The Geauga Lake story has made a Chicago paper.

---

halltd said:Why is it so hard to understand that "investing in something" doesn't mean millions of dollars or big fancy coasters. I'm baffled why you can't see that.

---

Bingo!

---

Jeff said:

Everyone wanted more rides even though it didn't work for Six Flags, and they were trying to scale down what they had to fit the audience. I can't tell you how many times I walked past the Yo-Yo and Scrambler just sitting there with bored ride operators. More rides would've added expense, not reduced it.

---

Not necessairly more rides, but new rides. Anything new, especially when there is mass ride removal. Something unique for Ohio. I dont know of a Jump, Evolution or Top Scan in Ohio......to name a few. Family attractions like King's Island's cheesy Scooby Doo glow in the dark Castle are seem to draw well too.............In fact, more lower-cost, moderate FAMILY rides could have been installed and the park could have taking the FAMILY direction (something which Cedar Point lacks for its size). Fine, remove some coasters, but when there is nothing new, attendance isn't going to grow. Water parks only appeal to the local crowd. *** Edited 10/26/2007 8:18:14 PM UTC by super7****

---

djDaemon said:Why would you have two expensive "we don't know if this will work" plans? The smart business move is, presumably, to have a plan of action, and then a plan to implement if that one fails. You don't succeed in business by implementing numerous failing (and expensive) plans.

---

Oh Bull, Trumps filed bankruptcy 7 times.

Chuck

Yeah they did the same things at Dorney and MIA as they did at Geauga.

Fact. Those two parks had nowhere to go but up while CF was attempting to downsize Geauga. You still gotta Offer something new to the public every year or they lose interest. KI is like my living room to me. I could walk it blindfolded, Its gonna take that new Recliner or couch to keep me interested.

Chuck saying the people that visited Geauga had less to come to every year. I understand the whole cost of operations ect thing but I CERTAINLY don't think it was all SF's bad customer service. I visited six times under SF in five years and only once had mediocre service. Most was very enjoyable like the rides on the lake with the banjo player ect.

For the record (insert "if you actually read whatever" comment here), Linda was not comparing the two parks as much as she was saying Cedar Fair took the same approach to both: Buy cheap, paint stuff, invest in the water park.

Jeff Said:
See my previous point. They did invest, quite heavily I might add, just not in the things you would have liked.

Yeah Jeff, Maybe if they had invested in what people liked, They wouldn't have dropped 1.5 million in attendance :)

^ LOL!! That's actually right on the money.

Cedar Fair sure did try pretty hard - with their wallets. They gave the park what it didn't need and didn't want. What they really needed to do was a little touching up on the park. It wouldn't have even cost that much. Repair the broken rides, give them a fresh coat of paint, add a few small attractions, and advertise in the area. Does that really sound that difficult?

All CF had to do was do a little bit of investigation about the park to see what it really needed before throwing money at it.

Did you know Geauga Lake amusement park pulled over 700,000 visitors in 1975? Do you know how many roller coasters the park had in that year? The only one was the Big Dipper!! The main attraction for that year was the introduction of the Geauga Dog. Don't believe me? Look it up. I found attendance information after a 2 minute search. You can find my source here
edit:url *** Edited 10/30/2007 6:00:36 PM UTC by Zima***

^Great post....you make several interesting points. Hell, my dad tells me when he used to visit CP all the time when Blue Streak was the only coaster. Shoot...Idora park and Meyers lake had more coasters, yet parks like CP and Geauga had fewer and were pretty close geographically and they managed to survive/thrive.

The only "what if" I wonder about with VF is if their approach would have succeeded if Sea World still operated across the lake. Do I need to make my symbiotic relationship comment again? :)

I'd like to point out that all I did was indicate that CF did exactly to GL what they did with MiA. It worked for MiA and it worked, apparently, for Dorney (I've never been to Dorney so I couldn't rightly compare Dorney to GL), so it was assumed it would work for GL as well.

I never said, nor do I think what they did was right for GL as, as others have pointed out, GL was much more built up than MiA. That is what I think screwed them. The operating costs were too high to maintain GL without increased attendance. Putting money into the water park certainly helped maintain attendance, but didn't draw people to the rides side.

And, although I understand taking out some of the larger coasters was an attempt to lower operating costs, I also believe NOT cleaning up the old water park and NOT adding anything new certainly contributed to the lack of additional attendance.

The thing is, CF is also known for not adding new rides unless the park is already showing a profit. That's why MiA only got water park improvements until the installation of Grand Rapids (which was apparently in the blueprints well before CF purchased the park). They don't appear to hold to the idea that you have to spend money to make money...at least not where the ride side was concerned.

I believe Jeff said it earlier...sticking with the old ways of operation isn't necessarily the best way to deal with things anymore. Each park must be considered separately and they definitely didn't do that with GL.

But, they DID TRY. I also wonder if they hadn't purchased the Paramount Parks if they might have continued to try to improve GL. As it stands, they came to a point where improving the other parks in the chain, parks that were already turning a profit, was a better option than trying to bring GL back.

Regardless if it's a success or not at Dorney, There are also those of us who don't consider it a improvement.

They did build one might awesome steel hyper there in that plan tho. Something they didn't do with either MIA or Geauga.

Chuck

In the article they stated that CF was going to sell 400 acres and retain 270 acres. Doesn't seem like a lot of land for just a water park?

Noah's Ark is the largest in the US at 70 acres, Schlitterbahn's parks range from 15 to 40 acres, SeaWorlds new park is 60 acres.

---

CPLady said:

And, although I understand taking out some of the larger coasters was an attempt to lower operating costs, I also believe NOT cleaning up the old water park and NOT adding anything new certainly contributed to the lack of additional attendance.

---

I agree 100% on that. When the monorail was still working, it was always a sad sight to see the old waterpark just sitting there and rotting away. Plus not adding at least a flat ride here and there didn't help matters either. What did we get? Oh, newly painted Texas Twisted and Lego Racers.

---

The thing is, CF is also known for not adding new rides unless the park is already showing a profit. That's why MiA only got water park improvements until the installation of Grand Rapids (which was apparently in the blueprints well before CF purchased the park). They don't appear to hold to the idea that you have to spend money to make money...at least not where the ride side was concerned.

---

Unless your CP.

---

But, they DID TRY. I also wonder if they hadn't purchased the Paramount Parks if they might have continued to try to improve GL. As it stands, they came to a point where improving the other parks in the chain, parks that were already turning a profit, was a better option than trying to bring GL back.

---

I do agree with the fact that they did try a little bit. Some people have said that the park's fate was sealed when CF purchased the Paramount Parks. I guess what some people would like is a straight answer from CF as to WHY they had to close the park down. I understand the fact of taking out the high costing rides, but not putting nothing in to replace what was taken out, that's what ticked off a few people.

Just to respond to a few replies to my post from yesterday (3 pages ago, boy did this thread get active!):

Gonch, at least you have a sense of humor. And I guess you can't even say that you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night. BTW, are you saying that people who don't agree with you on this topic (or any of the business talk) have no dealings with the real world?

Matt, no I don't think people need to post resumes to have opinions here. I don't have a problem with anybody disagreeing with my opinion. BUT, if people are going to tell other people in here things like "you're wrong" "that opinion's stupid" "I know more than you do" "you just don't understand business", I'm just calling them out.

Anybody think they're better or smarter? Then prove it. If you want to talk business decision, come up with numbers and figures to support your opinion. Actually, it's the business folk who have been using the circular argument here.

"CF closed the park because nobody was going there and the park was losing money."

"How do you know either statement is true?"

"Well it has to be true, since CF closed the park."

Funny thing is, I should be on the business side here. I've never been to the park, so I have no emotional ties. Plus I have a few hundred units of CF stock, which BTW, have gone down about $2.00 per share since this announcement was made. So obviously, the financial world hasn't been drooling over the apparent savings in maintenance costs, and people aren't rushing to get in before the stock takes off when the land is sold.

Cedar Fair bought Geauga in order to close it and force people to pay a higher entry fee at their main park. They knew they would never be able to charge the same admission fee in such a smaller park, so they began picking it clean.

First, by relocating the waterpark to the opposite side of the lake, they set the stage for their planned ride park closure and began chopping off the juicy chunks of coaster meat.

Now with their waterpark on the seaworld grounds, they've got a way to keep some of the northeast Ohio crowds distracted away from Soak City which will be more appreciated by the resort guests, reduce the number of cars having to drive around the narrow road surrounding the park, and possibly convert some of the Soak City parking lot area into another hotel.

---

RatherGoodBear said:
Just to respond to a few replies to my post from yesterday (3 pages ago, boy did this thread get active!):

---

That always happens when Gonch joins in. :)

---

Gonch, at least you have a sense of humor. And I guess you can't even say that you stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night. BTW, are you saying that people who don't agree with you on this topic (or any of the business talk) have no dealings with the real world?

---

Not at all. It's another way of saying, "Life sucks, buy a helmet."

There's a sense of idealism to all of the "I wish the park stayed" and "they just didn't TRY hard enough" posts that would be almost admirable if it weren't so far removed from the reality of the situation.

In the real world, the men with the power don't give a crap if the park is open or closed - they're paid to do what's best for the company. Many times that means pleasing the guest with new attractions, additions or upgrades of some kind. Many times that means to hell with the guest who has some emotional attachment to our product we have to kill this puppy now.

We see it happen time and time again in the amusement industry alone. Is it really any surprise anymore? At this point I have no choice but to wonder if some have just removed themselves from reality altogether.

Bleak, matter of fact and curmudgeon-y, but it is what it is.

---

Matt, no I don't think people need to post resumes to have opinions here. I don't have a problem with anybody disagreeing with my opinion. BUT, if people are going to tell other people in here things like "you're wrong" "that opinion's stupid" "I know more than you do" "you just don't understand business", I'm just calling them out.

---

I don't think anyone on the 'business' side is saying the other side is stupid or don't understand...at least I'm not. I'm just trying to sell/explain the other POV. Everything you say about those of us using the business argument is exactly how the other side looks to me from my side of the fence.

---

Anybody think they're better or smarter? Then prove it. If you want to talk business decision, come up with numbers and figures to support your opinion.

---

Someone mentioned it earlier, but the opposite can be said as well. For every armchair accountant spouting off more than they know about numbers, there's an armchair CEO spouting off more than they know about the corporate decision making process.

"They should have done this or that" - "They didn't try" - "They planned on closing the park from the start"

Think you're better or smarter? Prove it. If you want to talk "would've, could've, should've" then write me out a 5 year business plan using real world numbers that shows how CF could've done things since buying the park that results in it opening as a full-fledged park in 2008.

It's all based in the same speculation. Speculation that's incomplete at best unless you've spent many a year in the corporate offices of Cedar Fair and as far as I know, none of us actively participating in this discussion have.

JR Villain, I'd like to point out that CP has been making a profit for longer than you've probably been alive. And it's the flagship park, after all.

Even in 1966 when the largest ride was Blue Streak, the park would be packed to the gills. Don't believe me? Click the link in my signature and check out My Cedar Point History where you'll see two pictures from 1969 that show a pretty full midway.

Even some of their other parks (Valleyfair! Dorney and WoW) didn't see much in the way of large installations until they began increasing attendance.

Again, I may not agree with what they did with GL, but they stuck to a business plan they've had success with in the past. It just didn't work this time.

---

Lord Gonchar said:

There's a sense of idealism to all of the "I wish the park stayed" and "they just didn't TRY hard enough" posts that would be almost admirable if it weren't so far removed from the reality of the situation.

---

That's what's going to happen on a coaster enthusiast site. If this were a discussion on CNN Money, I could easily understand why we'd all be talking about the business aspect of this decision. But this is Coasterbuzz and a lot of us here don't want to see a park close, and it's only natural for some to take the, "they should have done this" approach. Sure there's a sense of idealism and some of it may be removed from the reality of the situation, but at the same time I think there are some good ideas being tossed about. We talk a lot about a Plan A (fix the park) followed by a Plan B (close the park and redistribute/sell assets), but some of what has been mentioned could very well have been a Plan A1, Plan A2, Plan A3 and so on.

---

I don't think anyone on the 'business' side is saying the other side is stupid or don't understand...at least I'm not. I'm just trying to sell/explain the other POV.

---

No, it's not you. I've always maintained that you're more of a pleasure to debate with because you actually listen to the other side. Yet I can count on both hands how many times someone said an idea of mine was "stupid", "ridiculous" or "absurd" since this whole Geauga Lake conversation started about a month ago (and don't give me any b.s. about not calling anyone out because I'm not going to list names- if you feel like you need to respond to that, you obviously know you're guilty.) A lot has been said lately about this forum being about the exchange of opinions, but that concept is shot to hell when someone takes the, "I know better than you do" approach and makes it very obvious with the way it's stated. If it's going to be said that this forum is about the exchange of opinions, some people have to stop talking as if they've been a fly on the wall during Cedar Fair's boardroom meetings and consider the possibility someone else might be just as right as they are.

Pretty sure that's what you were getting at, right Bear?

---

CPLady said:
JR Villain, I'd like to point out that CP has been making a profit for longer than you've probably been alive. And it's the flagship park, after all.

---

And that's why people no longer post on this site.

^^Nicely said, Rob.

And Lord Gonch, your sirness, I've got to agree. I've never had any problem with your parrying and ripostes in these kinds of threads. It's quite fun arguing with you.

And hooker analogies. We need more hooker analogies. ;)