Storm Riders Replacing SSE??

[Laura]

I cant speak for the poster but I think part of his point is that you are by far the most obnoxious person on these boards. Simple.

Actually, I think Thrawn has been quite pleasant the last few days. Even when he's not pleasant, he's at least honest, which the evil side of me finds rather entertaining. :lol:

 

[Thrawn]

exactly, and do you know how many coasters EPCOT has? 0 zip zilch nada.

Here's a simple question, Mr "Let's Build Coasters!!!!!!!11111"

Why should Disney build coasters when the big coaster parks all over the world are failing? Universal, the Six Flags parks, even the Cedar Fair parks to an extent now, are not performing as they used to. Six Flags has even dropped ownership on a couple parks. The Universal theme parks are known to be up for bids. And the Cedar Fair stock price has been stuck in a rut.

So why would it be a good decision for Disney to build these big metal scrapheaps?

Just because there are none of those big metal rides sticking up at WDW doesn't mean there aren't thrill rides. Is M:S not a thrill ride? Test Track? So, Disney takes the time to theme their attractions, and not just name them "Superman" and paint them red. That makes the attractions inferior?

 

[darthdarrel]

Here's a simple question, Mr "Let's Build Coasters!!!!!!!11111"

Why should Disney build coasters when the big coaster parks all over the world are failing? Universal, the Six Flags parks, even the Cedar Fair parks to an extent now, are not performing as they used to. Six Flags has even dropped ownership on a couple parks. The Universal theme parks are known to be up for bids. And the Cedar Fair stock price has been stuck in a rut.

So why would it be a good decision for Disney to build these big metal scrapheaps?

Just because there are none of those big metal rides sticking up at WDW doesn't mean there aren't thrill rides. Is M:S not a thrill ride? Test Track? So, Disney takes the time to theme their attractions, and not just name them "Superman" and paint them red. That makes the attractions inferior?

For once thrawn I have to disagree with you. Cedar point in Ohio by no means is failing, infact they just bought Geauga Lake Park from Six Flags and that park is also a huge success. but I do agree that Epcot is not the place to put a roller coaster in.

 

[Thrawn]

For once thrawn I have to disagree with you. Cedar point in Ohio by no means is failing, infact they just bought Geauga Lake Park from Six Flags and that park is also a huge success. but I do agree that Epcot is not the place to put a roller coaster in.

I'm not going into financials, but you're wrong. Notice, first, that I said they are not performing as they used to, not that they are failing. I made sure I prefaced that.

Now, here is Cedar Fair's 5 year chart.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=FUN&t=5y

Notice the marked improvements they gained every year before 2005. Now this year, the stock price is down. That is not performing as they used to, to a T.

If you start reading the stories you can find there on Yahoo Financial, you can see how badly they are actually doing. For instance, an awful 1% increase in attendance over June of last year. That is completely horrible, considering the huge recovery other tourism spots (including WDW) have been making.

 

[Papa Van]

In a perfect world, we'd get an update of SSE, plus Stormriders in it's own pavilion. But since we don't live in a perfect world, I'd settle for just the SSE update. BTW, I said update, not complete reworking. A rollercoaster or simulator just could'nt replace SSE. Epcot would'nt be the same. That would be like turning Cinderella Castle into a birthday cake or something. :hurl: :animwink:

Papa Van

 

[darthdarrel]

I'm not going into financials, but you're wrong. Notice, first, that I said they are not performing as they used to, not that they are failing. I made sure I prefaced that.

Now, here is Cedar Fair's 5 year chart.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=FUN&t=5y

Notice the marked improvements they gained every year before 2005. Now this year, the stock price is down. That is not performing as they used to, to a T.

If you start reading the stories you can find there on Yahoo Financial, you can see how badly they are actually doing. For instance, an awful 1% increase in attendance over June of last year. That is completely horrible, considering the huge recovery other tourism spots (including WDW) have been making.

Well I can't speak for the rest of cedar fairs parks, but Cedar point cant take much more growth in park attendance as Cedar point is on an island and it is land locked lol! BUt I wasn't calling you a liar, I just disagreed with you on one point.and personally You can argue with me that a 1% jump is dismal but in my book any jump is positive atleast there wasn't a decline. :wave:

 

[CAPTAIN HOOK]

i thought that this rumor was dead

It was :lol:

 

[peter11435]

Well I can't speak for the rest of cedar fairs parks, but Cedar point cant take much more growth in park attendance as Cedar point is on an island and it is land locked lol! BUt I wasn't calling you a liar, I just disagreed with you on one point.and personally You can argue with me that a 1% jump is dismal but in my book any jump is positive atleast there wasn't a decline. :wave:

The land locked argument does not work. They may be on an island but they can and did add new attractions. New attractions increase capacity and should increase attendance. Epcot did not "expand" in 2003, but the opening of M:S combined with 9/11 recovery increased park attendance by nearly 10%. Therefore a 1% increase in attendance is not performing especially when the parks would be having substantial recovery from 9/11.

As for the roller coasters in Epcot idea. Yeah they park has zero however the fact is that even with no roller coaster it is still the third most visited theme park in the country. Additionaly the attendance at Epcot ( 0 roller coasters), was about 50% more than the attendance at Islands of Adventure (4 roller coasters).

 

[brich]

You can argue with me that a 1% jump is dismal but in my book any jump is positive atleast there wasn't a decline. :wave:

So long as that 1% is generating more cash than the rise in costs to run the park this year...

 

[captcanada]

Here's a simple question, Mr "Let's Build Coasters!!!!!!!11111"

Why should Disney build coasters when the big coaster parks all over the world are failing? Universal, the Six Flags parks, even the Cedar Fair parks to an extent now, are not performing as they used to. Six Flags has even dropped ownership on a couple parks. The Universal theme parks are known to be up for bids. And the Cedar Fair stock price has been stuck in a rut.

So why would it be a good decision for Disney to build these big metal scrapheaps?

Just because there are none of those big metal rides sticking up at WDW doesn't mean there aren't thrill rides. Is M:S not a thrill ride? Test Track? So, Disney takes the time to theme their attractions, and not just name them "Superman" and paint them red. That makes the attractions inferior?

I couldn't agree more!!
There's a park in Canada called "Paramount's Canada's Wonderland". It has a coaster called "Tomb Raider". What does it have to do with the movie "Tomb Raider"?? Nothing!!! It may have a Laura Croft picture on it or something.
I find the practice of making a ride and randomly slapping a name on it and calling it a theme ride, to be misleading and dull.

This park is about an hour from my home (if I drive slow).
I went once this year (for the last time ever probably) and the last time I went before that would be about 5 years before that. The time before that was again, about 5 years prior.

My point? Disney is a 21 hour drive away from me. Last time I went.....Jan/05. The time before that....may/04 (less than a year between). My next likely trip....Jan-feb/06. I'd rather travel over 2000 kilometers to a real park, without much in the way of roller coasters, then drive less than 100km to a park FULL of (actually really good) roller coasters.

There's enough coaster parks out there for people. Let Disney (and epcot) BE Disney (and epcot).

(Wow....long winded me!)

 

[Thrawn]

Well I can't speak for the rest of cedar fairs parks, but Cedar point cant take much more growth in park attendance as Cedar point is on an island and it is land locked lol! BUt I wasn't calling you a liar, I just disagreed with you on one point.and personally You can argue with me that a 1% jump is dismal but in my book any jump is positive atleast there wasn't a decline. :wave:

Sorry guy, but a 1% increase when tourism as a whole is up 5-10% IS a decline. You have less of a percentage of visitors then you did before.

No matter the location of ANYTHING, you are always looking to increase every year. Disney doesn't release attendance numbers. However, the original DLR still has increasing attendance every year. Its been open for 50! And nothing gets more packed in than DLR.

Also, a simple question. How can Cedar Point be both on an island AND land-locked?

Land-locked is when you have no water surrounding your borders. An island is ALL water surrounding your borders. So, I'm confused by your statement.

Anyway, no matter what you may think of your precious Cedar Fair, they aren't doing as well as they used to. Coasters also do not pull in the repeat visits like Disney style rides do. How many times does a person really have to ride a big metal thing that repeatedly slams your head into the headrests?

 

[peter11435]

Also, a simple question. How can Cedar Point be both on an island AND land-locked?

That is a very good question. :lol:

 

[nelsonj3]

Here's a simple question, Mr "Let's Build Coasters!!!!!!!11111"

Why should Disney build coasters when the big coaster parks all over the world are failing? Universal, the Six Flags parks, even the Cedar Fair parks to an extent now, are not performing as they used to. Six Flags has even dropped ownership on a couple parks. The Universal theme parks are known to be up for bids. And the Cedar Fair stock price has been stuck in a rut.

So why would it be a good decision for Disney to build these big metal scrapheaps?

Just because there are none of those big metal rides sticking up at WDW doesn't mean there aren't thrill rides. Is M:S not a thrill ride? Test Track? So, Disney takes the time to theme their attractions, and not just name them "Superman" and paint them red. That makes the attractions inferior?

That's exactly what I was saying! These people just don't get it. Even with some of the questionable redesigns of Epcot attractions in the last few years, Epcot still has far superior attractions to the "Thrill Parks." Not to mention being the third most visited theme park in the World behind the WDW Magic Kingdom and Disneyland.

All I know is that I'm glad these people who think Epcot desparately needs a coaster are not in charge of Epcot attractions!!

 

[darthdarrel]

The land locked argument does not work. They may be on an island but they can and did add new attractions. New attractions increase capacity and should increase attendance. Epcot did not "expand" in 2003, but the opening of M:S combined with 9/11 recovery increased park attendance by nearly 10%. Therefore a 1% increase in attendance is not performing especially when the parks would be having substantial recovery from 9/11.

As for the roller coasters in Epcot idea. Yeah they park has zero however the fact is that even with no roller coaster it is still the third most visited theme park in the country. Additionaly the attendance at Epcot ( 0 roller coasters), was about 50% more than the attendance at Islands of Adventure (4 roller coasters).

As far as the arguement against roller coasters in epcot you are preaching to the choir here. BUt as far as Cedar point being land locked does hold weight how many passangers does the new ride hold?20 maybe and I am not sure where they could have even possibly put this new ride, they may have had to tear down an old ride, cause like I said there is no where to build, infact Cedar fair had a proposal infront of city council to fill in the bay so they could expand it's land mass and city council shot the propsal down so they in turn bought Six flags worlds of adventures.but I whole heartedly agree with you on your statistics becrying the implimentation of roller coasters in epcot, it just would not fit, infact the only roller coaster I could even see working in epcot is either EE, which they decided to put in the animal kingdom or a copy of the matterhorn.

 

[Thrawn]

As far as the arguement against roller coasters in epcot you are preaching to the choir here. BUt as far as Cedar point being land locked does hold weight how many passangers does the new ride hold?20 maybe and I am not sure where they could have even possibly put this new ride, they may have had to tear down an old ride, cause like I said there is no where to build, infact Cedar fair had a proposal infront of city council to fill in the bay so they could expand it's land mass and city council shot the propsal down so they in turn bought Six flags worlds of adventures.but I whole heartedly agree with you on your statistics becrying the implimentation of roller coasters in epcot, it just would not fit, infact the only roller coaster I could even see working in epcot is either EE, which they decided to put in the animal kingdom or a copy of the matterhorn.

Landlocked doesn't mean what you are using it for. You mean that they are out of space.

Guess what, DisneyLand ran out of space a long, long time ago. Hasn't stopped them from increasing attendance. Your argument does not hold water.

 

[darthdarrel]

Thrawn and peter I do not know why you 2 are attacking me, I am agreeing with you on the roller coaster statement and as far as cedarpoint is concerned you can dislike it all you want, just don't go there.the fact remains that there is no more land for cedar point to expand.and attendance is not down at cedar poiint infact it is up even if it is only 1%, you can't get any more attendance and if you did you wouldn't have any room to move beleive me I go there all the time, I have season passes.The one thing I do not like about Cedar point is that there is so many people you are constantly having people bump into you and the long lines, specially being that you are right by the water and it gets terribly hot and humid.

 

[Thrawn]

Thrawn and peter I do not know why you 2 are attacking me, I am agreeing with you on the roller coaster statement and as far as cedarpoint is concerned you can dislike it all you want, just don't go there.the fact remains that there is no more land for cedar point to expand.and attendance is not down at cedar poiint infact it is up even if it is only 1%, you get any more attendance and you wont have any room to move beleive me I go there all the time, I have season passes.

And it is because you have season passes that you are defending the parks even though the facts I have provided are showing you that you are wrong. The FACT I am trying to get you to realize is that Cedar Fair is not doing as well as they used to.

They can expand if they want to. Buy the land, buy another park, etc. I am not referring to Cedar Park, but to Cedar Fair.

You may love the park as much as you want, but the fact remains it isn't doing as well as it should.

If you think we are attacking you, you are mistaken. We are pointing out inaccuracies in the blind love you have for CP. You haven't commented on any of the facts posted, just made excuses for why they aren't doing well. One thing you will learn when you get older is that companies don't get excuses. If they have problems, they need to fix it, or lose money. Like I said in my previous post, DisneyLand is the same size it has always been, and attendance is always up, and more than 1% at that. Your excuse of "well theres no land to fit more people" simply doesn't work.

 

[gsimpson]

I think SSE should keep the same "type" of ride it has now, it is a nice cool place to relax, it has a good message, and it sucks up a huge number of people. Having said that, it is currently if pretty horrible shape, it squeeks and rumbles as though it is in bad shape and it has been years since all the scenes worked completely well.

I really don't understand the rabid anti-coaster sentiment. I dont' want to see Disney become a thrill park like Cedar point or Magic Mountain where they have a far more simply theme "roller coaster in a gravel pit" but I also don't see why Disney can't have a coaster in Epcot. Didn't the original plans call for a Materhorn knock off to be in Japan rethemed as Mt. Fuji? Or is the new view that the people who originally cut the budget for Epcot were showing extreme forsight and wisdom by keeping the evil roller coasters out? (sarcasm)

The 1% increase in attendance is only part of the story at Cedar Fair. Quoting a single statistic like that is a bit misleading, which I would suppose was the intent. Read the entire finiancial report at Cedar Fair LLC's website and you can see that they are doing fairly well at all their parks, including if not especially Knott's where they have been converting it TO a thrill park for the last few years.

 

[Thrawn]

I think SSE should keep the same "type" of ride it has now, it is a nice cool place to relax, it has a good message, and it sucks up a huge number of people. Having said that, it is currently if pretty horrible shape, it squeeks and rumbles as though it is in bad shape and it has been years since all the scenes worked completely well.

I really don't understand the rabid anti-coaster sentiment. I dont' want to see Disney become a thrill park like Cedar point or Magic Mountain where they have a far more simply theme "roller coaster in a gravel pit" but I also don't see why Disney can't have a coaster in Epcot. Didn't the original plans call for a Materhorn knock off to be in Japan rethemed as Mt. Fuji? Or is the new view that the people who originally cut the budget for Epcot were showing extreme forsight and wisdom by keeping the evil roller coasters out? (sarcasm)

The 1% increase in attendance is only part of the story at Cedar Fair. Quoting a single statistic like that is a bit misleading, which I would suppose was the intent. Read the entire finiancial report at Cedar Fair LLC's website and you can see that they are doing fairly well at all their parks, including if not especially Knott's where they have been converting it TO a thrill park for the last few years.

I wouldn't have a problem with the well themed rides like Matterhorn. However, I don't want to see big steel coasters lining my WDW landscape.

I wouldn't take my financial information from the companies own website. They aren't going to say "Well, we are up 1% but Disney is up 15%"

Go here if you want unbiased information:
Click

 

[darthdarrel]

And it is because you have season passes that you are defending the parks even though the facts I have provided are showing you that you are wrong. The FACT I am trying to get you to realize is that Cedar Fair is not doing as well as they used to.

They can expand if they want to. Buy the land, buy another park, etc. I am not referring to Cedar Park, but to Cedar Fair.

You may love the park as much as you want, but the fact remains it isn't doing as well as it should.

If you think we are attacking you, you are mistaken. We are pointing out inaccuracies in the blind love you have for CP. You haven't commented on any of the facts posted, just made excuses for why they aren't doing well. One thing you will learn when you get older is that companies don't get excuses. If they have problems, they need to fix it, or lose money. Like I said in my previous post, DisneyLand is the same size it has always been, and attendance is always up, and more than 1% at that. Your excuse of "well theres no land to fit more people" simply doesn't work.

Umm when I get older? don't treat me like a child, I am 38 years old look at my profile!