Track at SFMM

Rob Ascough: I'm sorry if you misunderstood; I wasn't directing my flagship comments toward you (the "home park pride" thing). On the contrary, I completely understand (and agree) with most of what you said. I was simply replying to Ravenguy's question about why people argue about which parks are and aren't flagship parks.

Ravenguy: You'd probably have to listen to the conference call to hear any of their business plans, unless you can find a summary of it somewhere. Unfortunately, the call was a few months ago and, since it's "old news", anything on it is pretty much impossible to find now.

Derrick Whitsett: It's a floorless. :-)

BFSFA: I really can't fathom how people can explain things to you, yet you keep missing the point over and over again. Here's a key sentence for you (read it several times so it gets ingrained): *The smaller parks are doing well!* It makes *no* sense to add to your smaller parks when they're performing well! The loss of money for SF basically occurred because of three parks - SFWoA, SFGAdv, and SFoT. They're working to correct the issues at those parks (SFGAdv and SFoT are getting new attractions, SFWoA will be advertising what their product is because their target audience didn't understand it).

All the Paramount parks may be getting new attractions this year, but they *don't* get new stuff every year. Since you like to whine about SFA not getting coasters, you should take a look at the Paramount parks that haven't received a major one in years (PCW - an SLC in '95, PC - inverted in '99, plus a few minor coasters since).

My point: you don't understand what's going on with SF because you don't listen to people. It's not the smaller parks that are doing bad, it's a couple of the larger ones. That's why those larger parks are getting new attractions and the smaller ones are not (or are getting used ones - a brilliant move on Six Flags' part and one I'm glad they're finally making).

-Nate

BATWING says:

"If you look at Paramount parks in 03 you'll see that each one of their parks is getting something,from PKD to PGA ,all of the parks in that chain will be getting new rides."

I'm not saying its right, but when you only have a handful of parks, its easy to spread capital expenditures around and give each park more. That's what Paramount is doing. But still, year after year PKI has gotten more major attractions that PKD, and PKD has gotten more than Carowinds, and Carowinds gets more than Wonderland, and so on.

Six Flags has more than 2 dozen parks...they have to place new rides where they were get the best RETURN ON INVENSTMENT!

I suspect you're still bitter your home park isn't getting what you want.

Moosh

-----------------
Coaster & Amusement Park Christmas Cards and Merchandise...coming soon! Details in new sig any day now!

---

Mamoosh said:

Stick by me, I'll teach ya what I know ;-)

-----------------
STICK, shoot, somebody could "bounce" off 'Moosh and learn what he knows....;)

Kidding...but how could I possibly resist such an invite....

---

What is so hard to understand about this whole concept. If SF will get a 500,000 attendance increase by putting a new coaster in SFMM, and a 150,000 increase if they put it in SFEG, which one do you think should get it? (not using either park, or numbers as fact, just for an example)

We would all like it if SF was in it just for the happiness and enjoyment of the world, but unfortunately, this is a business. With the total money that a park like SFMM, or GRadv is capable of pulling in, the company is not that concerned if a few of the smaller parks have a bad year.

I am fortunate to have GRadv close to my house, and enjoy going there. They could take a few years off from building, and I could care less. Instead of whining about it, I would be enjoying what they do have already, and maybe go sample whatever parks are getting the new rides(But I go to other parks anyway, regardless of any GRadv construction, or lack thereof).

And Batwing, I'm sorry, but face it...SFA has to take some time off from building. Your own home park has got quite a bit over the last few years, so you should be happy.(S:ROS, JJ, Batwing, just to name a few of there newer coasters). If the SF corporate strategy bothers you so much, take your business to Paramount, who give every park something!

I wonder what the track per enytrance fee ratio is?? Damn...wish I had all the time in the world. ;)

-----------------
"If the beats were made of meat then they would have to be me ..." - L.L. Cool J

Colonel Sanders said:main goal is to make money. Astro World hasn't been getting mass complaints or huge attendance droppage so sf really doesn't care.

I have illustrated that Six Flags treatment of Astroworld HAS resulted in a huge attendance drop, roughly 30% in the last six years or so. It's true that people in Houston don't have other amusement parks around here they can go to instead, but they have other ways of entertaining themselves and if Astroworld isn't made to seem attractive then they will go do something else. Now whether SF cares about it, apparently they don't, which is a braindead way to run a business. No one's expecting Astroworld to be treated like a flagship park, but we don't expect it to be treated like Frontier City either. You simply can't run a theme park and not paint the rusty rides, keep them operating, and add something new once and awhile, business will and HAS suffered accordingly.

As I've been saying, once attendance at SFAW suffers enough that the park is losing money for the chain you'll see something happen (perhaps a new attraction). Until then, SF apparently feels the expense of a new ride is not justified.

-Nate

Let me tell you the one thing that annoys me of the parks that rarely get major attractions (Wyandot, AW, KK): Even though the company isn't buying a new ride, they rarely make upgrades or cosmetic improvements.

AW looks horrible. the paint is peeling on almost everything, and the rides at SFKK are no better. I can understand not ordering a new ride, but at least have some sort of a budget to keep you parks looking fresh and new.

Plus, many of these parks keep removng attractions and not replacing them with new ones.

Exactly, it's not just a matter of being upset we haven't gotten the latest B&M creation down here, it's all those other signs of neglect that are cumulatively aggravating. Batman and Ultra Twister have more rust on them now than paint. Aside from the deplorable appearances of T2 though (and it doesnt run any better than it looks), I thought Kentucky Kingdom was looking better than Astroworld last time I visited (and that's WITH the thick tobacco build-up all over everything at SFKK).

Just to let you guys know, cosmettic changes and improvements are not the responsability of corperate. Believe it or not, almost all SF parks are budgetted the same for all departments. SFMM and SFWoA have the same amount of money to re-paint things as SFKK or SFEG. The only differences in funding are for new projects, which have no set limit, SF corperate looks at a parks proposal and descides whether or not its feasable. In SFMM's case, they're more likely to get what they want over a park like SFAW. This is one reason why smaller SF parks have better maintanced rides and are cleaner, because a park like SFMM has twice the area to cover with the same budget.

Well these cosmetic changes and improvements can't be made unless corporate budgets enough to the park so that they can make them, obviously. Sure Gary Story isn't going to get bogged down with the specifics, that's what park management worries about, but the guys in control of the purse very well dictate how much can get accomplished.

Im just saying that small parks have the same amount of money as MM or WoA(however little that is), thats why nothing gets done at any of the parks besides new attractions.

---

Rob Ascough said:

While I don't doubt that Six Flags said that, I tend to disagree... SFOT almost never receives the first of anything (heck, they were the last of the "old-school" SF parks to get a Batman clone- after the supposedly "lesser" SFOG and SFStL parks). Titan came after Goliath. They never got a Arrow mega-looper like the other Big 3. And they had to make do with a Mr. Freeze clone when SFMM got Superman and SFGAdv got Chiller.

I don't doubt that SFOT is one of SF's prized parks. I just don't consider it to be on the same level as the other flagships. Apparantly, Six Flags sees it the same way.

---

Actuallt, Astroworld had to make due with a transported looper while SFoT took claim of Mr.Freeze, so they actually got the better deal. They already had Shockwave so why would they add another multi-looper? Most enthusiasts would consider a Schwarzkopf looper far better than any off those rickety Arrow loopers.

Also, who got the first mine train?

Six Flags didn't build a Texas Giant for anybody else either. They were the only Six Flags park with a massive woodie like that for a long time until the CCI wave came along. And them comes BOOM! Mr.Freeze BOOM!! Batman:The Ride BOOM!!! Titan. That 1-2-3 punch wasn't a house warming gift.

Fierce Pancake, I agree with you on the cosmetic front, but may of the arguments made above were directed at people who were arguing much different things. and if all of the six Flags parks get the same maitenance budget (as ThePahntomLives has suggested), then it's a problem to take ot guest relations, not Six Flags management. if you get a whole bunch of people complaining (nicely) about the apperance of the rides, then something might get done. Adn as for getting something new, I'm sure you'll get something: probably when attendance is so low that they are either just breaking even, or not quite breaking even. However, be careful what you wish for... there's probably a way to squeeze Shock Wave in there somehow... (bwuahahahahahaha)

BTW, I don't consider SFGAm to be a "flagship" park, as the term generaly means the product being labeled as such is "touted" to a certain extent (i.e.: waved around, like a flag). In my experience, a lot of the GP knows what MM and GAv are, but not GAm. Which is fine with me, 'cause "flagship" status seesm to have done so much for the quality of those two parks...

Whether or not all the Six Flags parks are given the same amount of dollars to make cosmetic improvements or not, the bucket is WAY too small judging by the rotting carcasses most Six Flags call their rides. Premier has been very concerned with adding new attractions and overlooking that you have to keep up with what's already installed. Astroworld would love to give Texas Cyclone a fresh paint job, but it'll cost over $100,000 to do so and apparently Oklahoma is going to wait until the wood's truly rotting before they give consent (unlike many newer wooden coasters, this is of a type that HAS to be painted now and then). With the money they were given this year, they could afford to paint the hand-rails and that's all!

The matter is, if certain parks aren't going to be given expensive new attractions, at the LEAST they should be allowed to spruce up and paint what they already have. The only reason Astroworld hasn't lost money is because corporate won't spend a dime on the place.

Compare a Six Flags park to anything owned by Busch, Cedar Fair, Disney and there's just a world of different in the amount of attention given to appearances. No one's going to argue that Six Flags is being smart by letting most of their properties dilapidate are they? Aside from the new stuff, even flagship parks like Magic Mountain don't look that great (especially not compared to Knotts and Disney next door).

I visited Magic Mountain this year. Really, I wasn't that impressed with the ambience of the place. Definitely not as nice as Fiesta Texas and even Six Flags Over Texas. The money they are sinking into another new rollercoaster would be much better spent turning what they have into a more enjoyable, less trashy environment.

I think it was obvious that these clowns who took the reigns of Six Flags were going to let the parks get yucky just by looking at the state of their original property, Frontier City. Kind of ironic that someone bought the chain who had no other interests than amusement parks, yet they're the ones who've let it slide more than any of the previous owners.

So...has any new track shown up at SFMM?

Moosh - trying to bring this thread back on topic.

-----------------
Coaster & Amusement Park Christmas cards, clothing, gifts, and stocking suffers...coming TOMORROW! Check my sig for details!

Some new curved pieces showed up late last week. I'm not sure if there were any deliveries today.

-Jeff

http://americacoasters.com

I'm with Mamoosh... The color scheme looks good. I tried it on No Limits on my Medusa West I created. Also, with these colors, I cannot think of a DC superhero that has those colors, so will this be four in a row at SFMM without superhero themes, nice!

-Soggy, who is about to be barraged by names of obscure superheros who wear blue, yellow and maroon.

-------------
Nothing... NOTHING... can prepare you for... the Fourth Dimension!

Soggy says:

"I'm with Mamoosh..."

Yay! I'm no longer single ;-)

Moosh - jus' kidding, Swoosh!

-----------------
Coaster & Amusement Park Christmas cards, clothing, gifts, and stocking suffers...coming THIS WEEK! Details soon!

....what about the Green Lantern's often-forgotten sidekick, the Blue Flashlight....I swear, sidekicks just don't get any respect anymore...;)