Two more out the door at Geagua Lake?

I kinda did, but I think you're missing the point. People are saying the park's operating cost is too high and that justifies shedding a few coasters. But if Dominator is the most popular ride (as you stated), why not retire Double Loop instead of sending Dominator to another park? One surely costs a little more than the other to operate, but if getting rid of one coaster means saving enough money to help the park break even or turn a profit, why not get rid of the coaster that hardly anyone rides?

Posted earlier that we were there in Aug and the park was doing ok. Waterpark side definitely more so than the rides side. We got right on any ride we wanted. But my boys rode Headspin with a full car and saw quite a few more like that. I would miss the most is Big Dipper. Great ride and it does bump you around but it is fun. Maybe someday that could be a relocate to help it survive. I liked the ride on Dominator but it was not great. Not sure what I expected but it was neat but not really different. But most rides were a walk on. Major traffic was on waterpark side and I can see that trend continuting. But how does the park do when the water park rides are closed?

---

Brian Noble said:Chuck, you are missing the point. We're talking total spending here, not just admission prices. And, per-cap spending---the total outlay per guest, including admission revenue as well as food, merchandise, games, etc. etc.---in Cedar Fair parks is growing faster than attendance is falling.

---

No, Your missing the point Brian, The per cap is up solely on raising prices and cutting overhead. KI easily had 700 less employees this year and less full time, less marketing. Yes less people are attending, Yes profits are up.
Short term.

No matter how you put it, Less people spending money is BAD for parks even if the ones visiting are spending more. That reason is mostly increase in pricing.

Chuck

The fewer guests/ higher per cap idea MIGHT be feasible IF the parks figure out how to get it to work. For the past two or three years, the number released by SF and CF show things have pretty much been a wash. Attendance was down, and per cap spending may have been up, but overall revenues remain basically flat. A one or two percent increase doesn't even cover the cost of inflation.

When they can serve 5% fewer guests while increasing revenues 5-6% or more, then they can start congratulating themselves. Not before.

^ and ^^ Discovery Cove seems to be doing great with low attendance and really high per cap.

But I think that's more of an anomoly at this point because parks like Discovery Cove aren't close to being mainstream. That park offers something that's clearly different from what all other amusement parks offer and that's probably the only reason it works so well. If DC was just like neighboring Sea World but with limited admission being the only perk, it would probably be a miserable failure.

Big Dipper was running great last weekend. My five year old daughter just hit the magic 48" mark, so she got her first ride on it. She loved it so much, we rode it three times, once in each car on the train. She also rode Villain twice (including one ride after dark) and pronounced it "a little rough".

The trick to riding BD is grabbing a middle bench of the car, so you're not riding on the wheels. Even in the back car, the ride was quite pleasant, with good air time over the bunny hills.

Pick the right seat and you'll find air on pretty much every hill. My Dipper rides reminded me of how great John Miller drops are! Feels like the train is being pulled out from beneath you.

---

RatherGoodBear said:When they can serve 5% fewer guests while increasing revenues 5-6% or more, then they can start congratulating themselves. Not before.

---

This is the main item I'm having a hard time with in regards to the new regime at SF. The increases in per-caps are being offset by the DROPS in attendance. I like the idea of increasing the revenue per patron, and while I see serving fewer guests better is a "plan", it requires incresing revenues faster...a LOT faster. There is definite improvement in MANY customer service areas...can they get the kind of cash they need to not only operate, but to service the enormous debt load.

---

ApolloAndy said:...Discovery Cove seems to be doing great with low attendance and really high per cap.

---

There's a VERY valid point there....not sure if it still applies though when the business was NOT designed to be a high-service, high-margin operation...but we do get to pull up a chair and see how it plays out... ;)

There are too many variables in play to determine whether the increase in per caps is related to the drop in attendance (i.e., a less crowded park makes for a more enjoyable experience so people spend more)-- a true cause and effect.

Weather is always a factor for most parks. A few rainy Saturdays or a cold spring or fall can cost you 50,000-100,000 people right off.

Not only "how many" but "when" people are coming makes a difference too. If the drop in attendance is greater on weekdays that are already lighter, but the weekend crowds are larger than ever, you still have the service issues. Plus you haven't increased revenue at all.

Can SF or CF look at Discovery Cove and apply anything to their parks? What do they have or can they add to justify charging anywhere near the same price? Is it enough to say they'll reduce the crowds by half, but charge you twice the regular rate? (Or 1/4 and 4x, or 1/5 and 5x) In any of those situations, the revenue still doesn't increase.

If that's the route they want to go, they need to find the proper balance between reducing guests while still increasing per cap spending to a point where revenues increase, not just stay even year after year.

^ I actually agree with Gonch to a degree- I'd be more than willing to pay more money (something in the neighborhood of 30-40%) for a better theme park experience, but I think the idea of a $250/day ticket is absurd if you're a park other than Discovery Cove. There is no way to compare Discovery Cove to any other park because DC offers a completely unique, ultra-premium experience. There's a big difference between being able to swim with dolphins and ride a roller coaster.

So, to answer your question RGB, I don't think CF or SF could apply much of the DC model to their parks so they can charge DC prices. IMO, DC and the average theme park are two entirely different animals.

Don't ya'll wish we could just go back to the days when there was actually FEARS OF GEAUGA LAKE/SFO being over crowded & when coasteers and rides were being put in and not taken out and wish Six flags held onto the park.. cuz damn, I really wonder what Shapiro would've done with the place.
http://coasterbuzz.com/forum.aspx?mode=thread&TopicID=189

.Edited for link - joe. *** Edited 9/9/2007 8:11:50 AM UTC by Ѕіx Flαgѕ Đαrієή Ĺαkє***

NO

^^Odds are that Shapiro would've sold the park off for real estate because it wasn't doing so good under Burke's management in it's final years with SF.

SFI tried to turn GL into a mega park to compete with CP & simply put it just didn't work.Even CF has admitted that it's gonna be more difficult than they had anticipated to turn the place around.

Why not just start a funeral march for the park? It would be much easier that all of this wild speculation.

SFWOA could have competed with CP. I don't think saying it grew too fast is what the problem was. SF was a poorly managed company with dollar signs in their eyes. If the customer service was anything to be desired, they would have probably survived and flourished.

Also to the people who don't care about the removals at the park, if this was happening at your home park you would feel a lot different about it. I have been going to GL for forty years and worked in and for the park for ten. I care deeply about it's future. If they would just make an announcement of removals or plans, it would make me less angered with CF. Parks are not as busy as they once were, and to anger people by leaving them in the dark is not good pr. I was at Euclid Beach the last day it was open, but at least they told people about it so they could enjoy it one last time. Was I upset about it closing? sure, but at least they had the decency to tell people and we understood why. If they do close this park and not say anything until after the season, I will never set foot in another CF owned park again.

Wasn't there a GOCC event at the park over the weekend. Surely there was some kind of meet-and-greet with the park people and surely someone asked questions. Did anyone attend? Anything to report?

---

BATWING FAN SFA said:^^Odds are that Shapiro would've sold the park off for real estate because it wasn't doing so good under Burke's management in it's final years with SF.

---

Just like a so-called Southern California theme park that seems to have even greater woes than the former Ohio park but was saved? SFWoA could have been saved. It would have fit in with Shapiro's family-focused itinerary.

I believe the GOCC event is this weekend during Oktoberfest.

The GOCC event was this past weekend, with ERT on Villain, Dominator, Thunderhawk, and Big Dipper. I'm kind of suprised there's not a TR on here yet.

^^ What's this "Oktoberfest" you speak of XF? I haven't heard anything about it.

And do you know when GL season passes go on sale for 2008? What's that? They haven't announced that yet either?

Ray P. (who wonders if the sarcasm actually came through in his post)