Two more out the door at Geagua Lake?

---

Ensign Smith said:
Yes, it does seem like the Six Flags bashing has dropped off considerably around here. Guess there's only room for one 'villain' at a time. ;)

---

Wow.... I remember a time when everybody loved Kinzel.. the man couldn't do no wrong.

Not me, I think he's been slowly ruining the chain for a decade now.

Chuck, I know, I know, It's buisness.

I like the idea of these "park verbs," and think their use should be expanded. Herschended, Knoebled, Waldameered... I'd think of more, but right now I'm Busch-ed. :)

^^Yeah & now everyone in the enthusiast community wants to lynch him all over the removal/relocation of a couple of coasters from an underperforming park to higher performing ones.

Now if these rumored relocations are indeed gonna happen there's little if anything anybody can do to prevent it from happening.About all anyone can do is simply continue to enjoy these rides at their new locations next year.

As for the TH vs ME color schemes the yellow track/orange structure simply looks better IMHO as the brighter color should be on the track rather than the structure.

^^ LMAO @ RatherGoodBear.

---

Charles Nungester said:
Not me, I think he's been slowly ruining the chain for a decade now.

Chuck, I know, I know, It's buisness.

---

Well according to you, Chuck, every park in the country is going to hell and a hand basket, unless they have flyers.

My problem with Kinzel is that he is overseeing what is increasingly evident to be the systematic dismantling of my home park, while claiming to be fixing the place and redirecting it to a sunnier future.

Now hopefully Bill Spehn was telling the truth and all will be happy and shiny for the Lake, but I'm wary. It's not like they put in a wild mouse or a couple flats when they stripped out two of the park's most important coasters. A couple cabanas, a cornhole game and a (slightly) remodeled restaurant doth not make an investment. Maybe if you're Lakemont or Dutch Wonderland, but not Cedar Fair.

I could understand getting rid of Mean Streak (and think it's a pretty good idea), but I think Iron Dragon and CCMR should stay. You can't have all massive coasters. Kids need to be able to build up to them. I know my family just got my youngest sister to consistently ride the mine ride when we are there (working on Iron Dragon and Wildcat next).

RGB: Would a park that has no money to open be Conneauted?

---

Ensign Smith said:
My problem with Kinzel is that he is overseeing what is increasingly evident to be the systematic dismantling of my home park, while claiming to be fixing the place and redirecting it to a sunnier future.

---

In a broader sense, I think Kinzel is overseeing a company that is clearly too big for its own good. Like 'em or loathe 'em, Cedar Fair was pretty good at knowing what to do with a park to get it back on track and keep it there. Dorney is an example of that. I'm not nuts about the changes made to the park but I know that many of the changes made are the reasons why the park is thriving today. CF always seemed to know what it was doing, even if people like me disagreed with how certain things were accomplished.

The company is obviously too big right now. After taking on a park with hardly any growth potential (Michigan's Adventure) and a park with an identity crisis (Geauga Lake), the company decided to double in size by sucking up the Paramount chain- a group of parks that seemed to suffer from its share of problems in recent years. Now the company is in debt and saddled with a bunch of parks that I'm pretty sure it doesn't know what to do with. Maybe CF is putting on its game face and acting like it has a plan, but I really think the company doesn't have a clue and is just feeling its way through all of this.

^^ And if a park is totally torn down... with no trace of it remaining... is it "Astro Worlded"? (or soon to be "Astro Landed" if in NYC)

But the BIG difference of Premier/Six Flags purchase of so many parks and Cedar Fair's purchase of the Paramount Chain is that the Paramount parks actually made decent money and got the attendance.

Premier was so Gung-Ho about growing, it didn't look hard enough at overall attendance and growth in it's parks. Cedar Fair may have doubled it's size, but unlike Six Flags, these parks will double it's annual income.

Girlfriend: "You're moving out, aren't you?"

Boyfriend: "Who me? No way. In fact, I'm fixing the place up."

Girlfriend: "Yeah, I see you sneaking all your stuff out, piece by piece. Like I wouldn't notice."

Boyfriend: "Honest, I'm just reducing the clutter so the apartment will look better in the future."

Girlfriend: "You are SO Geauga Laking me!"

A steel Geauga Lake coaster gathers no moss.

^ and ^^
LMAO! (thanks, i needed it!)
;)

A GL coaster in a swamp is worth two in a parking lot. *** Edited 9/5/2007 6:48:08 PM UTC by FLYINGSCOOTER***

---

Jeff Young said:

---

Charles Nungester said:Not me, I think he's been slowly ruining the chain for a decade now.Chuck, I know, I know, It's buisness.

---

Well according to you, Chuck, every park in the country is going to hell and a hand basket, unless they have flyers.

---

Most of the bigger ones are, And I think the attendance is gonna prove my point.

Except that attendance is not the figure of merit. Profit per dollar invested is. And, as long as per-cap spending increases faster than attendance drops, then the parks are winning, not losing. As you said: it's business.

But how is profit at GL figured? The park incurred a lot of debt through coaster construction and the Sea World acquisition, but the only debt that Cedar Fair incurred was what they paid for the park (a lot less than what Six Flags spent on the park). The company can't expect to break even or make money after only a few years. More than anything, I'm pissed that the company isn't giving the park a fair chance- it changes the game every year and wonders why it's not successful? Why not stick with a plan for a few years and see how that goes, rather than dismantling the park and turning it into a waterpark-only property?

Good questions, all.

For what it's worth, though, I'm not sure I would consider the park "not successful", or "dismantled." We already know that adding a ton of rides to a park in the short term in hopes of dramatically growing it doesn't work. If it did, Six Flags wouldn't have sold it at fire sale prices to Cedar Fair. By the same reasoning, removing those extra attractions shouldn't dramatically shrink it either. We'll see whether or not that's true when 2007 attendance is announced.

I've probably been to GL four or five days this season. My take: they need more waterpark capacity for the crowd they attract, and they probably still have a titch more ride capacity than is necessary. Changing that balance to fit what their customers want seems like a reasonably good idea in the short term. Leave the growth to the longer term once you find your identity. And, communicating an identity to guests is going to take a while; that property has tried to be so many different things over the past decade that you need a scorecard to keep track.

---

Brian Noble said:Except that attendance is not the figure of merit. Profit per dollar invested is. And, as long as per-cap spending increases faster than attendance drops, then the parks are winning, not losing. As you said: it's business.

---

Yes it's buisness, but the parks are only winning short term. Attendance has everything to do with perception of the park. Eventually when that drops so low, The parks aren't winning anymore and consider a big factor of buisness as HOW MANY PEOPLE are in the park buying food, souvineers, Drinks and number of parking passes sold.

Chuck *** Edited 9/5/2007 8:32:23 PM UTC by Charles Nungester***