DispatchMaster

Enthusiasts have this fantastical opinion that a nontrivial number of Park X's guests are cross-shopping with Park Y, to the point they're convinced KI and CP are in competition when they are quite obviously not.

If a SIX park and a FUN park coexisted profitably prior to the merger, there is absolutely no reason that they can't coexist after the merger. Selling MA would be about the dumbest move imaginable, given it enjoys some of the CF chain's highest margins relative to revenue.

Yes, well known as a bunch of crappy parks with parking lot coasters and dismal operations. Well known is not the same as being a premium brand. This is bad from every angle aside from perhaps the CF board, who have apparently had this in mind for a while. It would explain the SIX-like destruction of the gate with the Gold Pass, and Ouimet's sudden departure right after agreeing to a new 3-year term. It looks like CF wanted to pump up the numbers using the SIX model (low gate price, try and make it up on volume), and when that turned ugly (look at today's CF earnings report), SIX pounced on them. Just a disgusting turn of events from what Ouimet did to improve CF.

I don't see how this is a good move for CF in the long term, though it does explain the Zimmerman-led, Six Flags-esque moves in recent years - the destruction of gate integrity via the Gold Pass being the most obvious. More troubling than that is that this does not feel at all like a "merger of equals" considering CF unitholders don't get a vote, and that the new entity will be Six Flags, while the two companies have similar valuations despite SIX having twice as many parks in the portfolio. This reeks of short term desperation from FUN, and SIX taking advantage of that desperation.

Ouimet resigned. First of all, you're putting an awful lot of weight behind what looks like a normal, innocuous "wish everyone well" comment. Secondly, this merger does not fit Ouimet's MO at all. In fact, I'd guess this merger is the reason he resigned so suddenly following his new 3 year seat on the Board.

Even with the ridiculous presumption that CF is a mustache-twirling evil villain, they have a financial interest in keeping guests safe from harm. So too do CF's underwriters. What does that have to do with anything? StR was a multimillion dollar disaster from start to finish. That MF hasn't tried to kill its passengers doesn't change that. Nor does it change what happened with I305, Rita, Xcelerator, the other time Dragster injured guests, S:RoS, Perilous Plunge, the other other time Dragster almost killed people, Maverick's heartline, and on and on. And on top of all that, they are by all accounts a terrible company to work with stateside.

The idea that two parks can't or won't have the same model coaster is patently absurd. Why would they do that after all the disasters? Shoot the Rapids wasn't very long ago...

Is the "lighter train = rattle" thing confirmed or is this just a theory?

B&M delivers exceptionally well built, reliable, and efficient products. So that's a great rut to be stuck in. Or a B&M wing coaster, which would be another good fit for The Vortex plot. I don't get the desire for a Mack Extreme Spinner. Spinning rides have limited appeal compared to something like, say, Copperhead Strike.

Yes, the Gold Pass provided 30 minutes of Early Entry to both the Cedar Point and Shores, and those benefits were extended through at least 2021. No, no visits this year. We went last year, but were not eligible for EE, because we weren't passholders and were staying off-property at Kalahari.

Castaway is heavily geared toward little kids, so it's not shocking that they'd stress keeping the kids' stuff open over everything else. Kalahari is better if you're over the age of 8, which now that I think about it I am not confident you are... Although, I've heard that Kalahari has been facing the same staffing issues as literally everyone else, everywhere, has been. But we had a good time there last year in any case. Also, Kewpee is awesome.

They absolutely did grant Gold Passholders 30 minutes of Early Entry, no resort stay needed, in 2020, 2021, and I think 2022. Not certain about 2022, but that's irrelevant, because we made our decision in 2019 not to renew, based in large part on the lack of EE. And Gold can still get the full hour of EE if they add the All Park Passport, at a price point about 25% less than Platinum (adjusted for inflation). The result is the same - Early Entry's value has been diluted.

Stage construction was nearly complete when the decision was made to remove WildCat, with the goal of expanding the midway there. So they kind of did it backwards, and given the opportunity for a re-do, they may well have flipped things around.

That was never a very good place for a stage, so hopefully it gets moved sooner rather than later. They could tweak Perimeter Road a bit and put the stage on the other side of the midway there, hopefully far enough away from Valravn that it wouldn't interfere with that ride's operation. Pretty sure they don't use sprayers.

Why do you assume they aren't doing it "correctly"? They're very experienced pros, who if nothing else have a financial interest in completing the job as efficiently as is safely possible.

That doesn't much matter if everything, such as the top hat support structure, is all one color. FWIW, on the track, which at the top alternates between red & white, they started from the top and worked their way down.

CP needs a first flume before KI gets a second.

If you think CF is unethical now, CF would be the worst company in modern history under Musk, by your standards anyway, if Twitter is any indication. Complain about Prestige benefits? Season pass rescinded. Call the company unethical? Banned from the parks, chain-wide. Criticize the owner? Musk will personally dox you, resulting in death threats to you and your family. So maybe recalibrate what you consider "unethical". There is some truth to the short term vs long term outlook that seems to be negatively affecting the guest experience, which is something I've mentioned before. Specifically, the destruction of gate integrity with the introduction of the Gold Pass. It has resulted in short term gains, and even in the face of somewhat stagnant attendance the chain has been able to maximize per caps, but I don't see how it's sustainable. Cedar Fair has a premium product in the regional amusement park category, and any low priced pass should have provided only the most basic of access to the parks. Like only through Labor Day, etc. Allowing Gold Pass-wielding folks inexpensive access to the immensely-popular HW is just boneheaded, in my opinion. It's anecdotal, but my Platinum Pass-wielding family would drop major coin on our visits to CP, staying on-property for multiple days per visit, paying top dollar for mediocre food at the resort, overpaying for poorly-mixed drinks, spending way too much on souvenirs, etc. We took one look at the Gold Pass, and the fact that early entry, previously available only to Platinum and resort guests, was significantly diluted by allowing Gold into the park for half of EE, and said "oh, hell no". Again, anecdotal, and so far they're doing fine without us, but I wonder if there are others like us who have since made the same decision. I'm not aware of CF closing parks for reasons other than inclement weather. Granted, I primarily pay attention to CP and KI, where what you're describing does not occur.

Agreed that it doesn't make sense to put another coaster back where The Beast, Mystic, and Diamondback already draw crowds. Better to revitalize the area where Vortex's station is, given there's not much over there.

Not necessarily. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Right, exactly. What else are they supposed to do in the event of rain or bad weather? Put a tent over the park?

For the ten millionth time, only if they always intended on switching from bottled to tap water. If they initially intended on provided bottled water and later changed to tap, then you can call that "unethical" if you're so inclined, but it ain't a "bait-and-switch". But it's clear that emotion is getting the better of you, given the use of words like "unethical", "morally", and phrases like "I am sure that...". You already have a conclusion before having the relevant facts, and it's clear you'll be darned if the absence or presence of facts will change your mind. One cannot be reasoned out of a position they did not reason themselves into, as the saying goes... Has a CF park ever changed a day's operating hours on the day, for reasons other than weather or "acts of god"? And even when there are unavoidable issues - weather, loss of power, etc. - has a park ever not said those visitors can use their admission to return on another operating day?

Yes, we quit buying things we no longer felt were of adequate value. What we didn't do was get weirdly emotional about it and create wild, unsubstantiated, nonsensical conspiracy theories about the situation. Again, "bait-and-switch" implies they always intended to rescind some of the perks of the pass. And sure, you can claim that's the case, just as I can claim they rescinded those perks in order to deter the unholy wraith of the fairy unicorn gods. And both claims are supported by equal evidence, actual, circumstantial, and otherwise: none whatsoever.

Reading is hard: They did provide what was advertised - access to the park. Also, they provided additional perks per the terms of sale. It's just that people are getting weirdly emotional over which specific perks were provided, which is just bizarre. Then again, enthusiasts are not known for their level-headedness, and this seems like as good an example as any. Also, until you can show that the park set out to deceive customers, the whole "bait-and-switch" and "fool customers" sounds like insane conspiracy nonsense. But, again, enthusiasts, I guess.

There's just no universe where such a lawsuit would not be laughed out of court, given the stipulation is clearly and plainly stated on the very page where the benefits are detailed. Also, conspiracy theories are not considered credible evidence in a court of law. Again, there is no evidence that any benefits were listed with the intent to later rescind, and there are countless reasons those benefits warranted rescinding after the fact, including and especially because the park(s) simply decided they preferred not to provide them, which they are perfectly within their rights to do. You can label that move with any number of adjectives, but it ain't a "bait-and-switch", and it sure as hell isn't illegal. Caveat emptor.