DispatchMaster

Everyone criticizing perceived "moves" by CF parks (short staffing, etc.) should read this closely. They read it again. And for good measure read it a third time, because it's correct - the entire industry is having a down year. The 9PM closing of certain rides at CP or firing Don from KI didn't negatively affect attendance in Orlando, so it stands to reason those issues aren't driving down attendance at the Cedar Fair parks that actually have higher attendance through July this year compared to last. The complaints around here sure are many, but they are rarely rooted in reality.

It's always listed "15% Food & Merchandise" discounts on the actual season pass page as far as I can recall, and your previous post showing screenshots from the blog doesn't contradict that.

No they didn't. You were referencing a blog post from a year ago rather than their season pass page.

Yes, for 2024, which can be easily found on the season pass page.

Who cares? That has absolutely nothing to do with the current earnings report and the present day economy. When the time comes to deal with the note the prime rate will be relevant. Seems like you're bringing it up to continue your "doom and gloom" narrative given that the Q2 report wasn't sufficiently "doomy and gloomy" for you.

And not by a trivial amount, either. Up a significant 7%. But that must be a misprint, because I have it on good authority that attendance is down because they fired Don and someone experienced short lines during their visits to the park.

At first glance, increased net revenue, coming by way of higher per caps from fewer guests is a pretty solid result all things considered.

So Cedar Fair should pour money into the industry-wide problem of cooling demand that followed the pandemic? Oh, come on. If Disney and Universal's marketing can't get folks through their turnstiles, no amount of ad spend or anything else is going to get folks through CF's turnstiles, and it would be financial malpractice to try and spend their way out of an industry-wide problem. Life isn't RCT, where you can magically goose attendance with an ad campaign.

No, they're both wrong (though I think Gordon was making a joke). Also, whether or not Ride A has a long wait does not indicate whether or not that ride is more popular than rides that have shorter or nonexistent waits. There are many factors at play, not the least of which is capacity.

Are you familiar with the concept of anecdotal evidence and why it is comically absurd to draw conclusions based on it? Also maybe familiarize yourself with confirmation bias.

Maybe they'll include parking at the existing GP price point, in which case you would save $55, which fits the description of "up to $65". Or maybe they'll have a sale this fall with the GP available for $125, in which cased you'd save $65, which fits the description of "up to $65". I don't know and I don't care. My point was only that you're calling them liars based on incomplete information.

You're using CW's 2023 Gold Pass pricing and benefits to make an assumption about their 2024 Gold Pass pricing and benefits in order to show the company is lying?

Agreed that it's chaotic and unstable. But confusing? Certainly not.

Do you honestly think FB comments are some indicator of... well, anything? FB is a cesspool of stupid people, often asking questions that can be answered via LMGTFY-level sleuthing. All this to say, FB comments are worse than meaningless. FB is not real life. See? You've easily found the answer to all of the questions with this post and the one that followed. There was nothing confusing about any of this considering you found answers within an hour or so of the change going live.

Yes, per the now-public details. The only caveat is that Prestige (which includes "preferred parking, a single-use Fast Lane with each visit, access to the VIP lounge, and so much more") is only available at CP, KI, and CW. If any of this is confusing to anyone they shouldn't be left alone with sharp objects. Or even dull ones.

I guess I don't understand what's confusing or convoluted about the reduction of 5 passes to 3, with the sole complexity being whether or not to add access to other CF parks. I'm honestly trying to wrap my mind about what's so confounding about fewer choices being more confusing. Like, if I'm shopping for a car, and there are 15 cars in my budget from 3 different manufacturers, each with their own warranty policies, etc., I'd have a lot to consider. But if there are only 4 cars to choose from, all from 1 manufacturer, I have quite a lot less to think about. What am I missing?

It's one thing to suggest that the new pass lineup is confusing to you, I get that. I disagree, and think this is a pretty clear example of people complaining about change, because change is scary or whatever, but I get that you find it confusing or whatever. But it's quite another to suggest that your confusion is shared by others, and even more absurd to suggest the "vast majority" of people find it confusing or that there's a wave of outrage due to this. They have effectively gone back to the old, simpler pass strategy of offering two passes, one of which includes early entry and the like, except now you can extend either of those passes to other CF parks. Or if you want a super basic pass, there's a third option in the Summer Pass. It's really not confusing, and I'm kind of astonished why anyone thinks it is. Different, yes, but at the end of the day it's fewer pass options which is a simplification.

Citation needed. Enthusiasts complaining about something on the Internet is not, and has never been, indicative of how the "vast majority" feels.

I feel like I'm missing something, because to me this seems like a simplification. Currently, there are (I think) a whopping five passes available (at CP anyway), all providing various levels of access and benefits: Summer, Gold, Platinum, Prestige, Prestige+. Going forward, that gets distilled down to three passes: Summer, Gold, and Prestige. Using the mathematical process known as "subtraction" I have concluded that three is fewer than five (someone please check me on this). Having fewer passes seems less confusing than having more passes, but, you know, YMMV. The only additional detail is the Passport, but that seems pretty straightforward in that it extends your pass (along with any add-ons) to other participating CF parks. But understanding what the Passport provides seems more intuitive than trying to compare Platinum, Prestige, and Prestige+ to determine which pass provides access to other parks, which pass includes add-ons, etc.

Yes, Cedar Fair is secretly and systematically worsening the experience at KI in order to benefit the other parks, because they care where their revenue comes from. /s

They've never been competing parks. It's true that all regionals were in a dumb "arms race" during the "coaster wars", but parks weren't competing for revenue, they were competing for bragging rights. And yes, Paramount invested more heavily than CF, but that's because KI was a less mature park in terms of ride offerings. I mean, CP invested more heavily in itself before it became CF and before the Paramount purchase, because the 90's and early 00's saw massive investment in the industry. It had and has nothing to do with competition between individual regional parks that draw from different regions. Again, if KI and CF could make a business case for Ride X, they would build Ride X, plain and simple. It's not some emotional or territorial issue, it's just business.

This is just complete nonsense. They are both regional parks and do not compete, since each draws almost all of their guests, and therefore revenue, from their respective regions. And even if that weren't the case, it still utterly nonsensical, since CF makes money regardless of whether a guest is going to CP or KI.

Ride rankings are meaningless, and unless you've talked to a statistically-significant percentage of KI's annual patrons, so too are those conversations. Line length, as you allude to, means nothing without further context. Orion may have better capacity than DB, which would result in shorter lines. So long as the ride performs at the ridership and cost/rider metrics the park aims for, that's all that matters. If KI and CF could make the business case for a ride, they would install it. It's not more complicated than that.

First, it's still true that $30 million today buys less steel than it did in 2014, and there's no indication that's changing anytime soon. So should they wait twenty years? Fifty? Second, these parks have access to data that you don't. And it's apparent their ridership data supported that Orion would please the vast majority of guests at a reasonable cost per rider, even if a insignificant number of insufferable enthusiasts complain about its similarity to DB. What percentage of KI's annual attendees do you think complain about the similarity? The overwhelming majority of guests don't think the way enthusiasts do, and thank goodness for that. "Exceeded" by what metric? Cost? Definitely not, because CF has thankfully learned that it's fiscally irresponsible to spend that kind of money on a roller coaster. But I can guarantee that if KI could make a clear, compelling business case for a taller, faster, longer, or whatever-er coaster CF would absolutely greenlight it. Fury 325 is proof of that.

It's also worth noting that between June 2014 and June 2019 (around when Fury 325 and Orion, respectively, were being fabricated), steel prices increased by more than 30%, which is not trivial. Parks have budgets, and like it or not those budgets drive cap ex decisions. Would anyone honestly prefer they not build Orion at all because they couldn't fit a Fury 325 clone/equivalent into the budget?