tlvtr

I know it's only been a couple days, but it sure seems like this might turn into a fiasco really fast if down time due to wind is going to be this common. Maybe the wind the last few days has been abnormal, and soon everything will be great. I certainly don't expect or want them to run the ride if it isn't safe, but it sure will be a major disappointment if the ride ends up being closed more than open this season.

I should do something like this. I've never submitted a comment - positive or negative - about my time at the park, and I'm generally very pleased with the staff and operations. My biggest complaints are always about inconsiderate attendees. Sometimes I'm annoyed when a ride is closed or running a lower capacity, but I usually assume there is a good reason for that even if it isn't obvious.

I'm not saying the job of the crew leader is easy, or that shift changes don't pose problems. But that is the crew leader's problem. That's why he or she is a crew leader. They should have had a better handle on the situation, or received more support from their manager. The lower employee had fulfilled her commitment for the day and the OP's desire for root beer floats didn't trump that. I don't mean to criticize the OP. But I don't find the employee's actions so objectionable.

I think it's hilarious as well. I generally don't get too upset over things like this. Think about it from her perspective... She's tired from a long day, her shift is over, she probably isn't allowed overtime, so even if she clocks out a few minutes later because she helped you, her pay won't reflect the extra effort. And if she helps you, there is a good chance someone else will line up to be helped and they will either have to be told to get in another line, or keep her busy even longer after her shift is over. There probably is no motivation for her to put on that extra smile or extra effort to help you. It would be great if everyone was nice and helpful just for the sake of it, but that is not the reality of human nature. The low-level employees have no real stake in the company as a whole, because even if they're attitude drives away business, by the time it actually effects the company, she's probably moved on to college and/or other jobs. All she has to do is just enough to keep her job, and anything further isn't worth her time. Honestly, I think the fault here is more with KI/CF management than the employee. Better scheduling and management of that situation would have put more people in the spots needed, and would have insured that someone was ready to take over for the employee leaving immediately so that there would be no interruption in service, and no need to switch to a new line. If they are making the decision to pay low wages, you have to plan for and work with the reality that many employees won't give 100% to their job. Expecting more is naive and just bad management.

I have found very few ways to have fun that are truly free, all the time. So, my simple answer would be, "No, we can not."

Would you mind sharing which studies you are referring to that give you such confidence in declaring (rather than opining, which is all I was doing) that this increase will have negative economic results? I'm not saying that a $50 threshold never has a psychological effect, but does the study specifically cover amusement parks and their patrons? Does it factor in the extremely easy way to purchase an identical ticket for far less than $50 through their website? My guess is no, and therefore can not be equated exactly to this situation. If you are looking to get a new DVD player, monthly internet service or a trip to the movies a $50 threshold will have a completely different effect on consumers. But this is a different animal, and it shouldn't be assumed that what is true in one situation will be true in every situation. Please take no offense, but as a scientist you should know that better than anyone else. But this can all be somewhat settled when we eventually find out how 2011 works out financially for Cedar Fair. If I end up being wrong so be it.

Honestly, I don't think the price increase — and the crossing of the $50 threshold — is as significant psychologically as some here seem to assume. Especially since with even the slightest amount of planning ahead that $50 barrier can be avoided, the effect will be minimal if non-existent. I also don't think the food prices are at a level where dropping the prices will result in higher volume and equal (or higher) revenue will result. I know that plenty of people decide to eat in the parking lot (or off-site), but I have stood in enough long lines to know that demand for the food served inside KI is still in sufficient demand, and I don't think there are nearly enough people avoiding the food to compensate for lower prices. I can count on one hand how many times I saw a family consuming food in the parking lot, or McDonald's that had been snuck inside last year at the park. Obviously I can not make a definitive statement from my extremely limited observations, but if there were really enough people avoiding the food over the price, the evidence would likely be much more prevalent. Nor do I think the park is particularly equipped to handle much greater increase in the number of people buying food at the park (again, due to the long lines I have experienced very often waiting to purchase food). Now, do I like the price of tickets, or food in the park? No, absolutely not. Nor do I think the pricing structure is the smartest way to run the park. But I don't agree that lowering prices for each would so easily make up for revenue and have a positive impact on the prices. Reducing the insanely high salary for top executives, would be a fantastic first step though!

My situation is different from others here (never had a platinum pass, never had an opportunity to get turned away unfairly), but the biggest annoyances for me during my visits to KI have come from other guests. Line-cutting, smoking in crowded lines, trying to sneak small children on rides that they are clearly too short for, groups splitting up to each sit in their own car on a ride, or spitting off tall rides (one time hitting my wife on the head!) makes me wish that there were more employees around to tell people NO. I personally think the cliche "the customer is always right" is wrong and has led to way too many people feeling overly entitled (I'm not applying this criticism to the OP though). I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to emphasize intense politeness while declining a guests request, but ultimately the policy will be dictated by the constructs of capitalism. Until attendance suffers because of complaints about park staff, there is no reason to address it. For instance, one night I was catching a couple last minute rides on Diamondback. It was right at closing time and my train pulls into the station. The gates open up and people start to climb on for one final ride, but no one was in my lane. They were obviously going to run the train again, but when i turned to a ride-op and asked if I could stay on he tersely told me no and motioned for me to move. He probably was tired and wanted to hurry and leave, but there was no reason for him to be so rude to me. HOWEVER, the benefits of attending the park far outweigh any occasional rudeness from an employee, so I keep returning and will be renewing my season pass this year. Basically, every time you renew your pass or someone comes back for a repeat visit, they are confirming that the benefits outweigh any drawbacks. Conversely, I used to use Tmobile for my cell phone, but became so fed up with their customer support I switched to AT&T, even though I'm paying more money now (not that AT&T is a shining beacon of customer service, but not as bad as my experience with Tmobile). If there was a big drop off in attendance or season pass sales and a survey showed that rude employees was a big factor in this, there would certainly be changes made to employee policy. But any complaint coming from a season pass holder that has every intention on renewing their pass will be met with minor concern. I'm not saying that is right, but there is no economic reason to worry if you are still going to give them the same amount of money regardless. Money is all that ultimately matters.

I wish there was a way to add single rider lines to all the big rides. Every time a train runs with an empty seat, a kitten cries. . . In all seriousness, I realize that implementing single rider lines park-wide is completely impractical. Maybe some rides like backlot and Invertigo that consistently have long lines and have lower capacity would be a good place to start. Even without a separate line, having an attendant assigning you a seat and making sure that all seats are filled could be done? Although, I'm probably overly spoiled by ERT and early spring visits, so I get frustrated by any line longer than 15 minutes. I should probably just get over it.

That's all fine. I'm not saying that EVERYONE goes for just the coasters. And I never gave any definition of what is or isn't a "thrill ride". I don't think I even said those words in either of my posts. I'm simply expressing my opinion that this ride is a big let down for me after seeing the initial teaser. If it's not a let down to you, that's cool. I have no interest in convincing anyone that flats are less fun, that's just my opinion. I do stand by my assertion that in GENERAL (there are obviously no absolutes in anything, and I'm not trying to speak for every possible demographic), coasters are a much bigger deal. The lines for Diamondback, The Beast, Firehawk, Invertigo and Flight of Fear are evidence that coasters are the biggest attraction. Delirium and Drop Tower lines can get long, but I have never seen anyone wear a t-shirt with their Delirium ride count on it for instance. Outside of this forum (which is a very different, and very small demographic of the Parks visitors) I've never heard anyone talk excitedly about the shows, the theming or many of the flats (Drop Tower is probably the only exception). When most casual visitors think of KI, they think of coasters (at least according to my completely un-scientific observations). That doesn't make it an inferior experience to ride a flat over and over, or repeatedly watch a show, or to just walk around and enjoy the atmosphere. I'm simply expressing my view, and I'm speaking from a general population/casual visitor viewpoint. Prior to this year, I've never been to an amusement park multiple times, and I've only been to a few at all in my life. I'm having fun going to KI repeatedly this year, but I'm in a completely demographic than what most of the posters on this forum are in. But it's all good to me.

Well, I said a wind seeker isn't worth a press CONFERENCE. But, no, I don't think any of those rides would have been worth a press conference either. Maybe tomb raider with all it's original elaborate theming I've heard about, but not as it is today. Any of those rides could be sufficiently announced with a no frills press release without the drama and suspense we're getting for tomorrow's announcement. This is obviously just my opinion, and you are welcome to yours, but I think this because none of those rides or the likely wind seeker are the type of ride that is worth making a special trip for. No one will make a trek to KI just for a ride on a wind seeker, or a gyro drop or a spinning frisbee ride (maybe I shouldn't say no one, but I'm speaking generally here) but rides like Diamondback The Beast, Son of Beast, Vortex, etc do inspire such excitement not just with coaster junkies, but lots of the general visitors as well. The way there is a pre-announcement that gets everyone anxious for a live press conference seems worthwhile for a coaster that people will want to travel far and wide to experience. For a ride that is likely going to also be installed in several other parks, some in the same state, a simple press release sent out today so the news could run a story would suffice. But many of you seem excited about a wind seeker, and if the suspense is worth it for you, that's great. I just think I'm going to be very disappointed tomorrow.

If they announce a Wind Seeker/Starflyer type ride I'll be pretty disappointed (but it seems all but certain that that is what is going to be announced). That looks like something I'll ride once just to try and then not go back. Anything less than a new coaster doesn't seem worth a press conference for. A ride like this would suffice with a quick press release without any suspicion or hype.

**oops, it looks like this is being discussed in the coming attractions forum already** http://news.cincinna...WS01/308230049/ can't wait to hear what it is!

thanks for the info. although, I don't know if I really understand all of that. I personally appreciate every redundant/superfluous protection. In fact, you could probably add time for the ride ops to go around and duct tape everyone to their seats as a triple/quadruple failsafe, and I wouldn't mind. I can be a bit of a worrier.

So, how do the restraints work to make sure they don't open up accidentally? When I get paranoid I imagine a scenario where a ride op presses a wrong button and suddenly the restraints pop up. I assume that isn't possible, but I have no idea how the restraints work. A little education for me would be awesome. Also, once my wife and I got on Back Lot, had the Op check our restraints and 5 seconds later hers popped open out of nowhere. Mine remained locked. We looked at each other freaked out, but she just re-closed it and went on the ride with no problem. In hindsight, we probably should've told one of the Ops about that. . .