What's the point in comparing them? They're not at all similar.

That's a long way of saying, perhaps the general public is both stupider and not-as-stupid as we'd like to believe. :)

The GP at CW will pick up on the similarities between the two, and already have. Everyone I have shown Leviathan to says "looks like Behemoth". But it won't matter. The line for Behemoth will still be 40 minutes on a busy day just like before. It will still be a ride everyone will put on their "to ride" list for the day. Yeah Behemoth will be looked at differently once Leviathan is here, but so what. Leviathan will most likely be a top 5 steel coaster from day 1. Any floorless, wing rider, invert, flyer has no chance of being as good as this. A dive machine would have made alot of sense but still, no dive machine is as good as this will be.

How many of you would be booking a trip to Wonderland next year if this was a floorless coaster? Anyone coming next year to ride Leviathan? I bet some of you are.

jonnytips said:

Jeph said:
Same exact manufacturer, trains, restraints, track, feel, lift and general elements..just 100 feet higher.

Well, they do use different trains. Which might be enough to make it different to the general public...

But I would also think that a big portion of the general public might believe that Canada's Wonderland actually designs/builds it's own rides, and so saying that it's the same manufacturer is only annoying to park/coaster enthusiasts.

There might be a lot of people that say it's just "like" Behemoth, or a bigger version of it, but not in a bad way. There definitely were people at CP in the first years of MF that said it was just like Magnum, but faster. But I would think that any two tall rides would do the same...

As for why this type of coaster over another type, not sure. They already have 3 coasters that are "under the track" and 6 coasters that go upside down (two of them with "arrow" style tracks; but those don't "count" as the same coaster type?). Maybe a 2nd fast coaster actually IS the variety they're looking for?

First off, I never said that the general public was going to know that Behemoth/Leviathan were from the same manufacturer, etc. I was pointing that stuff out to showcase how similar the rides were. Also, I didn't realize the trains had a different seating arrangement, but that's pretty minor.

Now you bring up an interesting point about Magnum and Millenium Force being similar to the general public. To me, an enthusiast, Magnum and Millenium are 2 entirely different ride experiences, and I don't see how anyone that rides both could argue. But, I was at CP with some people from a younger, non-enthusiast generation a few months back. I parked back by Magnum and chose it as the starting ride. They said, "Why would anyone want to ride this when there is Millenium Force?" I argued that it was a completely different ride experience and that it was rated one of the best steel coasters in the world. They responded, "Dude...look. It has a big first hill, a bunch of hills, tunnels, and a turn around...just like Millenium."

Now this has me thinking...maybe you just made a perfect point for the case I was making. There's no doubt that Millenium Force stole Magnum's thunder with the general public. Before MF, it was the signature coaster...the one everyone talked about and built up to. After MF, it was dated to the general public, and its popularity decreased dramatically (judging by wait times). So, even though they're very different in manufacturer/trains/restraints/track/brakes/lift, I'd say that Millenium Force still managed to cannibalize Magnum.

I never go on crowded days to Cedar Point, but I have been there on moderately busy days. I found wait times of 1-1.5 hours for Millenium Force, Top Thrill Dragster, Maverick, and Raptor. While not a complete walk-on, Magnum only had people in its station on these days.

What this says to me is that MF, TTD, Maverick, and Raptor are different enough to the general public to strongly co-exist, and they don't cannibalize one another. In other words, a non-enthusiast has these 4 on their ride list, but perhaps because of Millenium Force, some are removing Magnum from the list (that would have certainly been the case with the teens I was with if I hadn't been there).

So, now we're saying that people from the general public recognize similarity in Magnum and Millenium Force, but they're not going to draw similarities between Behemoth and Leviathan?

I've never been to Canada's Wonderland, so if it's truly as busy as people are claiming, then I don't see Behemoth becoming the Magnum situation anytime soon. And yes, I do understand people are typically drawn to the newest coasters in a park, which puts Magnum at a disadvantage.

But, my general point still stands. Cedar Point made a good call with Millenium Force, Top Thrill Dragster, and Maverick in the last decade. They're all from the same manufacturer, yet they're very different rides that have remained very popular. If Cedar Point instead built 3 different Intamin Millenium Force clones, with 100, 200, and 300-foot lifts, I'd bet that the 100 and 200-foot versions would decrease in popularity instead of remaining equally popular as MF/TTD/Maverick have.

And to answer the last poster, YES, if Leviathan was a 300+ foot floorless, inverted, flyer, dive machine, wing rider, or new breed, I'd already be making plans to hit up Canada's Wonderland next year. Instead, I'll be waiting for Leviathan reviews before deciding if all the passport trouble is worth it.

For the record, it doesn't matter if a coaster has a full queue or people "just in the station." The ride capacity doesn't change.

I know that Jeff, but it's not my point.

My point is:

Continuing on my hypothetical Millenium Force 100/200/300 vs. actual MF/TTD/Maverick example, which is the more ideal scenario?

Millenium Force 300: 3 hour wait

Millenium Force 200: 1 hour wait

Millenium Force 100: 30 minute wait

or

Real Millenium Force: 1.5 hour wait

Top Thrill Dragster: 1.5 hour wait

Maverick: 1.5 hour wait

Which scenario would you want at your park, and which best solves guest complaints of long waits? Also, think about 10 years in the future. It might be more like MF300: 45 minutes, MF200: 15 minutes, MF100: walk-on, whereas MF/TTD/Maverick stay at 20/20/20. MF100 may need to be removed due to low ridership at this point.

Anyway, just a thought. If it was my park, I would have personally avoided any risk by giving Canada's Wonderland a new breed of coaster for guests.