Superman Ultimate Flight opening soon at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom

This is what happens when you apply enthusiasts logic to a discussion. We worry about things that most people just don't care that much about. For the record, I have heard more complaining about long lines at Disney parks than I have ever heard at a SF park.

Lord Gonchar said:

I suppose the question is whether people already ride everything (or at the very least - everything they want to) in a day.

I'm guessing they don't.

More personal experience, yay! ;)

After 2 years at the parks in Orlando I've come to a kind of surprising (at least it was to me) conclusion: the average guest actually has a very short list of rides/attractions that really makes up their "list" despite their apparent desire to do anything and everything. More people seem to end up doing "extra" stuff than they expected. There is, however, a flip side to that that I've observed. Once people start expanding their "list" after experiencing extra beyond their initial core expectations it very quickly starts becoming too large to fulfill.

Translating this to the capacity issue: If the expectation is "set" by the 144pph attraction, then the guest will be more than satisfied by their experience. If their expectations are "set" by a higher capacity ride, then their satisfaction and fulfillment start dropping rapidly once they encounter something that radically different in the pace of their day.

Lord Gonchar said:

But guest satisfaction is so much more than ride capacity. In fact, I'd say ride capacity doesn't even directly factor in to guest satisfaction.

Totally agree.

To clarify, I was responding to Tek's first comment; in the given context, I felt compelled to give examples where customer service appears to have been given a higher priority seems directly resultant to their success, whereas Six Flags tanked due to a miserable guest experience. I wasn't necessarily comparing those examples to or defending Travisland; it was more of an aside to the whole capacity argument.

maXairMike said:

Translating this to the capacity issue: If the expectation is "set" by the 144pph attraction, then the guest will be more than satisfied by their experience. If their expectations are "set" by a higher capacity ride, then their satisfaction and fulfillment start dropping rapidly once they encounter something that radically different in the pace of their day.

I still think this is looking at it wrong.

The expectation is "set" by the length of lines/waits, not capacity.

Which sort of makes it a self-fulfilling sort of thing. People expect to wait X amount of time, so they won't get in a line that's significantly longer than X amount of time, thus keeping the line at X amount of time.

(obviously this can change with a new ride or a popular one or whatnot)

When I wasn't an "enthusiast," I never really paid attention to how many people per hour can potentially get on a ride. In fact, I haven't really bothered to do that as an enthusiast...until this thread, I guess. I'm still flabbergasted by the 144pph measurement that we now seem to use as a concrete statistic.

I waited three hours for Volcano the year it (finally) opened. It sucked (the wait, not the coaster). The closest thing to capacity that entered my mind was why there were only 4 cars on each train where it looked like there could be 8.

Correction (to save someone else from having to go through the trouble of pointing out my glaring error): I just looked it up and Volcano has 4 cars. When it opened there were only 2 seats attached to each car, whereas now there are 4.

Vater said:

I'm still flabbergasted by the 144pph measurement that we now seem to use as a concrete statistic.

Keep in mind that's the lowball, complain-about-six-flags estimate. Like I said, I like it because the real world situation can only be better than what we're working with.

I don't mind the number because it makes a lot of sense to me to assume the worst for your baseline and work from there.

Here's the promo video. What does everyone think the cycle time will be on this? Anyone able to come up with a more concrete estimate?

I can't seem to find any solid stats/literature on the ride.

Well, if we take that number as the worst possible I'm-never-going-back-to-Six-Flags (hey, I can relate to that--next year marks a decade since I've set foot in my "home" park) scenario, then it makes the below statement kind of not really applicable:

CP Chris said:

In regards to the 144 riders per hour number (if that's anywhere near accurate) and the talk of whether the ride should be an upcharge, consider this: A Skycoaster with two launch towers has a theoretical max capacity of 96 riders per hour. That number assumes the crew is fast and all flights are done with 3 flyers.

After thinking about that, a non-upcharge coaster that can only handle 48 more riders per hour than a Skycoaster just sounds completely absurd to me.

An absolute worst-case 144 to an absolute best-case 96 (and that number seems even more absurdly unrealistic than SUF's proposed 144) seems like an invalid comparison.

I just wanted to clarify that my initial comment to Travis was based on his assumption that high capacity = good customer service.

I guess I'm just Cedar Point old school. That's the company who taught me that High Capacity = good customer service. Each of the three years that I worked there (years ago), it was such a big part of the employee culture. It was always emphasized in the newsletters, daily readers, and in orientation too, that high capacity should always be the goal of the employees, because it was good customer service. It was a part of the Cedar Point culture.

How is high capacity NOT good customer service? I can't wrap my head around that.

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here. I'm just saying that my (limited) experiences in the industry are making the other side difficult to understand. Maybe, like everything else we discuss on CoasterBuzz, it's not black and white.

Some of you assume that this new ride is the only ride at the park. I bet you that 99% of the people will come into Discovery Kingdom and see that there is a 2 hour wait. Some will line up, others will enjoy the rest of the park with there friends or family, get on other rides, watch some shows and have a great day.

To think a new ride would actually dampen customer service satisfaction is rather rediculous to me

LostKause said:

How is high capacity NOT good customer service? I can't wrap my head around that.

I'd agree that high capacity = good customer service.

However, that does not mean that low capacity = bad customer service.

I believe all of Holiday World's additions have been drive by capacity for several years now. That seems to be working hand-in-hand with their growth. Dan and Will seem to have used the c-word several times over the years.

djDaemon said:
However, that does not mean that low capacity = bad customer service.

DING DING DING DING DING!

WE HAVE A WINNER!

Speaking of Holiday World, this year on the dry side they added a low capacity ride. I guess that was poor customer service since I had to wait in line for like 3 or 4 cycles when they could have gotten a smaller windseeker with higher capacity?

LostKause said:How is high capacity NOT good customer service?

By having a ride that is so crappy only 143 people per hour want to ride it? :)

Tekwardo said:

Speaking of Holiday World, this year on the dry side they added a low capacity ride. I guess that was poor customer service since I had to wait in line for like 3 or 4 cycles when they could have gotten a smaller windseeker with higher capacity?

But is that low capacity ride as popular as a roller coaster? Roller coasters are more popular than a flat ride. Flat rides don't normally need the high capacity of a roller coaster, with exception to the popular, giant, crowd-pleasing flats like Maxair or Windseeker.

Most people looking for thrills go to the parks for the coasters, and fill in the space with other, smaller, lower capacity rides.

^ Every park is different. SFDK is also a marine park, so it attracts even more families interested in doing multiple things, not just chasing after coasters. Which is why the "low capacity" V2 is often a walk-on even on busy days.

Sometimes parks (who have the hard data we don't) do know what they're doing, even if it doesn't look like it to us.

John Knotts said: Sometimes parks (who have the hard data we don't) do know what they're doing, even if it doesn't look like it to us.

You might be right. I think I'm having a Deja Vu moment.

John Knotts said:

^ Every park is different. SFDK is also a marine park, so it attracts even more families interested in doing multiple things, not just chasing after coasters. Which is why the "low capacity" V2 is often a walk-on even on busy days.

Me too! ;)

LostKause said:

I guess I'm just Cedar Point old school. That's the company who taught me that High Capacity = good customer service. Each of the three years that I worked there (years ago), it was such a big part of the employee culture. It was always emphasized in the newsletters, daily readers, and in orientation too, that high capacity should always be the goal of the employees, because it was good customer service. It was a part of the Cedar Point culture.

How is high capacity NOT good customer service? I can't wrap my head around that.

I think you're confusing capacity with efficiency here.

Ride "A" has a capacity of 400PPH and is delivering an actual throughput of 380PPH.

Ride "B" has a capacity of 1400PPH and is delivering an actual throughput of 800PPH.

Which crew is delivering better customer service? I'd say the one with the lower capacity because they are more efficient in operations. I'd bet the people in line for those rides would agree.

Most people looking for thrills go to the parks for the coasters, and fill in the space with other, smaller, lower capacity rides.

So you wouldn't mind if the park installed a unique low capacity flat ride, then? Like... I don't know... a drop ride on the side of an existing coaster for example. :)

I don't care how inefficient the crew is if the rides that I want are walk-ons or 1-cycle waits. Conversely, I'm usually not waiting 2 hours no matter how efficient the crew is.

Of course, I ALWAYS go midweek.