Is it me, or does it seem silly to adorn your main thrillride splash page with a picture of a rather boring coaster that hasn't even operated since 2007? No, the blur effect doesn't make it any faster... :)
I'm not surprised...but at least this is actually a ride AT THE PARK. (That space used to be occupied by a picture of B:TR...
I doubt that anyone other than enthusiasts would care.
I'm an enthusiast and I don't even care. It's actually a halfway decent picture.
I guess it bugs me more because I think Twins is one of the worst wooden coasters I've ever ridden (both sides). Maybe it was just having a bad day when I visited, but... meh. Unfortunately I can't get a second opinion because it's shut down now.
You want to talk about a real marketing d'oh?
Yesterday we were trying to decide...while on the road to Kentucky Kingdom...whether we should try to squeeze in a quick stop at Kings Island at the end of the evening. So my passenger whips out his iPhone and brings up Kings Island's web site. The operating calendar is only accessible via a Flash app which will not work on the iPhone. So he calls the park. The automated phone menu tells him "For park hours, check the web site." Likewise the brochure we picked up at a TIC. Automated phone menu also lacks any way to get to a live person.
We finally learned the operating hours for Kings Island...by calling someone who stopped in at the Guest Relations office--at Valleyfair!.
Of course, to bring this back on topic...the entire Six Flags web site is nothing but Flash and therefore completely inaccessible to the iPhone. But I think Six Flags still puts an operating calendar in their brochures.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
What never fails to crack me up are the descriptions of the individual rides, and Six Flags' are always the best. On that same page you find the Himalaya -for some reason rated Max thrill, while Roadrunner Express is rated Moderate- but anyway, here's the description.
"Jump in your toboggan and career and careen at breakneck across the icy, treacherous peaks and precipices of the mighty Himalayan mountain range."
Are you kidding me? Besides sounding like a grade school student wrote it, if I wasn't already familiar with the Himalaya I'd still be wondering after that descriptive piece. Some rides have pics, and some don't. This definitely falls under the "why bother" category.
^ It does sound better than saying "Go around in circles in front of several sheets of plywood painted to make it look like it's winter."
"... and try not to get squished. Also, hope and pray it doesn't stop on the uphill, cause you'll never get your fat butt out. Enjoy your ride!"
That's why it's called "marketing," people.
Oh yeah, love the exaggerations:
"This is Thunder Run — consistently rated one of the most thrilling wooden roller coaster experiences in the world."
I must have missed those polls :) Not that TR is a bad ride.. I liked it, although it's nothing real special. I think poor maintenance hurts this one a little, like Twins - the wheels were just howling in the turns and it wasn't very fast at all after the 2nd big turn.Last edited by metallik, Monday, June 1, 2009 5:42 PM
The only marketing faux paux I saw on that site is the fact that they still use Bugs Bunny. Do kids even know who the hell he is anymore?
I agree with SFoGswim, I could also care less, but it's a cool pic!
Most of the GP don't care as well. But if they really have their heart set on the Twins all they have to do is scroll down a bit and notice that it is not listed as operating. If they are locals/season pass holders they should know by now anyway. ;)
-TinaLast edited by coasterqueenTRN, Monday, June 1, 2009 6:24 PM
It might be marketing, but I call it bad copy. How about:
"A fast, thrilling, circular sleighride with strong lateral forces and small, coaster-like hills."
Career, careen, and breakneck don't educate the visitors about the ride and what they might truly expect once they get there.
Six Flags, IMO, have the worst websites and the worst marketing brochures in the business.Last edited by RCMAC, Monday, June 1, 2009 7:25 PM
^ and yet RCMAC, you still took the time to read and comment on it. Perhaps their marketing angle is working afterall?
You must be logged in to post