bkroz

Once upon a time proposed for Paramount's Great America. The success of such areas largely depends on who it offers, who goes there, and who can get there. Downtown Disney at Disneyland isn't the sort of place I'd like to be after dark on a weekend. I've seen fights break out on more than one occasion. See also Easton Town Centre in Columbus. Or even Six Flags Worlds of Adventure, whose entry price for a season wasn't much more than Downtown Disney's. The concept shown here of a shopping avenue parallel to the park's "Main Street" closely mirrors the DisneyTown coming to Shanghai Disneyland.

I wonder what happens to the facade when the Fischer Homes sponsorship comes to an end? If the end of the BMW license is any indication, we'll end up with a cream-colored, vaguely-house-shaped blob with its doors, windows, and mirrors gone.

I wonder if any park has asked them to? Not sure if any of you here are responsible, but there are some great, wonderful comments on the Son of Beast article and even more on Facebook. It's surprising to me how many people seem to have a sincere emotional connection to the ride. Same for Tomb Raider (though I understand that one much more. ) Like I mention in the article, I think those two rides in particular are evidence of a bygone era: So much has changed so quickly. I know that when I look at the 2006 park map -- just ten years old -- it feels like a completely different park than Kings Island today. Better? Worse? I don't know. But different. If we all romanticize the Kings Island we grew up with, the map above will always be my Kings Island. FACE/OFF in those colors, Tomb Raider just past Swan Lake in Rivertown, Nickelodeon Universe (with respects to Hanna-Barbera Land), Boomerang Bay... Even those colors on the map seem right. International Street should be purple, Rivertown dark blue, etc. It's confusing, but I think we all feel that way about one era of the park's history. For all its faults, that's our Kings Island. And I'd say my Kings Island has Son of Beast. Probably.

Great point! I don't choose the titles. Unfortunately. When I've tried, it's brought to my attention that the title has to sell the article, not necessarily represent what it's about. Hence why my 7,000 word magnum opus on Geauga Lake is entitled "5 Reasons The World's Largest Theme Park is Abandoned in Ohio" or something like that. 5 reasons? Really? No mention of its compelling story, Six Flags and SeaWorld combined, Geauga Lake, or anything? That story is many things to many people; a Buzzfeed listicle, it is not.

Literally? Oh man... There's only one coaster I've ever gotten off of and said "Never again." And this time, I Mean it. That being said, I am, at 24, different than I was at 18. For all I know, a ride on Son of Beast today might be too much for me. Especially with wooden roller coasters, I find myself asking, "Is it getting older, or am I? Or both?"

All I know is that Hulk – at least in its previous form – was rough. And not just from worn-out tires. It was very like an Arrow multi-looper where you could physically see awkward transitions in the track ahead of you. You could look ahead and see where the track would bend unnaturally. I'm not at all sure why that's the case with Hulk. My hope is that those strange moments are smoothed out in the new coaster, but my gut tells me that they literally just recreated the pieces they had before. Because it's so rough, the OTSR were too much. A vest would be fine. Ideally, just a lap bar. Hoping we'll find out soon.

It would be one thing if they were ultrasonically cleaned or cleaned with UV light. But you mean to tell me that Six Flags is going to hire people to sit there and use disinfecting wet wipes on these headsets after each cycle? As if. First of all, that's a LOT of wipes. Can you imagine?

If wooden coasters were given literally just another year or two to mature, who's to say what Son of Beast could've been? It also would've required that Paramount Parks was willing to pay premium prices for Intamin's product, and that Intamin would've had any interest in designing and building Son of Beast to begin with. Worth noting is that while Colossos is now the tallest wooden roller coaster in the world (197 feet tall), its actual drop is quite a bit shorter (159 feet). El Toro is not physically as tall as Colossos (181 feet) but it drops further (176 feet). So El Toro is taller than Colossos depending on how you're defining your categories, and it's definitely faster. Goliath at Great America is the shortest (in terms of height) of all three (165 feet) but it has the largest drop of all three (180 feet). That said, I'm so confused about what we group into the "wooden" category anymore that I don't know if that's worth counting or not. If rides like Goliath count at wooden coasters, then Colossos will be the 6th tallest in terms of drop when Lightning Rod opens at Dollywood and RMC's Wildfire opens in Sweden this year. It makes you wonder which matters more: the physical height that the ride reaches, or its greatest single elevation change? Of course, that and the "is it really wooden" argument are all arbitrary classifications anyway. Neither here nor there, but interesting stuff.

Thanks for posting this! As with the Tomb Raider article, it seems like the Son of Beast piece is doing really well and earning a lot of discussion and comments on social media, which is really what I'm in it for. Great to hear people's stories, to see friends reminiscing, and see strangers agreeing. All good stuff! An interesting story for a very interesting ride that probably is unlike anything we'll see again.

The most interesting thing about this to me is that they appear to be testing it in two very different ways: first, on "The New Revolutions," where we could make the assumption that it's meant to attract people back to one of the parks' older and simpler rides that could use a boost in popularity. The others are on Superman: Rides of Steel, and even though they're very different, they're major headlining coasters that probably don't need an extra "gimmick" to boost ridership. So as these VR coasters evolve, I wonder if the technology will tend toward older, simpler coasters in need of a boost OR major coasters being plussed even more. We'll see.

But then again, it was the financial collapse of Disneyland Paris that led to the cancellation of... well... just about every stateside Disney Parks project for the better part of a decade starting in the early 1990s. It's not very intuitive, but it definitely happens. Even if it's not because of a shortage of money (which, let's face it, it's not in Disney's case), an overrun elsewhere can also change the mindset of those at the top. The Walt Disney Company was not bankrupted by the failure of Disneyland Paris, but it DID make those in power take a step back and reevaluate their priorities, their abilities, and the limits of what a private company can do.

In 2012, I asked Disney enthusiast Jim Hill (who I very sincerely respect) why Disney's Animal Kingdom couldn't get a World of Color style nighttime fountain show in the Discovery River east of the Tree of Life. He answered: Obviously that idea DID end up coming true (so, yes, I take credit and assume that Disney Imagineering saw my post and thought, "What a great idea!" ), but it has given me an appreciation for how it must be done at Animal Kingdom, where (to my knowledge) they never drained the massive body of water in the park and made it into a filtered concrete pond. Maybe they installed coffer dams? I don't know... But it's made me think twice about how it all works.

^ WITHOUT Disney characters or songs from what we've seen! A brave (and appropriate) choice!

"It's a speed LIMIT, Dan, a LIMIT. It doesn't mean you have to go that fast!" – Grandma Bev, Roseanne

If points can't be combined, I'd wager that that would mean no signature meals for dining plan member... Or perhaps it would cost one sit-down point PLUS a $50 surcharge or something. Disney is unique in that 100% of tables are up for reservation. There is no "stand-by" or a percentage of tables set aside for walk-ups or even day-ofs. It just doesn't exist. It could very well be that Disney thinks that 100% of seats could be filled by guests not using a dining plan... In which case, why let people like Railrider with such a nuanced understanding of the system fill up seats that guests will pay big, big, big bucks to fill?

And doing it THAT way, you'll save a hefty sum. I just wouldn't feel confident guessing that most or even MANY people who buy Dining Packages know how to use it in such a way that they come out ahead. If Disney wasn't making a profit off of them, they wouldn't stick around much longer at the price points they're at. If you're smart about it (like you are), then you can really use the plan to your advantage. But if most people were using it that way, it would go away. For an average visiting family, it can be difficult to get your literal direct money's worth from the plan. They might even know that, but be willing to spend more to benefit from the simplicity of having "pre-paid" and not having to worry about budgeting and planning.When it DOES work in their favor, they might spend $1000 on a dining package where collecting the receipts says they got $1100 worth of food. That's a savings of $100. But if they DIDN'T have the dining plan, they might've only spent $600 on food. Sure, they 'saved.' In the same way that those coupon books are worth "OVER $40,000 in savings." Spend more than you would've to save. Increasingly, companies are learning that the less you have to look at cash or even a card, the more you're likely to spend. In my mind, that's why Apple Pay and MagicBands haven't caught on: we're all KEENLY aware that they exist primarily because of the expansive research that tells us we're likely to spend more money with them than we would with cash or card. For convenience?

Nope. Families plan their Walt Disney World vacations months -- even YEARS -- in advance. In fact, they're supposed to. If they don't, they won't get a hotel room, Fastpass+ reservations, or dining reservations, which in many cases must be made the DAY they become available (months and months before the trip) to secure the most desirable reservations. Besides, only one-day tickets are being tiered based on demand. How many families do you know who visit Walt Disney World for a single day? I sincerely think the only people affected by this will be convention-goers who 1) don't even know / care that it's a "peak" day versus anything else and 2) wouldn't have visited a different day even if they did know. I still think this is 100% just to warm the public to the idea so that in a year when multi-day tickets become tiered, it doesn't generate a media storm. People will say, "Psh, they did that last year. Who cares?"

Like so much at Walt Disney World (Fastpass+, hotel reservations, transportation, dining reservations) the Disney Dining Plan can save quite a bit of money IF you've taken a Disney Dining 101 class to explain the nuances of it. The average family probably loses money on it (if only because they're paying a premium to be able to get snacks that they otherwise wouldn't have gotten and didn't need), paying for convenience and simplicity. Like the Deluxe, with three meals (that should be full-service for your money's worth) AND two snacks. Compared to the sticker price, you can save money IF you secure the best reservations for the three best full service restaurants three times per day and also eat two snacks per day. But if it were not for the Disney Deluxe Dining plan, who would eat like that? Money saved versus the sticker price? It can happen if you plan it right. Money saved versus what you would've spent anyway? Unlikely. It's one more way that Disney keeps you captive. If they can be the sole provider of your transportation, entertainment, and even dining, then not only do you have no incentive to find a way to Universal, you're actually incentivized to not try. And that's not a bad thing. It's smart business. See also, Kings Island All Day Dining or even All SEASON Dining.

Variable pricing is in effect, but ONLY for one day tickets. If you're interested, explore the new system here. ONLY when selecting one day tickets does a calendar appear, asking you to select a date. All the ticket combinations did go up in price, but ONLY one day tickets are tiered into Value, Regular, and Peak season pricing at this time. If you ask me, Disney knows that this won't change a thing. By FAR, most visitors to Disneyland and Walt Disney World use multi-day tickets. Those who DO show up for a single day are often in town for a convention or special event and won't be likely to change their plans because it's a "peak" day (if they even realize the price could've been different if they'd visited another day). But for now, one day tickets only. The problem many people imagined was that applying variable pricing to multi-day tickets would lead to complex equations and unclear understanding of why certain days cost more than others in a week long trip, especially since Disney (and Universal) discount the price per day day the longer you stay which is at odds with some days being more expensive than others and mathematically explaining how they arrive at each day's price... difficult to describe to guests. All I can say is that this is step one in what is sure to be a gradual and multi-year process of radically shifting Disney's gate model. By time a Star Wars Land opens – in Disneyland particularly – I foresee all but the highest tier annual pass being gone and multi-day tickets being demand priced, too. It WILL take some computing and great clarity on behalf of Disney, but right now if my four day trip costs the same in January (when everything's closed) as it would in July, why in the world would I choose to take my kids out of school and visit in January? Tell me that my four days in July will cost $75 more per ticket and January suddenly won't look half bad. Very, very, very few people visit Disneyland or Walt Disney World for a single day. Variable demand pricing for one day tickets will not do a thing to redistribute crowds. But it'll make the transition easier once the REAL crowd control measures kick in. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-disney-demand-pricing-20160226-story.html And a timely reminder:

Variable pricing simply has to happen. It makes tremendous sense in a park open year round that a visit in the middle of February (with many attractions closed, cool weather, and fewer visitors) costs less than those wishing to visit during June or December, when the parks are in high demand, all rides are open, and entertainment is tripled. Universal Studios Hollywood just began variable pricing their tickets a few weeks ago. Though their system is really more like variable discounting, as the gate price ($95) is the highest you'll pay. When you pick the day you'd like your ticket to be valid, you might save $10 ($85 price) or even $20 ($75 price). So in other words, its incentivizing visiting during slower periods by discounting. Disney's, according to murmurs on the street, will be the opposite. The current ticket price (or something close to it) will be valid on Value days. It'll only go up from there, to Regular and Peak prices. So Universal's discounts, Disney's (in essence) punishes you for choosing high-demand days. It all amounts to the same idea, it's just a different way of spinning it. And make no mistake – Disney's ticket prices should increase. But unless or until annual passes (particularly Southern California ones) go the way of the dodo and annual pass payment plans disappear, the overcrowding issues will not stop. This is a step in the right direction, but it's not enough on its own. Disney needs to have one, MAYBE two annual pass options. They need to start at $800, no monthly payment plans. Period.

Brian Krosnick. Hm. Sounds like a great guy. Handsome, too! Cedar Fair's current CEO, Matt Ouimet, has expressed a great interest in making Carowinds a flagship park again, and I think they're doing it in the right way; the way that it should be done. A balance, a timeline, intentionality. Not a knee-jerk, reactionary, artificial growth spurt like Six Flags Ohio... Roller coasters at the expense of... well... everything else. I don't think that the "perfect storm" of very unique, very timely circumstances around Geauga Lake will ever replicate themselves like that again. Beloved and cared about parks close every single year, but the circumstances around Geauga Lake were almost unbelievable. That's why it's such a unique story. A 100+ year old park, SeaWorld across the lake, ownership change, the purchase of Six Flags by Premier, the re-branding, the expansion, the combination of two substantial pre-existing parks (two parking lots, two main entrances, two guest services, two lost-and-founds), a sea life park in Northeast Ohio, the sale of it all, Cedar Fair's strategy of redistribution, the surprise all-at-once announcement of the park's permanent closure after having closed for the season, and the relationship to the Paramount Parks sale, all set alongside the very unique strategies of Premier, then Six Flags, plus Anheuser Busch, and Cedar Fair after that, all at that specific time. It's an epic story. If it had all happened ten years earlier or ten years later... Well, frankly, I don't think it would've happened ten years earlier or ten years later. It's such a strange coalescing of the times, the choices, the ways, the leadership... Impossible to do the story justice, and my dinky 7,000 word piece barely gets close. I'm just pleased with the memories that people have shared in the comments and on Facebook as its spread through the region... Makes me think it was worth writing! Thanks for bringing attention back to it! If you're like me and you can sit for hours and read in-depth stories about lost attractions, never-built rides, behind-the-scenes looks, and more, I posted a thread here with links to more of my writing that I intend to update regularly.

"I'm not giving SeaWorld Orlando a cent of my hard-earned money. Instead, why don't we check out that thrill park in Tampa we've been meaning to try?" Rename their most controversial parks after the ones that have thus far slipped under the radar of public scrutiny? I hope not. And what might Anheuser Busch Inbev -- still a major sponsor of the chain -- have to say about that? At least for a while I was reading that analysts expected SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment to spin off their other parks for a potential sale. The SeaWorld brand was dragging down the Busch Gardens parks, Sesame Place, Adventure Island, and Water Country USA. In a post-Tempesto world, I'd argue that that's probably true. Pipe dreams, but I think NBCUniversal Comcast would be wise to acquire the Busch Gardens parks. I wouldn't re-brand them into the Universal Parks and Resorts banner necessarily, but as a secondary family of parks I think they'd do very well.

The first place I'd ever seen the large, unfolded one-sheet maps was at Busch Gardens Williamsburg. The system makes sense for them since the back of the map is printed each day with ride refurbishments, showtimes, restaurant hours and offerings, seasonal promotions, and animal experiences that change every day. It's a map on the front, and times guide for that specific day on the back. I found it charming in the sense that it was unusual, but if you look at the map as artwork (which many of us here do), it's painful to have to fold it wildly to fit it into your pocket.

If I could tuuuurn back tiiimeee.