Trying to understand Arrow from a sales point of v

Tuesday, September 23, 2003 12:15 PM
I don't understand Arrow from a business standpoint. Examples: Arrow builds Magnum for CP and doesn't do the other two Hypers in the CF chain. Arrow than sells a Madd Mouse to Parmount's Great America and doesn't get the opportunity to sell other Madd Mouse coasters to PKD or PCW or PCWLD. Arrow sells Tennesee Tornado to Dollyworld but doesn't sell another to SDC. It doesn't make sence to me. Usually, not always the trend for coasters companies sell multable units to a chain. What's going with Arrow and all those missed opportunities? It just seems odd that after Arrow sells a coaster to a company the company seems to go with a competiting company to build their second comparble coaster at one of their other properties. Intamin, S&S,and B&M do a great job of selling multible coasters to a chain. I'm obessesing a little; but it's strange. What's the problem?
+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 12:31 PM
The CF hypers was pretty straight forward... Morgan could do it cheaper. Not only that, but the brains behind Magnum for the most part ended up at Morgan. It has always been an issue of cost, and I think the years of doing their own fabrication are much of the reason for it.

Arrow now has an even stranger marketing message as a part of S&S. They kind of have this, "we build everything" message that, frankly, doesn't mean anything. Is that supposed to imply that because B&M only does coasters or Huss does mainly flat rides that their products aren't as good?

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 12:42 PM
Maybe they want to be "Your one-stop-shop" place when you decide to build that theme park in your back yard?

Maybe Magnum wasn't the one and only hyper, but the last in a long list of others. CCMR, Gemini, Corkscrew, Iron Dragon, Magnum. Having 5 of 16 coasters at the point being Arrows seems like repeat business to me.

Arrow seems to have had their time in the sun in the 70's and 80's. It would seem that other companies were able to beat them at their own game (price, quality, whatever) and therefore emerge with more repeat business in the 90's and today.

------------------
SCREAM with me... in 2003!
*** This post was edited by Soggy 9/23/2003 4:45:50 PM ***

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 12:47 PM
Unless you're opening a brand new park and getting a bulk discount, "we sell everything" means nothing.

If I'm looking for a Pirate ride, I don't give a crap what else you sell, as long as you have a Pirate ride.

I think "we make rides that don't break down that often or need major modifications at all" is a better tag line, personally.

------------------
Isn't it nice, sugar and spice, luring disco darlings to a life of vice.

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:03 PM
I don't think it's Arrow's business model that needed to be looked at. It's not like they said, "Here, we'll sell you this one coaster, but we're not interested in selling them to the rest of your parks." The parks probably just saw better possibilities for future business.

------------------
Be polite and ignore the idiots. - rollergator
"It's not a Toomer" - Arnold Schwartzenkoph
"Those who know don't talk and those who talk don't know." -Jeff

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 1:55 PM
Yikes... spell check! And I'd second Soggy's point. Change your frame of reference to the 70's and 80's, and Arrow looks like the king of the hill. What happened in the 90's was simply the nature of business. Competitors emerged with new and more diverse ride-types, and parks jumped on them. Factor in the economic side that Jeff mentioned, and Arrow quickly becomes a bench warmer, so to speak.

------------------
Colin D.
Ask about my references!

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 2:25 PM
I'm talking from late 90's until now. Arrow through their hat back into the game around 99. Arrow had the opportunitiy to possibably sell 3 more mice, another mega looper, 700 Fish hook, and possibably more 4D's. By my speculation that's at least 4 coasters that Arrow should have sold ( I won't count the fishook). Even going back to the 80's Arrow was first with the Shoot the Chutes (84's world fair) and only sold two to CF. Arrow could have cornered the market with chutes but, didn't and on and on it goes. Next will be the 4D's B&M will squash Arrow again. It's really sad that their sales department is so messed up. Doesn't Arrow understand the value of a discount to company that might purchase multable ride with a discount.
------------------
Does the World need another vanilla cola?
*** This post was edited by Cedar "Counter" Point 9/23/2003 6:30:36 PM ***
+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 3:09 PM
Is Arrow/S&S building any new coasters that anyone knows of?

------------------
2003 Parks: Cedar Point, SFWOA, Kennywood, PKI, MIA, SFGAM, SFKK and HW.
Still deciding where to go in 2004.

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 3:36 PM
What product did Arrow have to sell as a sure thing in the late 90's that their competitors didn't sell for less at a higher quality? The way I see it, the only reason they were able to sell a looper to Dollywood is because they were the only park on the planet that didn't already have one.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 3:50 PM
When did Arrow ever have a successful business model?

Arrow survived by building ride systems for Disneyland and Walt Disney World in its formative years. Even on Disneyland, Arrow lost money on the work they did. There were subsequently compensated by Walt Disney.

They were pioneers, but it doesn't seem like they were ever an enormously successful business.

------------------
--Maddie--
What do I Listen-To?
Hot stuff.

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 4:14 PM
The looping rollercoaster...Arrow made the concept hot and so popular that most parks in the 70's-early 90's hired them to put one in.
+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 4:21 PM

Jeff said:
What product did Arrow have to sell as a sure thing in the late 90's that their competitors didn't sell for less at a higher quality? The way I see it, the only reason they were able to sell a looper to Dollywood is because they were the only park on the planet that didn't already have one.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Blogs, photo albums - CampusFish
What time does the water show start?


My point was that SDC purchased a looper a few seasons later from B&M. If TT was such a success at Dolly then why wouldn't SDC buy the seacond from Arrow. SDC and DW are the same company. Right?

------------------
Does the World need another vanilla cola?

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 4:31 PM
Price probably wasn't a factor in SDC opting for a B&M, but perhaps B&M's track record over the past decade (as compared to Arrow's) was.

------------------
Colin D.
Ask about my references!

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 4:48 PM
You Decide.....Arrow's Tennesse Tornado $8mil 2682 ft long, 163ft lift, 128 ft drop thru a mountain, 3 inversion with one being a custom loop screw.
B&M's Wildfire: $14mil 3073 ft long, 120ft height, drop 155ft, with 5 inversions.
TT was a hugh success for DW with the GP and Dw set an attendance record that year

*** This post was edited by Cedar "Counter" Point 9/23/2003 8:50:45 PM ***
+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:05 PM
And?

Did you consider that price might not be the only factor in a park's decision to build a ride? Maybe someone from the parent company of SDC rode Kumba and thought something like that would be an even bigger crowd-pleaser than Tennessee Tornado. I don't know if you're trying to insinuate that there's a conspiracy against Arrow or what. Companies that dominate an industry one year can be gone a few years later. I know - I worked for one.

------------------
Colin D.
Ask about my references!

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 6:12 PM
Not at all. Just that parks seem to try a ride at one park and if it's a success the park usually installs a clone or slightly different version fron the same designer. Arrow has a problem with selling or making a multi ride deals with parks.

------------------
Does the World need another vanilla cola?

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:04 PM
I think the main reason that the Parent Company of Dollywood and SDC did not employee Arrow for another coaster is simply because they saw the future financial troubles of the company. Tennessee Tornado did good the first year, but after that the ride's popularity died down, and the ride never has a line longer than 10min. I wouldn't be surprised if Dollywood ends up scrapping one of TT's two trains in the future, considering the ride hardly never needs both of them.

While the new technology Arrow used on TT was amazing, and the ride was incredibly smooth, B&M had already been doing the exact same thing since the late Eighties. If Arrow had updated and improved there products back when B&M and Intamin were first starting up, the company might have still been a major player in the park industry.

*** This post was edited by Dukeis#1 9/23/2003 11:06:08 PM ***

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:30 PM
Is it bad luck or bad business?

------------------
Does the World need another vanilla cola?

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:32 PM
Tennessee Tornado having small lines has nothing to do with Arrow or the quality of the ride. I dont think I have ever heard one person say it is a bad ride other than maybe being a little short.

The reason that ride has small lines is the park itself. Dollywood simply does not draw a thrill-seeking crowd. Dollywood could put in any coaster by any manufacturer and it would bever have unbearable 3 hour lines. That is just not the demographic of that park.

+0
Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:50 PM

Dukeis#1 said:


While the new technology Arrow used on TT was amazing, and the ride was incredibly smooth, B&M had already been doing the exact same thing since the late Eighties. If Arrow had updated and improved there products back when B&M and Intamin were first starting up, the company might have still been a major player in the park industry.

*** This post was edited by Dukeis#1 9/23/2003 11:06:08 PM ***


This brings up another point. Why can't Arrow Sell this now? It's cheaper than Beemers , but still as smooth. Maybe S&S is Hiding this stuff right now , ready to get everything ready to market.They have many innovative products coming up , and they CAN be the new power in amusement park rides.

Let's see... Flying Squirrel(sp), Thrust air, Launched 4-d , Dragster racing(see Old Town), ARROWbatic, "new school" Virginia Reel, And , of course, the towers.

I'm thinking S&S Arrow is about to explode on the industry , with many new "fad" rides. They can still make many of Arrow's old products , and have the 'exclusive' air power.

Well, that was rambling.

------------------
I am TOS, destroyer of all Noobs!
Bow to Me aol'ers.

+0

You must be logged in to post

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