SFGAdv DOES get a NYC crowd... all I'm saying is that the northern NJ/NYC market could easily support another amusement park. Palisades Park did not close because of lack of attendance (as some people think is the case). A big hole was left in the market when that park closed and I think there is a need to replace it in some shape or form.
Shawn said:
a park in the south of FLA would need to ba a smaller one and not something that would cost over a couple of hundred million. A lot of (if not all) of the markets mentioned have been studied. The costs are really too high today to build a quality, 1 million plus attendance park, let alone one that will do over 3 million.
South Florida would have no problem putting up 3 million in attendance at a quality park. Heck, the Fair Expo in Miami draws 800,000 paying guests in just 2 1/2 weeks!
I agree with the mainstream sentiment here -- Six Flags is spending $100+ million a year on ALL of its parks, it's not going to cough up any more than that just to tack a new one on. Maybe in a few years if it mends its ways but certainly not in the near future. But the problem was that Six Flags was able to expand by buying existing parks on the cheap then amping them up with Six Flags coasters. Those mom and pop parks are now gone, closed or (like Holiday World and Knoebel's) doing well enough that they don't need an exit strategy.
I think that Phoenix and Miami will get parks in the next few years. I would be shocked, and almost worried, if it were Six Flags though.
Six Flags did not build Astroworld. It was there for many years before SF/Premier acquired it. The Powerhouse was not a full blown amusement park.
You must be logged in to post