Old Paramount (Viacom) vs. Cedar Fair Managments at KI

[The Interpreter]

Drop Zone was used by permission of Paramount. To continue using it would have required payment of a fee that Cedar Fair chose not to pay.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109676/

[BoddaH1994]

I'll chime in...

Paramount Parks:

Pro:

-They had the intellectual property to work with.

-I liked how employees dressed up for their individual rides at first, (ie Top Gun airsuits)

-Top-Notch media annoucements (a spectacle in itself)

-Winterfest!

Cons:

-As stated above, they had beautifully themed rides... for a few weeks

-Generalized apathy for the park from Viacom management

-Over-promise, under-deliver

Cedar Far:

Pro:

-Cleaner park

-Unannounced add ons (When a ride is added, typically the whole area is revamped)

-Fantastic live entertainment

-Adding rides that "round out" the park (ie Diamondback - we needed a signature steel)

-Special events (Knievel)

Cons:

-Peanuts is the only real licensed property, nothing directly geared toward adults

-Believing that a "coaster is its own themeing." That may work for some, but I don't buy it

-Constant pressure from investors may affect park additions and performance (remains to be seen)

-They refuse to respond to my weekly requests to open my latest venture in the park, "Ryan and Ronny's Nice Sit Down Restaurant Featuring RC Cola, Sponsored by RC Cola, Proudly Serving RC Cola"

[Guest rcfreak339]

^How dare they. RC Cola is freaking good.

[Truth Seeker]

I'll chime in...

Paramount Parks:

Pro:

-They had the intellectual property to work with.

-I liked how employees dressed up for their individual rides at first, (ie Top Gun airsuits)

-Top-Notch media annoucements (a spectacle in itself)

-Winterfest!

Cons:

-As stated above, they had beautifully themed rides... for a few weeks

-Generalized apathy for the park from Viacom management

-Over-promise, under-deliver

Cedar Far:

Pro:

-Cleaner park

-Unannounced add ons (When a ride is added, typically the whole area is revamped)

-Fantastic live entertainment

-Adding rides that "round out" the park (ie Diamondback - we needed a signature steel)

-Special events (Knievel)

Cons:

-Peanuts is the only real licensed property, nothing directly geared toward adults

-Believing that a "coaster is its own themeing." That may work for some, but I don't buy it

-Constant pressure from investors may affect park additions and performance (remains to be seen)

-They refuse to respond to my weekly requests to open my latest venture in the park, "Ryan and Ronny's Nice Sit Down Restaurant Featuring RC Cola, Sponsored by RC Cola, Proudly Serving RC Cola"

I cannot stop laughing!

[The Interpreter]

If they can have off brand ketchup in return for a consideration, they can certainly have off brand cola, in exchange for a consideration.

Terp, just sayin' (and missing Heinz at FUN, but not Papa John's at SIX)

[IndyGuy4KI]

I think KI would have a Coke contract burring a whole in a filling cabinet somewhere!

[The Interpreter]

The time is coming....and not so long....

And for a consideration, virtually any contract can be ended. It just takes enough nickels. Usually.

[CoastersRZ]

But the question will be, will they go to Pepsi, or will they go to Coke? Who will pony up the most nickels? Personally, I hope KI stays Coke. I was glad when the Reds switched to Coke from Pepsi a few years ago!

[The Interpreter]

I still say if RC offers more nickels, whoever owns KI at the time will go there...

It's all about the nickels.

[IndyGuy4KI]

I still say if RC offers more nickels, whoever owns KI at the time will go there...

It's all about the nickels.

I dont see them going to RC even if they offer more nickels. RC is just not going to sell as good as Coke and Pepsi.

[The Interpreter]

To paraphrase Mr. Kinzel:

"People gotta drink."

And it is true, in blind taste tests, people prefer RC to Coke or Pepsi, by large margins. Tell them which is which, though, and their preferences change. Drastically.

What if RC sponsored FREE soft drinks at KI all day for all patrons? Would your answer change? Do you really think Holiday World pays for all that Pepsi? Or loses even a nickel doing it the way they do it?

[IndyGuy4KI]

To paraphrase Mr. Kinzel:

"People gotta drink."

And it is true, in blind taste tests, people prefer RC to Coke or Pepsi, by large margins. Tell them which is which, though, and their preferences change. Drastically.

What if RC sponsored FREE soft drinks at KI all day for all patrons? Would your answer change? Do you really think Holiday World pays for all that Pepsi? Or loses even a nickel doing it the way they do it?

That may be true, but they are not going to put "surprise" on the fountains and not tell people what it is.

I assume Pepsi gives HW as nice price reduction on their product to serve it there. I also assume part of their ticket price is your drink fee.

I have heard that you have to pay a nice fee for a Coke or Pepsi contract to serve in your business.

[The Interpreter]

That depends on the size of the business and the nature of the audience. At many large colleges and universities (and their venues like stadiums and arenas), it's the beverage companies that pay the school a large fee to be there...(including, in many cases, free product, cups, serving equipment, ice machines, and in some cases, even workers to serve the product).

[Browntggrr]

When I owned my small business, my contract was with Pepsi and they performed all the work & maintenance for free.

[Mr. America]

Cedar Fair:

Early ride times on their best coasters!!!..... oh wait.....never mind.

Are you kidding me, brother? Didn't we have a topic about this?

Cedar Fair Pros:

WindSeeker and Vortex ERT.

Paramount Pros:

Selling the parks to Cedar Fair so that one day they would build a WindSeeker that passholders could have an ERT on.

[markr]

here here how i see it

Cedar Fair

clean

thrill rides (if CF did not come along Diamondback would not be here)

Paramounts

themeing

Rides

WinterFest

Octoberfest

The Beast

As you can see i am more of a Paramounts fan more then anything from the tv studio that made it (IDR what it's called) to Cedar Fair I've been with paramounts my whole life at kings usland so sad they they singed it over to CF

The Beast was built during the Taft years, not during the Paramount years. Also, Winterfest was discontinued during the Paramount years except for 1 year.

For me, the attempt at theming KI around movies just didn't work for me who grew up during the glory Taft years at KI. One of the reasons that I am pleased with Cedar Fair is that they seem to be going back to KI's roots during the Taft years, including bringing back the wonderful live shows.

[beastfan11]

The music! Oh how I miss the music on International Street!

[Mr. America]

here here how i see it

Cedar Fair

clean

thrill rides (if CF did not come along Diamondback would not be here)

Paramounts

themeing

Rides

WinterFest

Octoberfest

The Beast

As you can see i am more of a Paramounts fan more then anything from the tv studio that made it (IDR what it's called) to Cedar Fair I've been with paramounts my whole life at kings usland so sad they they singed it over to CF

The Beast was built during the Taft years, not during the Paramount years. Also, Winterfest was discontinued during the Paramount years except for 1 year.

For me, the attempt at theming KI around movies just didn't work for me who grew up during the glory Taft years at KI. One of the reasons that I am pleased with Cedar Fair is that they seem to be going back to KI's roots during the Taft years, including bringing back the wonderful live shows.

I agree. I think Cedar Fair with the renovation of Coney Mall is getting back to that "Classic Amusment Park" feel every season.

One thing that has impressed me each season is the continued addition of landscaping.

[markr]

^My sentiments exactly. The Coney area has been too long neglected.

[Jasper]

What I liked about Paramount.

-Theming, I cannot stress enough about how much I loved the park when the theming was in abundance it felt like.

-Overall atmosphere of the park, it felt like it was more of a vacation destination and you cherished every minute you spent there, not saying I don't now because that is far from the truth.

-The Paramount license rights, such as Top Gun, Drop Zone, Face/Off, etc.

-I don't think this has any direct connection with Paramount, but I absolutely loved HBL, and even Nickelodeon Central when it first opened, now we have Peanuts, who I think it is safe to say most children are not very familiar with.

-The music played throughout the park.

-The slogans, a la, Where The Magic Of The Movies Meets The Thrills Of A Lifetime!

What I like about Cedar Fair.

-The addition of world class rides such as Diamondback and WindSeeker.

-The revamping of certain areas such as the new looking Planet Snoopy and the Coney Mall overhaul.

-The park seems to be much cleaner over the past couple of years.

-The benefit of being able to have a Platinum Pass and get into any Cedar Fair park, this is probably my all time favorite thing about Cedar Fair owning the park(s) now.

Overall, I still prefer Paramount solely because of the atmosphere and the theming around the park, I still love the park and think Cedar Fair is doing a great job with it. I cannot wait to see what happens with other areas of the park in the near future and cannot wait to see what more world class rides Cedar Fair has up their sleeve for our beloved Kings Island.

[bkroz]

It's too bad that all seasonal operators (excluding SeaWorld Parks, if you would call them "seasonal" operators) can't seem to understand how simple it really is: people want a well-themed, immersive experience (which may or may not make use of intellectual properties - Flight of Fear, Boo Blasters, DarKastle, Corkscrew Hill, etc are all great rides without them, and The Crypt certainly could be) with cleanliness, customer service, and well-rounded investments as a priority.

Theming, immersion, attention to detail, intellectual properties, appropriate music, well-rounded experiences.

Cleanliness, costumer service, "big" rides, emphasis on thrill, "record breakers," unrelated food and shopping and ride experiences based on themed areas.

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't there be big, well-themed rides? Record-breaking thrill parks with an emphasis on immersion? Both original and liscenced properties that work in sync? A clean, friendly park that also has in-character ride attendants? Universal has it. Busch Gardens has it. So why did both Paramount and Cedar Fair find the two concepts to be at odds?

[Browntggrr]

It's too bad that all seasonal operators (excluding SeaWorld Parks, if you would call them "seasonal" operators) can't seem to understand how simple it really is: people want a well-themed, immersive experience (which may or may not make use of intellectual properties - Flight of Fear, Boo Blasters, DarKastle, Corkscrew Hill, etc are all great rides without them, and The Crypt certainly could be) with cleanliness, customer service, and well-rounded investments as a priority.

Theming, immersion, attention to detail, intellectual properties, appropriate music, well-rounded experiences.

Cleanliness, costumer service, "big" rides, emphasis on thrill, "record breakers," unrelated food and shopping and ride experiences based on themed areas.

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't there be big, well-themed rides? Record-breaking thrill parks with an emphasis on immersion? Both original and liscenced properties that work in sync? A clean, friendly park that also has in-character ride attendants? Universal has it. Busch Gardens has it. So why did both Paramount and Cedar Fair find the two concepts to be at odds?

CP has never been a "theme" park, and they seem to be doing well. The same goes for Kennywood, Hershey, Waldameer, CW, etc.

Perhaps it is not all people that want/ need a "well-themed, immersive experience" to have a good time.

[bkroz]

You did nothing more than prove my point.

I said that people want a well-themed immersive experience (read, Paramount, Disney, etc.) with cleanliness, friendliness, and a well-rounded collection of attractions (read, Cedar Fair).

I made the case that Paramount and Cedar Fair represent extreme (and opposite) ends of a spectrum. Put another way, Paramount focused on well-themed, medium-sized rides. Cedar Fair goes big, or goes home. Neither is right or wrong. My question was clearly stated: instead of arguing over which is better, why can't we say that being in the middle certainly wouldn't hurt? Sure Cedar Point does fine with big rides. Always has, always will. Disneyland does all that it needs to with small, themed rides. Always has, always will. Some people want it one way, and some want it the opposite. Meeting in the middle (see, Busch Gardens Williamsburg, Universal's Islands of Adventure, Alton Towers, Tokyo DisneySea) seems to have some pretty spectacular results.

I think that's pretty clear even in our own case: when Cedar Fair entered its "flat ride" era and decided to focus on the family as much as on the roller coaster, it was well-received. The attempt at theming on Maverick was noticed, as was it on Shoot the Rapids.

When Kings Island finally received some thrill over theme with Diamondback and Firehawk, it was well-received.

To be thrill-centered is fine. To be theme-centered is fine. But it never ever hurts to move towards a happy medium.

And in fact, not once did I make a point of saying that "all" people want it one particular way or the other. Though that didn't stop you from implying that I did... I think it's clear that Cedar Fair has a firm stance on the value of theme. It's no more right or wrong than Paramount's very clear stance on how worthwhile a ride is if the ride didn't market its products.

To quote my own post:

people want a well-themed, immersive experience ... with cleanliness, customer service, and well-rounded investments as a priority.

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't there be big, well-themed rides? Record-breaking thrill parks with an emphasis on immersion? Both original and licensed properties that work in sync? A clean, friendly park that also has in-character ride attendants? Universal has it. Busch Gardens has it. So why did both Paramount and Cedar Fair find the two concepts to be at odds?

I didn't suggest that one was right. Nor did I suggest that either was wrong. Clearly, Disneyland and Cedar Point have been absolutely fine remaining pretty close to the extreme areas of the spectrum. My suggestion, as I clearly highlighted above, was that certainly meeting in the middle has been created incredibly successful results, and might be something more parks should make an objective.

I also wouldn't dare bring parks like Waldameer or Kennywood into this debate. I would say that large, corporate thrill parks and large corporate theme parks are more closely related to each other than they are with any smaller parks, be they themed or not.

[The Interpreter]

Paramount focused on well-themed, medium-sized rides? Really?

Son of Beast. Really?

Tomb Raider: The Ride. Medium Sized? Really?

Well themed? Hypersonic XLC? Really?

Ricochet? Really?

Hurler? Really?

I just don't see that Paramount really did theming all that well (with a FEW exceptions like Tomb Raider: The Ride or Volcano: The Blast Coaster), nor that they focused on medium sized rides. That certainly wasn't true of the Jane Cooper era. (Should I even mention the Drop Zones, which prove both my points?) Or Face/Off? (Or Invertigo at PGA) Well themed? It is to laugh.

[Browntggrr]

You did nothing more than prove my point.

I said that people want a well-themed immersive experience (read, Paramount, Disney, etc.) with cleanliness, friendliness, and a well-rounded collection of attractions (read, Cedar Fair).

I made the case that Paramount and Cedar Fair represent extreme (and opposite) ends of a spectrum. Put another way, Paramount focused on well-themed, medium-sized rides. Cedar Fair goes big, or goes home. Neither is right or wrong. My question was clearly stated: instead of arguing over which is better, why can't we say that being in the middle certainly wouldn't hurt? Sure Cedar Point does fine with big rides. Always has, always will. Disneyland does all that it needs to with small, themed rides. Always has, always will. Some people want it one way, and some want it the opposite. Meeting in the middle (see, Busch Gardens Williamsburg, Universal's Islands of Adventure, Alton Towers, Tokyo DisneySea) seems to have some pretty spectacular results.

I think that's pretty clear even in our own case: when Cedar Fair entered its "flat ride" era and decided to focus on the family as much as on the roller coaster, it was well-received. The attempt at theming on Maverick was noticed, as was it on Shoot the Rapids.

When Kings Island finally received some thrill over theme with Diamondback and Firehawk, it was well-received.

To be thrill-centered is fine. To be theme-centered is fine. But it never ever hurts to move towards a happy medium.

And in fact, not once did I make a point of saying that "all" people want it one particular way or the other. Though that didn't stop you from implying that I did... I think it's clear that Cedar Fair has a firm stance on the value of theme. It's no more right or wrong than Paramount's very clear stance on how worthwhile a ride is if the ride didn't market its products.

To quote my own post:

people want a well-themed, immersive experience ... with cleanliness, customer service, and well-rounded investments as a priority.

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't there be big, well-themed rides? Record-breaking thrill parks with an emphasis on immersion? Both original and licensed properties that work in sync? A clean, friendly park that also has in-character ride attendants? Universal has it. Busch Gardens has it. So why did both Paramount and Cedar Fair find the two concepts to be at odds?

I didn't suggest that one was right. Nor did I suggest that either was wrong. Clearly, Disneyland and Cedar Point have been absolutely fine remaining pretty close to the extreme areas of the spectrum. My suggestion, as I clearly highlighted above, was that certainly meeting in the middle has been created incredibly successful results, and might be something more parks should make an objective.

I also wouldn't dare bring parks like Waldameer or Kennywood into this debate. I would say that large, corporate thrill parks and large corporate theme parks are more closely related to each other than they are with any smaller parks, be they themed or not.

Oh, so you simply regurgitated exactly how everyone feels not from either end of the spectrum, but from the entire spectrum.

Thanks for explaining how we all feel.

[Burgtoad67]

"record breakers,"

<<<<<<< (Cough, cough) All i'm gonna say on this subject. And I am fully prepared to be ripped to shreds

[CoastersRZ]

Really? Flight of Fear has some pretty nice theming. And while it may not be as top notch as it once was, KI`s Flight of Fear has had its theming stay, relatively intact. Minus some minor deletions, like the radio antennae outside. At least its not like KD`s where most of the indoor queue was torn out for a Haunt location...

Now if only Cedar Fair can bring back the Kings of Komedy Clown Band... The one thing that KI is missing is the liver atmosphere entertainment in my opinion.

[CoasterKrazy]

I made the case that Paramount and Cedar Fair represent extreme (and opposite) ends of a spectrum. Put another way, Paramount focused on well-themed, medium-sized rides. Cedar Fair goes big, or goes home. Neither is right or wrong. My question was clearly stated: instead of arguing over which is better, why can't we say that being in the middle certainly wouldn't hurt? Sure Cedar Point does fine with big rides. Always has, always will. Disneyland does all that it needs to with small, themed rides. Always has, always will. Some people want it one way, and some want it the opposite. Meeting in the middle (see, Busch Gardens Williamsburg, Universal's Islands of Adventure, Alton Towers, Tokyo DisneySea) seems to have some pretty spectacular results.

To quote my own post:

Why must it be one or the other? Why can't there be big, well-themed rides? Record-breaking thrill parks with an emphasis on immersion? Both original and licensed properties that work in sync? A clean, friendly park that also has in-character ride attendants? Universal has it. Busch Gardens has it. So why did both Paramount and Cedar Fair find the two concepts to be at odds?

There aren't big, well-themed rides at regional parks like Kings Island because, unlike Disney, they don't have 100 million dollars to spend on a single attraction. As destination parks, Universal and (to a somewhat lesser extent) Busch Gardens aren't comparable to Kings Island or the other Cedar Fair parks (with perhaps the exception of Cedar Point, although that is debatable).

I don't know if you've been to Tokyo DisneySea, but based on my experience there, I would say that park is far from meeting in the middle. It has both spectacular rides and amazing themeing, and having worked for one of the companies that built that park, I can assure you they paid a huge sum of money to make that experience. Money that Cedar Fair simply doesn't have, and money that Paramount/Viacom wasn't going to spend.

[The Interpreter]

Paramount/Viacom was capable of such attractions, as Star Trek: The Experience so amply demonstrated....in Las Vegas.

[Snowman]

Now if only Cedar Fair can bring back the Kings of Komedy Clown Band... The one thing that KI is missing is the liver atmosphere entertainment in my opinion.

Frankly I don't think a "liver" atmosphere would be very enjoyable I love funny tiepolls.

I agree with you completely. At Busch Gardens Europe, they have a great drum corp, magicians, crooners, wild bird displays, and other performers all over the park. It really adds alot to the vibe of the park and would be a great and inexpensive addition to KI.