Jump to content

SonofBaconator

Members
  • Content Count

    5584
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    100

SonofBaconator last won the day on July 5

SonofBaconator had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

12476 Excellent

About SonofBaconator

  • Rank
    KIC Legend

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

21880 profile views
  1. CF has been on a reliability streak this past decade. We'll never lose B&M
  2. Here's a really cool video which more or less explains why Orion was built the way it was
  3. I'm not the expert when it comes to water parks but I typically have a pretty good idea of their general purpose and how they can be most effective. Recently, I talked a lot on the other water park threads about updating certain aspects of our water park to make it more modern and profitable. There are other parks, however, that I question their placement and if its giving the respective park their money's worth. The two parks that come to mind are Kings Dominion and Canada's Wonderland where their water parks are placed inside the park itself instead of being put to the side near a separate entrance like our Soak City, Carowinds newer Carolina Harbor, Oceans of Fun, etc. If you look at Kings Dominion and Canada's Wonderland's map, you see both Soak City and Splash Works only have one entrance and they take up a lot of dry park real estate. I personally think its problematic when there's not a separate entrance who want to just enjoy the water park and have to walk all the way through the dry park. Would it have been a better business decision for these two parks to relocate their water parks to a different property? I'd argue no for Kings Dominion because many consider it a mid-tier CF park and relocating the water park wouldn't help out as much. Canada's Wonderland on the other hand wouldn't be a bad idea. I know the financial setback of relocating a water park would be astronomical, however I foresee some potential benefits. For one, Canada's Wonderland is landlocked so it would always benefit the park to free up some more space. Additionally both the dry and the wet park would be able to expand on their own without having to worry about affecting one another. Like I said this would be a lot of money but don't necessarily think its a horrible idea. Anyone else care to voice your thoughts?
  4. That's another argument I have- if there are more dark rides in a park, there's more of an incentive to go/stay during less than optimal conditions. They could also give a park good excuse to close a coaster or thrill ride down early for off season maintenance if needed. I know coasters are reasons why people go to parks, heck they talked about that in this documentary, but I think dark rides are good insurance. Dark rides provide shorter lines for other attractions, comfort, shelter, something the grandparents can ride, and the ability to operate without worrying about bad weather.
  5. Here's the story https://www.pennlive.com/news/2020/07/dad-sues-over-9-year-old-sons-near-death-experience-on-hersheyparks-storm-runner-rollercoaster.html
  6. In the words of DJ Khaled, "Another one" https://www.10best.com/awards/travel/best-amusement-park-2020/kings-island-mason-ohio/?fbclid=IwAR15txZx00uqIMLYADiaKjCLu3l8jYr-SltTWFtBHTEQSO90zmU1HdRrQHE
  7. I feel the same way. It would take away from the Eiffel Tower in my opinion.
  8. The fact that they said that for many years always led me to believe management didn't care, until I read what you said. One time the train robbers at Knott's asked guests for money and one guy replied he didn't have any money. The robber replied "you're right, if you had any money you'd be at Disneyland." I thought that was pretty funny. The scambler thing is passable too just because ride ops and associates always try to set up a rivalry. I remember riding Mystic Timbers where an op said "enjoy Mystic Timbers, the best wooden coaster in the park" then when I went to ride The Beast later they were calling The Beast the "best woodie in the park." Rivalries are fine and in my opinion encourage guests to ride the other rides but I understand the unprofessionalism that people can see in that. Its when people flat out trash talk the new product that I have trouble understanding.
  9. I'm not trying to get anyone fired. I'm saying people DO get fired for stuff like this so it surprises me that employees are so bold to criticize a ride while on the clock. For the younger employees, KI is their 1st job so they don't know how to act in a professional manner. I worked for a place where this kid kept complaining about how the place was ran and the decisions that were made so they let him go. I just think people need a little bit more foresight.
  10. That stuff I'm fine with. In 2018 CP built up a rivalry between Maverick and Steel Vengeance and it was fun to see the associates make playful jabs about the opposing ride When an associate is bashing the park's newest ride around guests however, it looks bad. The park didn't pay millions of dollars on a coaster to have it be negatively reviewed by it associates; especially around guests during work hours. If you have employees talking ill about the park around your guests, how do you think the guests will react?
  11. It baffles me how some employees blatantly criticize the company they work for while on the job. Most companies will fire employees if they talk ill about their company or product.
  12. Jeez, do you like anything at KI or do you just like to crap on everything about the park?
  13. Two RMC's don't make one park better than another. Two RMCs certainly improve a park's line-up but KI is still the superior park. I've talked about KI not underestimating KK and from what @BeeastFarmer has convinced me, they seem pretty responsive to what other competing parks are doing
×
×
  • Create New...