I have always felt that there would be a limit as to how much a park can grow and still pull-in a profit. With ever rising costs of everything, and the economy not as great as it could be, I fear parks will either slow down in adding new additions/attractions, or simply close. Even Cedar Fair is having problems (maybe they bit off more than they can chew) and we have had other smaller parks go by the wayside.

Without commenting on whether you like a park or not, what think ye of all this?

I think the smaller parks shut down due to the fact they draw less guests with bigger theme parks to go to.Im sure bigger parks have many ways of drawing in more money with food cost,gifts shops ect ect.

Well, I think the law of diminishing returns certainly applies here...at a certain point it no longer makes sense to invest in growing something because the investment will no longer yield worthwhile results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns

^ I was taught to understand the diminishing return law as "A $1.00 taco may seem like a really incredible price, because you might be willing to pay $1.25. But if you eat one, and then want a second one, it might only have a real value to you of $.90. Then by time you want a third, that third may only be worth $.70." etc. That suck with me! If Kings Island has three or four coasters around 200 feet tall, there comes a time when people simply won't bother paying to ride the same sort of thing again, because with each new, similar ride, the actual value to the customer drops.

But what I'm saying is, Cedar Fair, like all chains, has some big performers (Cedar Point, Kings Island, Knott's Berry Farm, etc) and some parks that are, admittedly, aimed only at local areas, and aren't really meant to be destinations - Great America, Carowinds, Valleyfair, even Dorney... These parks are not meant to be world-class parks. You'd be hard-pressed most days to find a line over 15 minutes. At least, that's my opinion... Just my thoughts!

That sort of the problem with Paramount, imho, if each park was getting similar rides it makes going to that park less exciting. So I can see that each park needs its own unique flair...

Pretty much every park operator "clones" rides. With Paramount, it was Flight of Fear and Italian Job. With Cedar Fair, it's B&M hypers (among others). With Disney, it's Muppet-Vision 3*D, It's Tough to be a Bug, Tower of Terror, Honey I Shrunk the Audience, Under the Sea: Ariel's Adventure, Star Tours, Toy Story Midway Mania, Soarin', Turtle Talk With Crush, etc. And that's not even including the Disneyland-blueprint park that's very nearly duplicated for each of the five resorts.

Many folks (especially Disney-heads) complain about the constant duplication of rides. The fact of the matter is, it reduces costs, improves all of the park's attraction counts, and affords guests at multiple places to have the same experience. The Italian Job is nothing to flock to Kings Island for, but I'm sure the folks at Canada's Wonderland are glad they have one - it's a nice ride to have, increases their coaster-count in the competitive ride standings, and they get to experience it without having to visit us. Much the same way, I'm sure Californians are quite happy to have a copy of Tower of Terror. Believe it or not, most people don't get to visit both resorts (if they can even tell the difference...) so why would anyone on any side of the equation complain?