Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:30 AM
Well it looks like SFNO will get Nothing big like a waterpark for 2005 ..Rumors from the park lean that way....Our elustrious City Council and Park Manager teamed up together to squash a Water Park plan by the Zephyrs Baseball team .Saying SFNO has plans for a waterpark and could not compete and come out in the green... Now we will probably get nothing either at the park or by a outside Company...Way to go SFNO and New Orleans City Council for concreting my reason to move away..This was a home grown idea to not allow Economic Development in the suburban area for waterpark income..I don't believe this Idea came from SFI to squash the Zephyrland waterpark..Every needs to remember New Orleans is well known for (The City that Care Forgot)..They didn't get that slogan for nothing!!!
Saturday, October 9, 2004 12:39 PM
Don't get your hopes down so soon. A lot of people felt 2005 was going to be a slim year, but SFI has shown they still have a few surprises. SFA seems to be on the brinks of an announcement based on the hints on their webpage scroll bar, but you also have to remember that usually SF parks don't announce new additions until Jan or Feb. If you look at all the SF press releases for all their parks over the last three or four years, you'd see that it is still very early for SF to be making announcements. There's still time. It might only be a flat ride or two or maybe a small coaster (like a Frequent Faller or Screamin Squirrel), but a lot of SF parks still have the CHANCE of getting something if SF manages the money corretly.
Saturday, October 9, 2004 1:34 PM
I think everyone sees that SFGAdv made an announcement, right after SFGAm, and now everyone wants their parks announcement. You can be that there will probably be nothing bigger than SFGAm's brand spankin new water park, and SFGAdv's brand spanking new record breaker, and for those 2 things, they need and want to generate a lot of interest for 2 of the biggest parks.
Remember, the former *star child* park, SFMM, hasn't shown any signs of anything new...
Saturday, October 9, 2004 1:49 PM
Coasterlover and TeknoScorpion. I appreciate your opptimism but for one who has seen SFNO management go out of their way to stop a Waterpark Project. Its shows flat out Greed and audacity for SF to run a business like this..Now the local area residents will suffer..Our City Council has been Quiet and probably don't want to talk about it now..SFNO could save face by just coming out and say they made a jump of the Gun Mistake...But that I believe will never happen...You can bet that The water park issue will be brought up in the next upcoming council elections...To build a waterpark like promised by SFNO It should have been started by now ,,Imagine that Chicago the Windy chilly city getting a Waterpark and New Orleans Hot and Muggy getting a upgraded reputation for a city that works with a major entertainment company to kill Economic Development due to Greed and Politics..New Orleans /SFNO new Motto ( the City and Park that Care Forgot) Being lied to by Jazzland and SFNO for new additions kind of goes without saying Same Management/ Same Manager/ Same City Council..One would not expect anything to change>>>>
Saturday, October 9, 2004 5:22 PM
BatwingFanSFA is that you? Sure sounds like it.
Saturday, October 9, 2004 9:51 PM
Dude, Six Flags New Orleans and the New Orleans City Council just cancelled/destroyed waterpark plans out of the blue that had promise, feasibility, and money behind it with well over a year of research. Now it goes down the drain, no waterpark at all, and Six Flags just sits on their hands and bs's us. I think that reason alone is perfectly good reason to be really ticked off.
This isn't an issue where we're whining that "oh why won't Six Flags give us something, we're so desperate and we aren't happy enough with what we've got" but rather what Six Flags has TAKEN AWAY for no reason at all other then... greed? lack of competition in the market for the future? or what?! I think it's greed on both parties of Six Flags New Orleans and the New Orleans city council. The New Orleans city council has close financial ties with SFNO due to the terms they created due to the Jazzland bankruptsy. Also Six Flags New Orleans would profit immensely (say about 350,000 more in attendance) from this proposed waterpark. However, due to the insecure and volatile nature of Six Flags Inc, the funding for it goes down the tube and we're left with nothing at all.
Also think of it this way. They are HAMPERING the economy in one of New Orleans's suburbs. The Zephyrs wanted this waterpark to raise revenue and increase popularity. And now Six Flags just wipes out their hopes completely and leaves New Orleans empty-handed without a long-awaited waterpark (it's been one of the public's biggest demands). The Zephyrs were shocked at what Six Flags and the New Orleans city council did. I guess you just have to live here to be shocked too.
DOWN WITH SIX FLAGS.
Can Zephyrland be reborn?
Saturday, October 9, 2004 10:11 PM
Just because there isn't anything in the cards for an '05 waterpark dosen't mean it won't happen. I highly doubt Six Flags would have stopped another party from building one if they didn't have pretty decent plans of one of their own.
What I can't understand is this, you've went this long without a waterpark, why all of a sudden has it become a neccessity?
Heck, I don't even think there is such a thing as a waterpark anywhere in the state of WV. I've not seen one in years, and the one that was here I'm pretty sure closed when I was quite young.
There are lots of public demands here, there and everywhere, but demands do not neccessitate a need. It only shows a want, and eventually I'm sure you'll get your little waterpark.
Saturday, October 9, 2004 11:56 PM
Jeezz... Did anyone ever think that the reason the city doesn't want that "other" water park is because they (the city) have so much money riding on the financial success of SFNO? If they had allowed another water park to be built, and that water park had a better turn out that the one at SFNO's, the city would lose money on the deal. This decision is a no brainer as to why they declined the other park.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 12:22 AM
But josh, don't you know that SFI and the city are just being greedy? I mean, its not like they're trying to run a successful business here! C'mon, Jeesh!;)
I'm sorry, but this really does boil down to another case of sensless whining. Why do you guys whine about something you can't control?
Not only that, but the park hasn't made any kind of announcement on what they may or may not be adding next year. So far only 2 SF parks have confirmed, and we have a really good hint for anotherone.
Its called big business, deal with it.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 12:58 AM
Well, Teckno, too be technical we have three parks confirmed...SFGAdv, SFGAm and...Six Flags Mexico...then again SFM's Superman hypercoaster is supposed to open this winter, so it could be late 2004, or early 2005...all technicalities, just don't want to forget our lucky neighbors south of the border, seemes they have a pretty good ride coming too...
Anyways, back to the bickering...
If SFI thinks SFNO needs a waterpark to be successful, then they will build a waterpark given the oppertunity and money. However, you have to consider that they just spent something like $20 million on SFNO alone when they flagged it plus the cost of purchasing the park and while some parks seemed to add a TON of attractions after being flagged (the former SFWOA, SFA, SFNE to an extent, SFMW to an extent), the company just isn't in a situation where they can spend upwards of $80 million (the estimated cost of what they've added so far plus the cost of a new waterpark plus the cost of the park) on a single park over a three year span, especially when the park couldn't even break 1.1 million guests in it's first year. Who knows, if the park pulled in the crowds for 2004, something could still be in the works, only time will tell...
Sunday, October 10, 2004 2:13 AM
True, Coaster Lover, but when something is announced 2 years in advance, one tends to forget;).
I agree with what you say. Just because SFI hasn't announced something for next year in the way of a waterpark dosen't mean it isn't coming. Heck, Six Flags is good about waiting till the last min. for something to be announced. If what Joe C. said in that other thread is true, and I have no reason to doubt it isn't, then Six Flags dosen't even know what parks get what till the last min. on alot of rides. Why is this year any different?
Oh, thats right, because they've already announced 2 parks, and are teasing us with another. Guys, this year is the exception, not the rule. Remember that. And if they don't get anything next year, its not like they'll never get a new coaster or a water park ever again (stop reading all of BATWING FAN's posts, darn it! He hasn't got a clue!).
Just look @ SFGAm, they're just now getting their (long overdue) waterpark...
Sunday, October 10, 2004 4:19 AM
SF has owned SFNO now for what, two complete summers? I'm sure it takes longer than that to design a water park, get approval and build it. I'm sure SF has told the city council they are well on their way to building a water park.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:43 AM
I always thought competition was Good. The City was told that a Waterpark was in the Plans for 2005. Thats why the Superdome Commision who regulates the property shut Zephyrland down..I just believe this was not a SFI generated Idea but one Generated by SFNO's Manager and all his friends on the City Council. You have to remember this manager was also the manager of the now defunct Jazzland.He has emense ties with the Mayor and City Council.I Honestly believe he made this move on his own to secure his job..Its a win win situation..If we get a Park he wins, If we Don't, he is off the hook,telling SF that he Loves to run the park so much look what I've done for you..The only people hurt is the people who support the park and the People from the Suburban areas who don't go to the park but now know they got screwed out of a waterpark by SF..It's just boils down to Louisiana Politics..Once you live here you will be able to say "Been there, Lived there,Got Burnt, Got the Hat, Moved" My other point is why build a park in a area like Chicago that has weather for about 70 days versus our hot weather times down here that last much longer.. *** Edited 10/10/2004 1:45:56 PM UTC by CrazyB***
BATWING FAN SFA
Sunday, October 10, 2004 11:21 AM
Coasterlover:I saw something rather interesting at the park when we pulled into the gates....there's a sign for a public hearing involving a detailed site plan & I saw no other signs like it all anywhere along central avenue so it looks like they're about to get the ball rolling really soon.
Sorry to hear about SFNO's waterpark plans falling through at the present time,but the park is still young & given time (& funding) they might get it sooner or later....on the bright side at least you got a B:TR when your park was flagged,we're still stuck with a crappy SLC.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 11:42 AM
The same exact plans for a waterpark have been in place since Jazzland was in planning stages; it's ready to go as soon as it gets the funding from Six Flags Inc. Also, this is not the first waterpark that Six Flags has put a stop to. In 2002, another waterpark was in the planning stages closer to Six Flags (then still Jazzland). Six Flags told them it would not be feasible because they had plans for a waterpark. I know Six Flags is a business and will do some devious things to make an extra buck or two. But that doesn't mean I have to totally agree with what they've done. Due to this horrific season, they've lost me as a customer and a pass holder.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:10 PM
Techno...I don't think these guys are whining about SFNO. When you see a sign put up inside the park (as I did on my visit there last month) that says "Coming in 2005 - New Attraction", then you are led to believe the park is adding a new attraction. Then, when the announcement sign "mysteriously" disappears as a hurricane blows through (Florida mind you, not Louisiana) with mild winds and rain in New Orleans, you can't help but begin to think SFI is pulling a fast one on the park. How convenient for the sign to be removed. Everyone will think the hurricane did it. Hmmm...I'm not buying it. Keeping my fingers crossed regardless. SFNO could definitely use a water park as much as SFGAm, if not more so.
BATWING FAN SFA
Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:35 PM
I feel your frustration Cameraman,we've got a whole list of approved rides for our park just waiting to be built but lack the funding from SFI at the present time to do so.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:40 PM
As I've said in previous post, I don't have problem with the park. My point is did the Manager on his own accord get together with his friends on the City Council and Kill the Zephyrland Waterpark Project or was it an idea generated by SFI. Either way the citizens of New Orleans and the suburbs will suffer. If its because of one persons greed or the Corporation he works for..I would be will to bet that the truth will never be revealed..Birds of a feather stick together ..New Orleans grown politics will never change that is why the city continues to lose big business.. New Orleans the City that Care forgot or is that New Orleans the City that sold out Care for Profit..I for one would like to hear it from Terry Prathers mouth that He did what he was told to do. But that would be political suicide. He would be regarded much better in the eyes of the season Pass holders if he for once told us the truth!!! How about it Terry we are all ears!!!!!
Sunday, October 10, 2004 11:25 PM
Well, with your reasoning that Chicago (SFGAm) shouldn't get a waterpark due to weather, why does Valleyfair, Michigan's Adventure, Cedar Point, Geauga Lake and Indiana Beach have them? Same weather climates.
Realize that your park is small in stature so mega-additions aren't going to happen constantly. Be happy that SF saved Jazzland and added a few coasters when they took over.
Sunday, October 10, 2004 11:32 PM
And lets not forget that the "mysteriously disappearing sign" didn't say 'Coming in 2005, a Brand new Waterpark!'
It said new attraction, which could be anything from an upcharg, sim, flat, or coaster.
The key word that everyone is saying, but not paying attention to, is "PLAN". Say it with me, "PLAN", which means: A proposed or tentative project or course of action (second def. from dictionary.com).
The key word there is *tentative*. Again, say it with me *tentative*. That means: Not fully worked out, concluded, or agreed on; provisional: ***tentative plans.***
That was cut and pasted directly from dictionary.com (with all 6 stars added by me to make my point).
Again, just because its not coming next year dosen't mean its been killed.