SFWOA Hyper?

Monday, September 23, 2002 7:45 PM
Does anyone have any news on it? With all the Six Flags money problems I really hope this thing wasn't canceled. The last thing I heard was a post of Jeff's back during mid summer saying he was on the phone with some people and that they were watching supports being unloaded, or something along those lines. I know some may feel the ride might be kinda pointless (no pun intended) since CP will have soon have 4 coasters over 200ft, but I don't think I could pass up riding any Intamin hyper on my trip to Ohio next summer.

-----------------
"This time I think ... I think it's ... it's going to work!" - Dr.Bruce Banner

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:12 PM
I wish I knew, I'm just praying they'll let us have it. I'd like to know if anyone knows anything new about it too.....
+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:29 PM
Intamin hypers are definatly the best ones out there but I think the project was cancelled. There was a post a couple months ago about SF only adding major attractions to 4 of its parks this year and SFWOA isn't listed. This was also a very reliable sit with an interview of the president of SF. If a hyper isn't a major attraction I don't know what is but SFM's hyper wasn't mentioned either and that one is definatly happening.
+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:33 PM

I havent' heard anything lately on the thing. Some were convinced that it was going to be built, but then again they thought the same thing last year. My money is on that they won't. It's not SFI's belief to put large capital improvements into parks that aren't preforming. Look at this year, tigers, zebras and a moving bridge. They didn't even do much on the inside except chase out more good managers and make things more of a mess. Why would the company look to dump more money into a park that won't see a return on its investment.

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:35 PM
Just remember Medusafan., SFI has no premenent plans.
+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:54 PM
Um, it's not like they were going to get it definitly. All that happened when we all heard the news together was that SFWOA got a 10 or so feet extension to 210 feet to build an attraction on the wild life side of the park. They wouldn't have sstarted to send pieces of it that early anyway. It was just an approvement. It is approved so maybe in 2004 they will get it, unless if there is something better that can fit in the 210 feet. I do think though that SFWOA will still recieve something, just b/c they will decrease in more attendance with CP taking away more people. also, when u heard them announce 4 parks recieveing coasters, it sounded to me like examples of parks that were doing good for the company. It didn't mean they are getting coasters no one else isnt. With limited money this year, i'm sure they are just going to put the biggest rides in big parks and small parks will recieve small rides, unfortunatly for SFDL :( no coasters for 4 YEARS!

-------------
-ANDREW-
http://insanerides.fateback.com

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:00 PM
SFDL is not going to get another coaster for 4 more years??? Heck, SROS is already about 3 years (or more) old. I mean, I like the viper, and mind eraser, but compared to other SF parks, it pales in comparison. I can pay just as much $$ at SFGA, Hersheypark, etc. and get alot more. SF should have never bought the park if they were not going to invest in it on an ongoing basis.

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

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:13 PM

Oh great...another "we're getting overlooked" whinner.

-----------------
Mamoosh - aka Trouble Boy!

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:24 PM
If I were to take a guess....stick a fork in it.

-----------------
Vekomember is from Holland, ishn't zaht veerd?

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:25 PM
Ya know!! If I've said it once I've said it thrice, if certain parks were not under SF leadership they would not smell certain coasters such as SROS or Chang.

-------------
I, am nobody, and nobody is pefect!

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:31 PM

Antuan, you must never have heard of Buffalo Bills Casino. No big SF corporate there, and they got Desperado. Big rides sell, that is all I am saying.

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:37 PM
Ofcourse I heard of them. But do you think the previous owners of these bastard parks had the money to invest in such large rides. Plus IMO Desperado is just a showpiece at BBCasino. They could very well do without it...ie it makes merely a fraction of $$ compared to the casino itself.

-------------
I, am nobody, and nobody is pefect!

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 3:46 PM

Who wants to explain to Meta the concept of "overhead" and how it affects profits?

-----------------
Mamoosh - aka Trouble Boy!

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 4:15 PM
In the most current Aurora paper, it does say that plans are still go for the new roller coaster. Although whether it actually comes true or not, I don't know. An employee told me to watch for an announcement very soon.

-----------------
(Coaster Con XXV, SFMM)ACEr Lady: Who would like to be at Cedar Point right now!? ACErs: YEAAAAAH!!!

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 4:46 PM

Whinning is good!! If people don't whine, or express there disappointment in a park, then what is the parks incentive to give them what they want. I am sure they don't just put in a S:ROS type attraction out of the goodness of their hearts. Supply & Demand if you will Mamoosh. WAAAAAAAHHHHHH. {sniffle} {sniffle}

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

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:03 PM

Personally (and I know I am going to get flamed for this), they should add more to the wildlife side. As far as I am concerned, they added enough coasters in the last 3 years.

10 coasters in that small of an area (wild ride side) is pretty impressive to me.

Excuse me while I go duck for cover

-----------------
2 superheroes in Gurnee next season? Oh the humanity. :)

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:10 PM
I think that to Chittown but to keep up with CP what can you do exept build coasters.
+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:13 PM
Too bad a certain park got Chang before it was under Six Flags control
+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 5:27 PM
Chitown, you're not going to get flamed for your comments as that is exactly what SFWoA management wants to do - add more to the Wild Life side of the park to get more people to stay over there.

That's why the hyper was proposed for that side of the park in the first place. According to a past article, the park has no desire to add any rides to the Rides Side but focus more attention on the Life Side.

Base Camp Zebra, Tiger Island, and Shouka are just the beginning. I feel there will be much more added to the Wild Life side in the coming years, whether it's a few more rides/coasters and animal attractions.

Now everyone can comment on how the park needs to improve its operations and guest relations (as if that hasn't been discussed so many times before.)

X Factor
-------------
SFWoA: An Unofficial Guide
http://sfohio.tripod.com

+0
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 6:12 PM
True, SFKK got Change before it was branded a Six Flags park, but not before Premier bought the park.

-----------------
Mamoosh - aka Trouble Boy!

+0

You must be logged in to post

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