Would 1972 KI Survive in 2010?

[Oldiesmann]

After reading over the 1972 Park Guide last week, I thought this would be an interesting discussion.

Do you think that the KI of 1972, with its attention to detail, themed areas, etc., would survive in 2010?

I haven't really decided yet. I would love to visit a park with all the charm that KI had in 1972, but at the same time, some things obviously wouldn't survive.

[CoasterFreak45]

Sadly, i don't think so. Culture seems to like a ton of rides more then stores. But, wow! I wish we stilll had some of those stores! and the food! That must have been amazing to eat at these places.

[bkroz]

Sadly, i don't think so. Culture seems to like a ton of rides more then stores.

*Drives nine hours to Busch Gardens Williamsburg*

[PREMiERdrum]

*Drives nine hours to Busch Gardens Williamsburg*

This.

I'd almost argue that 1972 park, with a few additions, might be in better shape than the current one, especially when it comes to atmosphere and quality of experience.

[TylerRider]

The first thing that hit me is all the free services they provide.

[Colonel_SoB_fan]

No way. Especially in these economic times. Times have changed, if businesses do not change with the times then it will fail.

[bkroz]

No way. Especially in these economic times. Times have changed, if businesses do not change with the times then it will fail.

Why, pray tell, do people travel for hours (myself included) to reach parks like Busch Gardens Williamsburg? Holiday World? Dollywood? These parks have one, maybe two stand-out rides (as Kings Island once did), an emphasis on preservation, and absolutely unbeatable customer service, food, shopping, shows, and atmosphere (again, as Kings Island once did).

Most everyone here rants and raves about the original park - the lush vegetation, the unbelievable entertainment, the atmosphere, the performers... It's the same praise that parks like Busch Gardens still get today! Great atmosphere, great entertainment, great shows, and great rides. Busch Gardens has four roller coasters, and is consistently (and deservedly) rated one of the best parks on Earth with some of the best coasters. For me, it was probably the highest praise I could give that even their Arrow coaster is fantastic. Just focusing on rides alone (which is what they don't do, but for the sake of argument) I would take their four coasters, two water rides, and one dark ride over our fifteen coasters, three water rides, dark ride, and giant flat rides any day of the week - that's the power of focusing on all aspects of a park until you have a nice, rounded, equilibrium of attractions.

Break down Islands of Adventure, consistantly considered one of the top five parks in the world, and what have you got? Two adult coasters, one dark ride, three water rides, and two shows. So why is a park with so little to offer so wildly popular? Because it also has everything else. Theme. Music. Atmosphere. Attention to detail. Great food. Reasonable prices... That is literally almost exactly what 1972 Kings Island was.

It's quality over quantity. Parks that still believe in it are wildly successful destinations for many people.

[LongliveKingsCobra]

Well, I suppose it would be a challange, nothing impossible, but hard to keep guests coming back. I mean, you go once; eat at a nice place, explore some of the pathways...ride a ride, go home...after what a month wouldn't that get old?

[bkroz]

Well, I suppose it would be a challange, nothing impossible, but hard to keep guests coming back. I mean, you go once; eat at a nice place, explore some of the pathways...ride a ride, go home...after what a month wouldn't that get old?

That's why such parks are destinations - they're not necessarily meant for the local teens to get a season pass and go back every single weekend. And really, how it is any different than a roller coaster park? Don't you ever get to the point where you're really not interested in riding certain rides because you ride them every single week?

And considering 1972 Kings Island was a success, it obviously does work! Haha.

[LongliveKingsCobra]

It worked back in 1972, the question posed is if it was 2010, and a new park called Kings Island was opening with the same type atractions it did back in the day, would it survive. You said it would make it a destination, and not something for everyday, thus it wouldn't thrive. I think that no matter what it would have to grow into some kinda form it is today...

[Colonel_SoB_fan]

The main attraction in 1972 was The Racer. Now how many people today come to KI just to ride The Racer? Yes Don or whoever does 5@5 likes to hype it up, but really and especially with Coasters of today it is nothing special. What special about it is it has stood the test of time, but if it just opened today it would not be that special and would not bring in that many guests. If the main attraction can not bring in money then the park is bound to fail.

[Beast1979]

I can honestly say that Universal Studios Florida is my favorite Amusement / Theme Park ever. It pays INCREDIBLE attention to detail and at the same time does not sacrifice thrills for it. Why couldn't 1972 Kings Island do the same in 2010? I honestly think they could have added Diamondback and still managed to keep Rivertown in spot on condition. It could have survived, it's not hard to have the best of both worlds. Seeing pictures from the park's opening day in 1972, I think a park like that would be a refreshing experience for the "Dressed up Carnival" culture of today.

[shark6495]

this question is loaded for one side to win this argument and the other to lose horribly. You (people, most of you) are assuming that KI would open today (2010) with the same tech., rides, and other features that existed in 1972, while competing against other parks with new great tech. Lets be real here. First if the park was to open today it would not open with just The Racer, it would open with a ride similar to Diamondback. So to say the park from 1972 in its entirety to be opened in 1972 is not a fair question at all. Thats like saying would Cedar Point of 1912 survive today? Would DisneyLand of 1955 survive today. Of course any of these parks (including KI) would survive if the tech is allowed to be of todays fair.

So with that being said, a more fair question would be

"Would the business tasks and attitudes that opened the park in 1972 be profitable and would the park thrive in 2010?"

As goodyellowKorn has pointed out the answer would be a resounding yes. So a KI that had a few rides, but was well maintained, worked towards creating a family fun environment, and had great customer service would become a wonderful park, similar to a Busch Gardens.

But would a park that has a hannah Barabara Land, 1 wooden roller coaster, and big tower in the middle of it survive? probably not.

[IndyGuy4KI]

I think the answer to this is clear, for there already is a park like this in Cincy. They call it Coney Island. It is a small park that seems to withstand the test of time! For this is their what 124th season? Robbie?

[The Interpreter]

IF Kings Island 1972 operated today, it would not, if 1972 rules prevailed, have season passes. The lines would be much shorter, the shows grander, the food exquisite and prepared nearly to order, the service exceptional and the rides...abysmal...for the most part...except:

Bavarian Beetle...a classic Galaxi, operated grandly.

The Racer had far more airtime, cushioned trains, no seat dividers, no head rests, no seat belts, big old brake levers manually operated and smooth as glass track...including the last hill on each side. It was, for many years, proudly, my favorite wooden coaster. IF it could operate like that today (and it cannot), it might still well be. And I don't even much like out and backs anymore...

And let us not forget The Flying Eagles, the Rotor, the sky ride....

[Coney Islander]

Heck yeah! Over the years, Kings Island's management gradually put more stress on the thrill rides, to get the teenagers and college students to come in. Meanwhile, Kings Island gradually started putting less of a stress on everything else, in effect losing people from every other age group.

Kings Island could survive today as they did in 1972, but going cold turkey in trying to reach this would end up being disastrous. They would need ten or fifteen years to ease over... Gradually lose teenagers... Gradually win families...

And I might be wrong here, but from what I've heard, KI's 1979 attendance was higher than KI's 2009.

[Oldiesmann]

Two of the things that really stood out to me were the BankAmericard Service Center and the NorthAmerican Van Lines storage center.

When you shopped at KI, you could have your purchases sent to the front of the park, free of charge, and pick them up on the way out of the park.

The storage center offered a place for you to check items that you brought with you but didn't want to carry around with you all day (coats, sweaters, umbrellas, etc.). Both were provided free of charge.

[Pillsberry123]

I think people in this thread who say that it couldn't survive are assuming that it would still market itself as a park for thrillseekers. It would not.

There are plenty of small theme parks like Coney Island that survive today along with fairs, carnivals, as well as parks like Holiday World. If King's Island had all the same attractions that it had in 1972, then it would also attract people who come just to see shows, buy things, and just enjoy the landscaping. Riding rides was (and would be) a secondary thing, if not one of many things to do when visiting King's Island.

Plus, I'm convinced that The Racer was much better in the past than it is today, and the same goes with rides like Blue Streak, ect.

[Thrill_Biscuit]

The Kings Island of 1972 had a particular grandeur that fit the mood and general attitude of the time. It was in a much more rural area, too (the suburban sprawl hadn't quite reached its borders yet), which gave it that feeling of being far away from the 'real' world. With relatively limited media and communication choices (the cell phone was still a year away, Nintendo was still making playing cards, and cable television was still a high-end luxury with, at best, 8 channels), visiting a well-themed amusement park still seemed a very uniquely satisfying source of entertainment. Teenagers were still quieter and more polite, too (except for the true hippies of the era, who really weren't as interested in visiting amusement parks, if you get my drift, man!)

[gigacoaster2k]

Why, pray tell, do people travel for hours (myself included) to reach parks like Holiday World? Dollywood? These parks have one, maybe two stand-out rides (as Kings Island once did), an emphasis on preservation, and absolutely unbeatable customer service, food, shopping, shows, and atmosphere (again, as Kings Island once did).

It's quality over quantity. Parks that still believe in it are wildly successful destinations for many people.

I absolutely could not agree with you more. Holiday World is my #1 favorite park out of the 13 I've been to.

So many people think that because I'm a ride warrior, that I'm going to love the park with more coasters. Yes, I like to lap coasters, but I also like to stop and enjoy the atmosphere, try their food and desserts, and yes I even stop to smell the flowers, take photos of a parent goose with their goslings, and read about the park's history, etc.

I would have LOVED to have seen KI when it first opened. If that 1972 park was still here today, you can bet I would DEFINITELY go.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Cedar Point.. the place has a magic I cannot describe that pulls you in like a magnet. There's always bands playing, shows going on, music blasting, coasters and rides going.. the energy of CP has literally given me goosebumps just from walking into the park. Not to mention CP has some pretty interesting historical significance.

I like big crazy parks, and I also like small charming parks. For me, it just all depends on what they have to offer.

[BoddaH1994]

If you ever wondered how a park with great attention to detail but a lack of quality rides would do in today's world just look at the Hard Rock Park. Remember how well that went?

[bkroz]

If you ever wondered how a park with great attention to detail but a lack of quality rides would do in today's world just look at the Hard Rock Park. Remember how well that went?

Completely different. Like, completely. Hard Rock Park was completely off the beaten path, located on a once-main-thoroughfare to Myrtle Beach that had long since been diverted. Their marketing was atrocious to say the least, their admission options were terribly priced, and their ride selections were all "basic" versions of great rides. If Hard Rock Park had been a local, regional park, it would've lived. But it sought to be a destination - people don't travel to ride Time Machine if they're within the same driving distance to a superior B&M, which most everyone is.

If Hard Rock Park is an example of anything, it's that of a park that thinks it can skate by on its name alone. Clearly, it couldn't.

Kings Island 1972 did not suffer from the "lack of quality rides." Many of the rides that were there when it opened, as Terpy said, are still celebrated, remembered fondly, and missed today. Would the park be a regional draw? No. Would it have season passes? Probably not. It would be much like modern day Coney Island or Indiana Beach - a small, humble, quality park with a few great rides and an emphasis on quality.

Would it survive? Yes. Would it cater to the same people as it does today? No way. At all.

[gigacoaster2k]

If you ever wondered how a park with great attention to detail but a lack of quality rides would do in today's world just look at the Hard Rock Park. Remember how well that went?

Good point, but look at parks like Holiday World, Dollywood, and Stricker's Grove. They are certainly doing well.

Dollywood is the only park I've ever visited where I know I could not ride a coaster for an entire day, and still have a great time.

Holiday World may be a small park in the middle of nowhere, but they work VERY hard to make their customers happy. They are consistently voted cleanest and friendliest park. Plus they have the world's tallest water ride, the world's #1 wooden coaster, and are soon debuting the world's longest water coaster. They also offer their customers drinks, SPF 30 sunscreen, and parking all without additional cost. Holiday World certainly does not need a lesson in marketing strategy, and they are proof that dynamite comes in small packages.

Not every small park is doomed. You don't always have to have a 300 foot coaster to keep your customers coming back, because that's not what everyone wants.

[BoddaH1994]

If you ever wondered how a park with great attention to detail but a lack of quality rides would do in today's world just look at the Hard Rock Park. Remember how well that went?

Completely different. Like, completely. Hard Rock Park was completely off the beaten path, located on a once-main-thoroughfare to Myrtle Beach that had long since been diverted. Their marketing was atrocious to say the least, their admission options were terribly priced, and their ride selections were all "basic" versions of great rides. If Hard Rock Park had been a local, regional park, it would've lived. But it sought to be a destination - people don't travel to ride Time Machine if they're within the same driving distance to a superior B&M, which most everyone is.

If Hard Rock Park is an example of anything, it's that of a park that thinks it can skate by on its name alone. Clearly, it couldn't.

Kings Island 1972 did not suffer from the "lack of quality rides." Many of the rides that were there when it opened, as Terpy said, are still celebrated, remembered fondly, and missed today. Would the park be a regional draw? No. Would it have season passes? Probably not. It would be much like modern day Coney Island or Indiana Beach - a small, humble, quality park with a few great rides and an emphasis on quality.

Would it survive? Yes. Would it cater to the same people as it does today? No way. At all.

You make some good points, but I think we have different things in mind in terms of surviving today.

Could KI still remain a regional park doing a million or so visitors a year? Absolutely. However in order to remain a competitor for markets such as Cleveland, Nashville, Huntington, etc where this is a reasonable distance, you have to make a mark on the map. I think Kings Island, through a little bit of luck, some brilliant connections and perhaps some divine intervention got some fantastic breaks in its early years. It became a household name with appearances on The Brady Bunch, Partridge Family and ultimately with the construction of The Beast.

A good example is Cedar Point. Talk to a handful of non-enthusiasts and they'll know about it, they may even be able to accurately describe some of the major rides. Probably very few of them know about Holiday World.

Speaking of Holiday World, they do about a million visitors a year. It's a very regional thing. They do what they do and they do it well. However, I think the best thing that's ever happened to them is the fact that they're in the middle of nowhere. They're just far enough away from several metropolitan cities. Hypothetically, if Holiday World were a half hour for Indianapolis, would it still be around today? Probably not. If a small regional park could draw a million people, then I'd find it likely that one of the big chains (particularly Six Flags in the 90s) would see the value in the market and build a mega-park there. Obviously with the industry in shambles, it wouldn't be true this very second, but you see my point.

You have to remember that Mason in 1972 was like the Santa Claus, IN of today. In fact, Mason wasn't even close to being a city yet. It literally was a farm in the middle of nowhere.

Same could be said about the Hard Rock park. Nothing really stood out. Nothing notable was there to draw you away from other tourist destinations in the area. Sure, the place was a mess from day one, but even the worst situations should be able to yield more than one season.

[RingMaster]

A good example is Cedar Point. Talk to a handful of non-enthusiasts and they'll know about it, they may even be able to accurately describe some of the major rides. Probably very few of them know about Holiday World.

Because Cedar Fair spends so much money promoting and advertising the park to the point where you're insane if you've never heard of it. Almost every Travel Channel special showing coasters has to have Cedar Point on it.

[BoddaH1994]

A good example is Cedar Point. Talk to a handful of non-enthusiasts and they'll know about it, they may even be able to accurately describe some of the major rides. Probably very few of them know about Holiday World.

Because Cedar Fair spends so much money promoting and advertising the park to the point where you're insane if you've never heard of it. Almost every Travel Channel special showing coasters has to have Cedar Point on it.

Absolutely. Why are they on the Travel Channel? Because what they offer is noteworthy.

[Guest rcfreak339]

Good topic! really gets ones mind thinking. I think the 1972 Kings Island would have survived but instead of the park having 200 foot tall monsters and being televised on national shows the park would have a local market with very family oriented rides, not looking to thrill thrill seekers. Just a nice place to stay a day and enjoy your time. Not worrying about lines and high prices. One could argue that the 1972 Kings Island was better and one could argue that todays modern park is better. There are positives and negatives for both.