Which 6 SF parks are getting new rides.
But when talking to you about SFA I should know better than to rely on reason....
lata, jeremy
zacharyt.shutterfly.com
PlaceHolder for Castor & Pollux
SFI isn't evil, they're trying to be "profitable". Much like the *Pop thread*, why do people try to make business decisions into a battle of good and evil....
...and finally, any park with a RoS shouldn't claim to be "overlooked"...to the contrary, I think that particular breed of Intamin hyper has been *dissed*....
You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)
I don't know if you've been to SFDL recently or not, rollergator... but the park is lacking certain aspects that most other parks have added long ago, including such parks as Elitch Gardens, New England, Worlds of Adventure, & Kentucky Kingdom.
Although I will continue to get my season pass at SFDL because it's good at other Six Flags parks, I am disappointed with what Six Flags Corporate has done with the park since 2000, and question why they don't invest the money that specific park makes into new attractions (ie: if Magic Mountain only makes 10 mil profit, they have that much to spend on new attractions, not 25 million... and if say Fiesta Texas brings in 35 million in profit, they shouldn't only be limited to just capital improvements)...
...but that's the problem with chains... just doesn't matter who makes what (unless that's just Six Flags... I honestly don't know for sure how Cedar Fair & PAramount operates)
Please! Please! Please stop with this mentality that only the four big parks ever get a new attraction and that SFI just flat out ignores other parks in the chain. Using SFA as an example, since '99:
'99
A whole new area (Gotham City)
Joker's Jinx
Two Face
'00
S:ROS
'01
Batwing
'02
New Shows (okay questionable)
'03
Penguin's Blizzard River, a landscaping overhaul, new signs and other maintenance items.
I'm perfectly happy with going back to SFA for another season. Because I know the park will have improved in some way. Why do I know that? Becaue they have every seasons for the past five seasons.
For the rest of you, if you listen to Burke's last Earnings announcement where he mentioned that Cap Exp. would be limited to 75 mil this season, he also said they expect to increase cap. exp. in 2005. So this, at this point, seems like a one season thing. I also believe, that had SFI not pruchased SFNO last year and dropped $25 mil in that park immediately (which wasn't there plan) then things might have been a little different this season. Banks aren't afraid of SFI huge debt for some reason, they seem to be ever more than willing to renegotiate the terms of their loans. *** Edited 1/28/2004 7:51:07 PM UTC by coasterguts***
I'm hoping, and am fairly sure that the halfpipe will be much better received, and am very excited about getting to ride and operate it. Because of its small size, it is a great addition to our landlocked little park. With a little luck, this new ride combined with any other park improvements SFI has planned for us this year (which includes at least a partial retracking of Twister II), we can see a turn in our attendance.
The half-pipe, to ME, sounds like a MUCH better ride....
But then, seemingly out of nowhere, people started buying the Z-flyers this year....perhaps it's more popular with parks than with patrons??? That's what made me ask the "semi-rhetorical" question about the Z-flyers...nobody seems to like them but parks....ROFL.
You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)
Oh yeah, you also have Superman... although I'm not giving up Nitro!
The grass is always greener, eh?
mOOSH
My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.
Taking SFStL as an example. This last year they did get a new flat. A relocated one. But my point is that before this installation they hadn't had a new state of the art flat installed since Rush Street Flyer. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but that was installed almost a decade ago. Sure they've added several up-charge attractions and rennovated the dark ride, but no significant flats in almost a decade. That is pretty bad.
Now SFStL doesn't deserve a new coaster every couple of years due to the attendance. BUT can't they at least get a little love on the flats side of things.
You still have Zoidberg.... You ALL have Zoidberg! (V) (;,,;) (V)
mOOSH
While I feel Six Flags did bight off more than they could chew by purchasing all of the small, neglected parks, to where there was no way to make everyone happy. I mean what did you have at SFDL or SFA before Six Flags came in? I have been to both parks anmd the only coasters at either park that I even considered to be put in my top 20 were the rides Six Flags had recently installed into your parks.
The main thing Six Flags is thinking about is making money and that is what they will do by installing more and more ridess into the "big four." These parks are near cities with huge populations. SFGAM being right in the middle of 2. While if they don't install coasters into these small parks they will fail. These parks make more money no matter what.
I think all the people with small homeparks just need to get over the fact that Six Flags is neglecting your park and be happy with what they have now. I do, however feel it is on the ridiculous side that SFDL has not gotten a coaster for 5 years now.
They more or less took out more than they put in, when it came to Six Flags branding of Darien Lake...
...of course... Premiere is the one who owned SFDL since the mid-90's, who bought out Six Flags eventually, but before the buy-out, went nuts at SFDL giving them a lot of attention. Once they aquired 36 parks or so vs. the 5 or so they had... they just stopped paying attention to a coupe of the little guys.
When I look back on it, I'd honestly have been happier if Six Flags never bought Darien Lake... as there was a lot removed, and little put in its place.
How well was Darien Lake doing before SF bought it? Nevermind how many rides they had, was the park pulling in the crowds and making money?
Alot of small parks that SF bought would be history if it wasn't for them stepping up and buying them.
So here are the choices.
1. Privately owned park can't continue to operate and closes for good. Rides auctioned off and land sold for a new Wal-Mart.
2. Privately owned park can't continue to operate and is contacted by Six Flags to purchase. Park continues to operate.
Which would you choose?
My favorite MJ tune: "Billie Jean" which I have been listening to alot now. RIP MJ.
BATWING FAN SFA said:
Coasterdude why don't you just quit with the "rub it in our faces" attitude ok? your park is getting major additions every couple of seasons while a majority of us aren't getting anything!
So? Point me to where I'm rubbing it in anyone's face. Unless you at my profile (or has read posts of mine in SFGAm threads), you wouldn't know what my "home park" is. Not once have I ever said, "Ha! My park is getting all this while yours gets none!" I don't rub anything in anyone's face because I'm not twelve years old. I do, however, point out the business behind why certain parks get more additions than others (which, it seems, you are still unable to grasp).
It's obvious that they aren't at all interested in making wise expenditure choices toward these parks that could help them rise to the level of "the big four" & the reason why alot of the coaster installations didn't make such a marked improvement in attendance was because they were all sent to the wrong parks that didn't really need them instead of the low attendance parks that could've benefited from such a ride being added for the season.
No, it's obvious Six Flags is interested in making wise expenditure choices...which is exactly why SFA isn't getting big new rides every year! A wise expenditure is one in which the business will see that money returned (in increased revenue) and then some. Smaller parks (like SFA) just don't - and can't - have the attendance to pay for big new attractions every year. It's really that simple. Face the truth - SFA will never be on the level of the big four. It's no big secret why SFGAdv, SFGAm, SFMM, and SFoT are the "big four" in the chain because they're the parks near the largest populations! SFGAdv draws from the largest market in the country. SFMM draws from the second largest market. SFGAm draws from the third largest market (plus Milwaukee, which is the 17th). And so on. There are definite limits on how many people a given park can attract in any one year. A park in a more populated area (like SFGAm) can attract more than a park in a less populated area (like SFA). More people means more money. More money means more rides. Additionally, more population means more potential to draw in more people by adding big new rides. That's as simple as I can put it. Believe it or not, SF is not giving you the shafte personally. It's about business.
I'm quite sure if your homepark wasn't SFGRAM but was SFDL,SFAW or even SFA you'd probably feel the same way that we do
And you'd be wrong. I post what I do because I understand the business aspects behind it. If I'm not happy with what my "home park" is getting, I'll travel elsewhere.
as a result we do have the right to express our opinions on the subject whenever we feel it's neccessary to do so.
You can express your opinions all you want, and look as foolish as you want to, but that doesn't change the fact that new rides are determined by business strategies. It was the no-holding-back spending tactic that got SF into a big mess in the first place. Now that they're trying to get out of it by adding less rides to smaller parks, all I see are complaints. It's a battle that just can't be won.
Your homepark (SFGRAM) hasn't been as overlooked as mine or darienlakefan's(in fact it's been quite the opposite) but if it was then you'd probably feel very much the same way as we do about it.
No. And as others have said, SFA is far from "overlooked". But hey, I'd gladly give you SFGAm's new wild mouse if I had a choice. It's marginally better than taking a crap in a box and sending it SFA's way.
-Nate
DawgByte II said:
At SFDL before Six Flags took over, we still had 5 coasters (they took out one the year they put in Superman), we had a couple more flats that were just plain taken out to make room for some souvineer shops & such... as well as a couple little up-charge attractions.
That's kind of correct. Six Flags never really "took over."
They more or less took out more than they put in, when it came to Six Flags branding of Darien Lake...
No, I believe you're wrong in this case. They removed the Crazy Quilt. They added Superman: Ride of Steel, Twister, Slingshot, and Shipwreck Falls. Aside from aging water slides, what else did they remove?
...of course... Premiere [sic] is the one who owned SFDL since the mid-90's, who bought out Six Flags eventually, but before the buy-out, went nuts at SFDL giving them a lot of attention.
PREMIER purchased the park in late 1995, to be exact. But yes, you're correct.
Once they aquired 36 parks or so vs. the 5 or so they had... they just stopped paying attention to a coupe of the little guys.
Do you understand what kind of position Darien Lake is in? Darien Lake, as a theme park, camping resort, and concert venue, will consistently see visitors coming though its gates regardless of weather they add a new ride or not. Sure, a new ride will help INCREASE attendance for a given year, but surely Darien has no trouble maintaining a healthy yearly attendance figure because people still come to camp and they still come to see concerts. A new ride almost (I said almost!) works as an added benefit. It makes business sense to under-invest in Darien after all the build-up between 1996-1999.
When I look back on it, I'd honestly have been happier if Six Flags never bought Darien Lake... as there was a lot removed, and little put in its place.
Okay, so what you're saying is that you'd be happier if Premier Parks never bought Darien Lake, because, as you stated, Premier bought Darien Lake, and the Premier bought Six Flags, Inc. You got it right the first time, why did you mess up the second time?
And, if this is in fact what you mean, then you'd rather go back to the Viper and Predator days? I wouldn't give Superman back for anything.
-Blast *** Edited 1/29/2004 8:36:18 AM UTC by VolcanoTBC***
You must be logged in to post
