All of these posts suggesting that B&M inverts are antiquated technology and irrelevant in 2013 and "belong at KK" are really starting to annoy me. Allow me to explain why these arguments are bunk.
Let's start with the argument that they are outdated and irrelevant. In that barring insane new advancements in technology (like anti-rollbacks or the like) that doesn't happen to coasters. The first sit down looping coasters were built by Arrow in the 1970's. Does that make Kumba any less significant in the 1990's, or the same Arrow coasters less significant now? Our Vortex is 26 years old, and still one of the most popular rides in the park. Heck, the first hyper coaster was built a full 20 years before Diamondback, B&M's first hypercoaster was built 10 years before Diamondback, but no one complained of the hypercoaster "gimmick" being outdated and irrelevant when it came to Kings Island. It was a hole in Kings Island's lineup that was filled with an excellent ride, regardless of the age of the model.
Which leads me to my next point. Inverted coasters are not a gimmick. There are some elements of roller coasters that you can debate are gimmicky. 90 degree lifts, tunnels, backwards running trains, etc. But inverted coasters are an entire model of roller coaster, and designed to be just as expansive as the classical sit-down model. They offer their own unique ride experience not only for the invert model but for each individual ride. Saying that the inverted coaster design in and of itself is an inherent gimmick would be akin to saying that hyper coasters or looping coasters are inherently gimmicky.
And lastly, I would like to point out that if Kings Island installed a B&M invert for 2014, you guys would be the only ones upset. B&M has been building inverts since the early 1990's, and continue to build them all around the world to a wide range of customers. Some point out that the last invert built in the United States was built in 2006, and I would like to point out that that is because nearly every park in the country that can afford an invert already has one. The Six Flags parks have their Batman: The Rides, the Busch parks have Montu and Alpengeist, the Cedar Fair parks have Raptor, Talon, Patriot, Afterburn, Flight Deck, etc. It seems that Kings Island has, like with the hyper model, been left out of the party. And, like with Diamondback, no one when it opens will say "don't ride this! It's decades old technology, it's so outdated!" Instead, people will come out to ride it in the millions, as with Diamondback. (In the 5 years it has been here, Diamondback has given enough rides to service the entire Greater Cincinnati area). A B&M invert would do the same. It would fill a much needed hole in Kings Island's lineup and would attract millions of riders, because a large majority of patrons care only about what they have ridden at their home park, not its context in the global coaster industry.
And as for the enthusiast community, I feel like this B&M invert prejudice is being fostered by a small and vocal minority. I personally have very few rides that I dislike, and I can't think of an entire model of roller coaster that I don't like. That doesnt mean you cant dislike certain coasters, but generalizing an entire model of roller coaster is not a great idea. And most seasoned veterans will tell you that if you don't like a ride, then don't ride it. A truly bad roller coaster is any roller coaster that does its home park more harm than good, not whichever one you enjoyed or didn't enjoy. And a B&M invert would do Kings Island a lot of good. So if you don't like B&M inverts, don't ride the one Kings Island gets, if we do get one. Don't try and assert your opinion on them as a fact of the industry.