KI Guy

The rollout would not need to be a full change to third-party operations in one season. Six Flags could have a pilot program with one location at the larger parks and see how it goes. Just because something has not been done doesn't mean it is not a viable or preferred path. All innovational moves weren't the "wise" move at the time. Kind of, there are more options than there were in the 90's and 00's, but I don't know if I would say the food situation is much better overall. The lines are longer and the prices are less affordable when factoring for inflation. And before someone says "all restaurants are like that," go to Indiana Beach or Knoebel's, and look at their food prices. Two years ago at Knoebel's, I got a half chicken dinner with two sides for $12. For such small operators without "cost efficiencies" they seem to be able to keep the prices down! There are benefits to this that I haven't yet mentioned— think of the reduction in headcount. How about the steady income from rent? Food would be one huge issue to no longer worry about, they could focus more on park maintenance, appearance as well as ride operations— KI's ride ops are great, other parks not so much. An over emphasis on "cost efficiencies" has gotten them where they are now. Cost efficiencies mean rewriting guidelines for keeping pizza 10 more minutes under the heat lamp before throwing it away. It means using frozen fries even at a place dedicated to french fries. They mean limiting the number of people refilling syrup in the soda fountains. Because of the meal plan, the goal is to get you the cheapest food possible with the ultimate goal of being just good enough that people still purchase the food plan. Specific reasons are not necessary, but I'll give you one anyway. The restaurants that are actually going to make it will be open every day the park is open. The main reason that the food would be better is that someone will care, because there will be consequences if they don't. That's the main reason anything ever gets better.

Yes, Kings Island needs food to be delivered on a large scale but so does everything with large crowds. They are not so unique. Decentralizing food service incentivizes performance. With a meal plan the park has their money already. Any food they serve to someone with a meal plan actually costs them money. The most senior employee "in charge" of each restaurant's livelihood is not dependent on each sale. Selfishly, why should he or she care how much food is served or if a customer is happy? The performance of one restaurant is minuscule in the grand scheme of Kings Island not to mention Six Flags. For an independent operator the performance of that restaurant is their entire business. Park operated eateries are not a rule but an industry-wide norm. With any sea change, someone is always first. Disney popularized pay-one-price admission. Kings Island brought back the roller coaster. The business and the business model changes. They aren't having the best time with food at present; I'm suggesting a way to improve it.

What does the size of the park have to do with the business model for how the park makes money on food? The number of eateries would stay the same, the operator would just change from the park to third-party vendors. Scale doesn't effect the viability of the business model; Oktoberfest in Munich provides food to crowds of 120,000 and is served by independent vendors. Market factors would very much solve many of the problems. Each eatery would have to make money or it wouldn't exist. Each would have to be competitive on price and quality compared to the other restaurants in the park. No, what the Cedar Fair has tried is having chain restaurants under license operated by park employees. When I say "third-party vendors" I don't mean chain fast food places. If you go to Indiana Beach you won't see one chain restaurant. They're mom and pop restaurants you won't find elsewhere—not tacky at all. Eat a hamburger at the Bluejay Cafe or a corn dog at Pronto Pup and maybe you'll understand.

Yes, I miss them a lot. 1. Downloading an app for a new park is inconvenient and still is not as good of a map as a paper map. A guest should have the option of going phone free for the day if they want and yes that includes physical season passes. 2. I collected the paper maps and for 15 years and built up a very nice collection. They were my "record" of what parks I went to and when. I'd very much like to see them back. Seeing the new ride for the year on the map was always nice.

They could do it very easily without much backlash; they'd just have to phase in the change by making meal plans unattractive. If the guest "decides" not to buy it they won't be as upset. 1. Slightly lower the food prices across the board so that the meal plan is less attractive. Make sure this is announced to the media. 2. Increase the meal/drink plan price to where it is no longer the "deal" people think it is. If they doubled the prices of each how many people would buy them? 3. Quietly remove the meal plan by announcing mid year that it will no longer be available the following year. Regarding food... every time I go to Indiana Beach—which has independent food vendors—it makes me wonder why Kings Island bothers to be in the food business at all. Why not just have independent restaurant operators paying rent? Yes, they'd lose flexibility on the operating calendar since the vendors will depend on them to be open, but the market competition just results in better food and better service. If the restaurant isn't up to the level of it's competition it fails. Why bother with it at all—just become a landlord and collect the money.

Because more can be done with a blank slate. The current vehicles force you to only look forward so the theming can never be 360°. It also is limited to nearly fixed speed. There can be no drop scare or variance in speed like on Blazin' Fury at Dollywood. Think of the Calico Mine Ride at Knott's or Fire in the Hole at Silver Dollar City for a different kind of experience they could have made. Ideally they'd have a big budget and a clean slate, but that wouldn't be in line with what they've been doing for 8 years or so. It can still be a great ride for sure. Maybe the theming will be great enough that the rest won't matter. If it's on the level of the Phantom Theatre, they'll have winner on their hands.

The Boo Blaster ghost was not a cool as the several Pepper's ghosts in Phantom Theatre. It looks like they're re-using the ride mechanism and track. I've got to say that's a little disappointing.

The market cap is low enough that it could be scooped up by a deep-pocketed buyer. Considering the Paramount Parks were bought for about $2 billion dollars in today's money, ($1.24 billion in 2006 dollars) $5.2 billion is incredibly low. It just goes to show how bad off they are financially.

Okay, but where is the family addition on the level of White Water Canyon or Adventure Express or even Italian Job: Stunt Track? Why only retheme half of Planet Snoopy? Since 2018 each addition, including family additions, has been less than it could have been. I understand they're a mature park in a much less innovative/more mature industry than it used to be, but did some switch flip after 2017 that said they don't need to put in as much money?

Am I really though? The average park guest doesn't care all that much if they've changed a couple restaurants or retracked a coaster; that's just upkeep at the end of the day. Coasters need to be maintained, restaurants need to stay up-to-date. It's the super enthusiasts who spend time talking about (or even specifically notice) slight improvements to a restaurant menu or a new coat of paint on a building. In terms of raw dollars invested into the park the numbers don't seem to be in-line with historical levels.. Correct, it is not all about thrill rides. Unfortunately, their family additions have also been lackluster compared to what they did in the past. They have been doing just enough to check a box because they are not being given the historic levels of investment money. Upkeep and refreshing of decor is general upkeep. Of course, marketing will sell it as an addition as they probably should. They can only work with what they're given. I'm glad the park had a 50th anniversary celebration, but the park should have several shows regardless and did historically. Those weren't really replaced so it wasn't a long-term benefit at the end of the day. Comparing KI to other SF and (legacy CF) parks is not my barometer; it's comparing KI to its past self and under that measure they are not keeping up.

They've been trying to save money and get the same ROI. It just doesn't work that way. 2018 Nothing 2019 A worse version of the old antique cars 2020 Cheapest Giga(ish) coaster they could get by with. 2021 Nothing 2022 50th celebration without major investment 2023 Worse (cheapest) version of Der Spinnen' Keggers and Skylab 2024 Half-baked revamp with Camp Snoopy - Cheapest coaster they could get by with. - Cheapest play area they could get by with. 2025 Cheapest Water Coaster they could get by with. Lack of investment has consequences. Those old (steel) coasters they rely on to bring people in and fill the park out don't last forever either. They're probably not even keeping up with replacement rate at this point. Kings Island used to be world class in everything!

It was an exciting time for the park. Diamondback was and remains the most significant ride added to the park since The Beast. You have to consider that nothing of that scale had been built since S.O.B.—which in all honestly was kind of a dud—and probably Flight of Fear before that. Regardless, it was kind of cool to have two hypercoasters in the park at least for those brief couple months. The food prices were expensive but more affordable than today if you knew what you were doing. I think two slices of LaRosa's was about $5.99 or $9 in today's money. Now that would be $16.29 (with two breadsticks) which is absurd. When folks talk about Kings Island's value being higher than in the past that's really only true when speaking specifically about the gate price. The food is more expensive and the expected number of rides per visit is fewer due Fast Lane. The park had a larger calendar Summer/Fall in those days and there were more days during the week where someone could ride everything in just a few hours. There was much more emphasis on the kids' area in those days and the Nickelodeon IP was still much more relevant than today's peanuts. The kids area got much more attention and investment in those days and it was updated more often. There has been good and bad since then, but anyone who tells you that the park is much better now is probably not seeing the full picture. Halloween Haunt was a lot better then than it is today and it was of course all inclusive. Today's park does offer Winterfest which is a nice thing not offered in 2009. In short: Today: Slightly better rides, more affordable pass, Winterfest. 2009: More expansive Summer and Fall calendar, Fresher Kids' Area, more rides per visit, more affordable food, better Haunt, better entertainment and special events (thanks Don!).

I'm curious—and maybe this is a future Tower Topics show—but do you consider the present to be the lowest point in Kings Island history?

Questions that need answers: 1. Are very affordable—say sub-$150 passes—still a sustainable business model chain-wide/industry-wide? If so, what is the replacement? (Very?) expensive season passes, no season passes? ★One thing I'll say is that I think sometimes the very concept of a pass devalues the product. Historically a day at a pay-one-price amusement park was a special day, not a place to kill a few hours on a Wednesday or a place to get rid of the kids. Going all the time makes it less special, i.e. valuable. 2. Are fast lanes a net positive? Positives: appealing for big spenders i.e. additional revenue. Negatives: Devalues season pass and daily ticket in terms of number of expected rides per visit, potential hostility and hard feelings from single ticket and standard passholders. 3. Are meal plans a net positive for overall profit of food sales all things considered? Are there other business models that would be better, (no meal plans with more affordable/better food, switching to a being a landlord for private restaurateurs)? 4. Is the current park clientele part of the problem? If the clientele is a problem are payment plans for passes a net benefit? ★★ One issue that seems to be way out of whack is that the park seems to want to cut hours. Historically, cutting hours was the same as cutting revenue. With a few exceptions, if the gates were open they were making money. That doesn't seem to be the case anymore and it doesn't lead to great attitudes towards customers in general.

@disco2000 We can infer based on what we see. Land is not at an ultra-premium like it is in Silicon Valley where CGA is. Look at the nearby Beach Waterpark—that would never sit for almost a decade if the area land were THAT valuable. Also KI brings Mason a lot of money and it helps distinguish it from any other upper middle class suburb. Mason wants it there. Your example of the Cincinnati Open complex parking kind of helps my point. It is a highly specialized and under-utilized piece of land in terms of how often it is used. Land doesn't sit vacant for anything if it's valuable enough—it becomes housing developments, retail, or office parks. The land makes money at all times. Of course things can change and the park's future is not guaranteed; I just don't see it being in any significant danger of closing any time soon.

Unfortunately they're already doing that. See CGA and Six Flags America. Also notice the lowered level of investment chainwide. Kings Island is not one of those parks that would be scrapped out and sold off for housing development. It's one of the best performing in the chain and the land still has its most potential being operated as an amusement park. If the chain keeps operating as it is parks are going to be lost regardless or at least change hands.

Let the buyer beware is a thing but it's usually the credo of the sleazeball business. If they were sent emails to encourage them to buy a 2025 pass they have a legitimate complaint... not legally it's just not treating your customer right.

I'm actively rooting for bankruptcy and a sell-off at this point. Freeing KI from these clowns would be worth it. Selling passes before the announcement was unethical. That's just not how you treat a customer. Anyone else?

That's a fair point, but the same logic still applies. They started the sale because there are not going to be any significant investments chainwide for 2026. They are deeply in debt and are depending on the MVP sale to drive pass sales at a similar rate without the investments. If they're going to invest then the MVP sale makes no sense at all. The only times I can recall their announcing a new ride after pass sales were the late announcements for Firehawk (relocated late with little notice to the park) and WindSeeker (large chainwide package sale done at the last minute).

It definitely will sit vacant next year. ★1. If they could have used an upcoming attraction to sell additional 2026 passes they would have and would be doing it. 2. The existing ride mechanism is unchanged from the Phantom Theatre (1992). Even if they reuse that again it's doubtful they could have it ready in 8–9 months. This is the park that couldn't open a two-flat ride expansion in time afterall. :-|

From Don... "So maybe the smart play is to hold off, skip this sale altogether, and wait until midsummer 2026 to buy a new pass that covers the back half of that season and all of 2027." I really question their selling the passes this early for this reason. You can save money by getting passes every other year if you don't mind sitting out the couple weekends in April, May, June and July. But this is what you do when you're desperate and you can't afford to invest in the park to drive sales.

The ones where you can still grab the ring are special. I've been on three. 1) Grand Carousel – Knoebel's (Elysburg, PA) – 1913 Kremer's Carousel Works. They also have a carousel museum with horses and other collectibles saved from long-gone carousels. 2) Balboa Park Carousel – Balboa Park (San Diego, CA right next to San Diego Zoo) – 1910 Herschell-Spillman. This one is probably the best, it's a menagerie Carousel (many other animals other than horses). 3) Flying Horses – Martha's Vinyard, MA – c. 1876 Dare. The oldest carousel in the country. It is primitive by modern standards but it is truly a piece of history. It used to be powered by steam when it was first built. * Honorable mention: Cedar Downs – Cedar Point, Sandusky, OH – 1921 Prior & Church Derby Racer. This is one of two left in the country. Put broadly, any carousel built before 1930 if kept up well, is really nice and anything after that pales in comparison.

Do you mean the program was almost destroyed through poor decisions and execution such as the intended plan to get rid of included parking with season passes, or that there was almost a decision to no longer sell season passes?

@befat @IndyGuy4KI Why should we want the chain to be saved? It would be better for everyone if this bumbling giant was broken up. Private ownership is so much better than public.

Inter-park competition is a favorite topic for enthusiasts, but it's just not that important for a park like KI. The siphoning off of a few thousand people in Louisville and maybe Indianapolis is not that important on the grand scale. Even at the height of the coaster wars, PKI and CP were competing for thrill seekers in the Columbus market and maybe some double visitors from outside the typical market who might like to go see both. It's not KI vs. the other parks; it's KI vs. any other form of entertainment.