Variety - the key to success?

Theres been a lot of talk here about the rise of water parks, and how they are 'taking over' coasters and things like that.

Do you think that coasters are no longer going to be built because water parks are make more money?

Look at Cedar Point, they have 16 wonderful coasters. Flat rides? Sure they've got an S&S tower, and with maxAir it's a bit better, but up til very recently their flat ride collection sucked. What was drawing the people? The coasters.

Who visits for coasters? Teenagers, people in their twenties and SOME families.

Cedar Point,because it's so big can base all of earn all it's money and base it's business of the coasters, but for the average park, it's not easy.

Look at holiday world ? They only have 3 coasters but they have variety. They have an awesome water park along with the free Pepsi and sunscreen, as well as the addition of various thrill rides.

Do you think that water parks will become popular now just because they are reliable and draw guests, or is it really because the park lacks any variety in the first place? Up to the past few years, theme park water parks, aside from Disney, have been pretty dull.

What parks are doing now, isn't it just catching up in terms of water rides?

Eventually it will go back to coasters, and then back to water parks.

I think it's the variety that keeps the people coming. Sure 2 coasters within 3 years of eachother that were over 300 feet will attract people, but the variety of the water park will help bring what ever the coaster didn't accomplish.

Any thought? or do I have this entirely wrong?

The only person talking about how "water parks are on the rise and replacing coasters" is our very own water park afficianado, CoastaPlaya.

While he has some valid points - water parks are indeed popular and do pull in a lot of people as Holiday World and other parks have proven with great sucess - coasters will still continue to be built each year.

You gots nuttin to worry about! ;)

some people like waterparks better than coasterparks and some people like coasterparks better than waterparks and even more like both. SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

I think coasters will continue to be built as well as waterparks parks are now beginning to realize that they should draw families since they have more money to spend and that = variety. because a park should cater to the whole family = kiddie rides, mild flats and trains for those with little ones...roller coasters and thrill rides to entertain adults and teens. and waterparks seem to cater to familys too teens love to hang out at waterparks and kids well they just love water

Gather 'round, everyone, and listen to the tales of roller coaster lore.

In the beginning, there were ice slides, and while fun, the buttocks were cold.

Later came the wooden roller coaster, and, lo, how there were many. Plentiful, yay, but their variety was limited, for they were all wooden. Sure, there were Viriginia Reels and Flying Turns, but they were lambasted by the early-20th-century enthusiasts. "Gimmicks!" they shouted.

Then came the Great Depression, and many a fun wooden coaster were dismantled and turned into matches and Lincoln Logs.

But, huzzah, then came the second half of the century! A mountain of a coaster was built in Anaheim, and it did spawn little mine trains, and the public's appetite was whet.

In the crazy and psychedelic '70s, a few men on different continents thought, "wouldn't it be groovy if our mine trains went upside-down?" And then they did. And many corkscrews were placed in tiny parks of amusement across the land.

But these little loopers were not enough! The public cried out for more, more, more loops! And, yay, they were built. One park would boast, "I have the most!" Then another would come along and make one with one loop more.

The competition grew so fierce that it was called an "arms race." But late in the century, it seemed that loops weren't enough. "We need something different," said the park owners. And so the mighty designers sought to put riders in different positions: standing, dangling, flying. And the public did eat up these rides... for a time. After some years, the enthusiasts did shout, "Gimmicks!" and few more were built.

"If standing or flying or reclining is not what they want," the park owners said, "then let us give them height and speed!" And the designers did comply. And rides reached farther and farther into the sky. "Why does parking cost $10?" the public would ask. "Why?"

And one day, an enthusiast questioned it all. The enthusiast wondered why parks would build multimillion rides so very tall when a child playing in a pool seemed to have the most fun of all.

And, lo, that enthusiast posed that question on Coasterbuzz, with a certain confident burning in his heart that his sincere query would ultimately be mocked in verse by an exhausted editor.

I thought I was hailing "the Golden Age of Waterparks" as well, LOL. It isn't necessarily that water parks MAKE more money, it's that they make so much *in relation to* their cost...ROI!

Plus, with global warming and all...;)

Pretty good Olsor, except you left out the Racers at PKI that ushered in a new golden age of interest in wooden coasters.

idk CP has more variety than they get credit to. Anywhere else, Soak City would be an above average water park, their shows are xtremely underated and their dinning has really gotten better, if u want to pay their sit down resturant prices. CP might not have the newest and best flat rides, but they do have 2 major flats-more than some parks can say. They have one of the better collections of old classic flats also. Most people just dont ride them...cause the coasters.

Should note....I am NOT the huge fan of waterparks that 'Playa is (my *handle* notwithstanding). But, oddly enough, it doesn't seem to prevent me from understanding good BUSINESS sense...weird, huh? ;)

Eventually the $60 million waterpark resort bubble will burst. Neither as quickly or with anywhere near the same failure rate as the giga / wanna-be giga / stratacoaster bubble--but in due time, the market will be saturated.

Not to say the stratacoaster bubble has quite popped...I smell the stink of a few more future failures.

But in the meantime, both before and after, sensible coaster and slide expenditures will always fare well.

-'Playa

---

CoastaPlaya said:
Eventually the $60 million waterpark resort... market will be saturated.

---

Nice! :)

If a bubble bursts in a waterpark, I'm pretty sure that wont be failure that is stinking....

lata, jeremy

--who wonders if they use that 'red dye' in SFGAms new HH

I'm just nitpicking with Ride of Steel, but drop tower rides aren't flat rides. The first clue would be that they're completely vertical.

What flat rides are completely flat? Heck, maXair is taller than a Double Shot...isn't maXair a flat ride?

"Flat ride" to me is generic for any non-coaster, non-water ride. Some folks MIGHT even called the flume, S-T-Cs, or rapids rides "flats".

A nice variety of flat ride experiences, along with the aforementioned water rides, goes along WITH the coasters (and I guess upcharges where applicable), to make up your so-called "ride package". Even the entire ride package represents less than half of what a park needs to have. Infrastructure, landscaping, STAFF (love good staff), shows, maybe wandering musicians, and other *attractions* make up the overall park experience.

Of course, ALL that being said...since I have about 3 hours' total at BGT tomorrow morning, I'm going for SheiKra alone! ;)

*** Edited 6/17/2005 5:17:32 AM UTC by rollergator***

Drop towers not Flat Rides? That is the funniest thing I've ever seen in print here. Ever! If a ride was truly a 'flat' ride, then we'd have loads of 'Queue: The Escape" rides, and where would the fun be in that?

I completely agree, Gator, and I'd add one more qualifier: ...and non-dark ride, too.

Ha! I scoff at all of you!

- Bumper cars ride on a flat surface

- CP's Calypso rides on a tilted flat surface

and Tilt-a-whirls would be more of a 'stuffed crust' ride...

-CO

All I'm saying is that a drop tower doesn't meet the criteria for being a flat ride by current definition. You won't find any drop towers at flatrides.com. It's missing the one key component to being a flat ride, and that's the spinning element. Sure you could argue that a few of the Intamins rotate going up the tower, but it's at a speed that's more like an observation tower than a flat ride.

Rollergator, who has ever said that a rapids ride or a shoot-the-chutes ride is a flat ride? There again, it misses one of the definitions for being a flat ride, and that's the fact that you can't transport a rapids ride or shoot-the-chutes to the next fairground--yet. Yes, I'm aware that they have portable log flumes, but they're log flumes.

I know it's splitting hairs, but no one ever came up with a definition for rides like MaxAir or Iron Eagle that are clearly not flat, and are very tall during their ride cycle. To me it's sort of like people who win SUV's on reality shows and fawn over their brand new car. I'm sitting at home going "It's not a car".

*** Edited 6/17/2005 1:52:26 PM UTC by Intamin Fan***

What's a rollercoaster? What's an inversion? Same debate, different packaging.

---

TeknoScorpion said:
If a ride was truly a 'flat' ride, then we'd have loads of 'Queue: The Escape" rides, and where would the fun be in that?

---

Boy that takes me back to a certain South Park episode where the boys are at an amusement park in line for a ride they don't even know what it does. Turns out they were in line for "The Line Ride" and at the end of the line that was it. "Thank you for riding The Line Ride." Too darn funny!
*** Edited 6/17/2005 2:13:07 PM UTC by cyberdman***