announcement date 8/18/15

Thabto said:

Maybe this and Gatekeeper was part of a package deal. And just because they add a coaster this year doesn't mean that family friendly additions aren't in the future.

If the two coasters are part of a package deal that forced CF to install them at a certain date, then CF is being terribly mismanaged.

A dark ride is all but confirmed for the future.

Yes. The future. That's what they've been saying for a long time now. And there's been a net loss of family-friendly rides while we wait...

djDaemon said:

Kevinj said:
For all we know, this project has been in the works for up to 5 years, and perhaps pre-dates Ouimet; at least in its genesis.

That would be surprising. Wasn't GateKeeper Ouimet's first move? If that's the case, that suggests two things: first, the decision to install Valravn came after Ouimet came on board, and second, that the company can be extremely nimble when they want to. So even if this were in the works before Ouimet joined CF, they could have easily postponed the project.

So, here's my understanding of how this works.

The parks (and chain as a whole) have a rolling plan for five years out. This is used for budgetary and planning purposes, so they know roughly how much they'll be spending when, and what they'll be spending it on. They don't know five years out where each support will go and how deep; they don't even necessarily have too detailed a concept.

Here's my reasoning for that..

The time between the initial discussions between a top tier coaster manufacturer (particularly B&M) and a park is roughly 12-24mo. Further, Rob Decker has been quoted as saying that the GateKeeper talks started rolling at IAAPA in November 2011. It's a given that they did have some type of five-year plan, and it's been said that Matt Ouimet had some influence in changing plans (including GK's) once he took over.

If Rob's team had the ride pretty well planned out five years in advance, he probably wouldn't have just started talks with B&M roughly 18mo out.

Bottom line? I'm sure they had some idea they wanted a coaster to go in around the 2013 season, maybe some ideas for ride types. Matt "shadowed" Kinzel for 6mo or so before taking over in January 2012. So, Matt was already meeting with the various departments to get to know how they function (as any new CEO would). This would include Rob's team, so I'm sure he had some input from fairly early on.

Another point.. CF/CP has also said that plans for Top Thrill Dragster started shortly after the launch of Millennium Force. That's a total of three years out for a fairly advanced ride; perhaps that extended planning period is why Wicked Twister came first in 2012.

TL;DR: A five-year plan is a rough planning and budgetary tool. Management has some idea what they want to do a couple years out but doesn't have the specific attraction planned out. That, and GateKeeper was indeed the first coaster project with Matt Ouimet's influence. Luminosity was the first significant addition under his reign.

Willijs3 said:
"Snake kills Dumbleore"

*Snape* kills *Dumbledore*... Sorry I just felt that needed to be said.

But the Snake was Slytherin!

Thanks for digging up the details, 4lyf. That indeed indicates that their plans are vague at 5 years out, and get more fleshed out, until about 2 years out (at least in the case of a coaster install), when they have to pretty much have things ironed out.

With that in mind, it would suggest that Valravn was given the "go ahead" sometime last year.

Based upon the recent performance and results of Cedar Fairs financial information I am going to say that management knows how to run and upgrade their parks. There is a reason that people here who know what's best aren't being paid the money to make the decisions.

The trends we're talking about aren't exactly going to manifest results immediately, good or bad. Removing family-friendly attractions over a long period of time, without suitable replacements soon after, is something that will show up in financial results years down the line.

And at that point, it will take several more years for any corrections to have an impact.

Somebody here, I think that buckeye guy, said that the general public will see a new dive coaster as "just more twister steel." I beg to differ. It would be the third tallest coaster in the park and will tower over EVERYTHING in the area where it is, where everyone will see it dangle there before dropping straight down 230 feet. I've been to both Busch Gardens and ridden on Sheikra and Griffon and trust me; listening to the people in line there you can tell that the general public does not see this as just another B&M "fun but not thrilling" commodity. The 90 degree drop, the holding break, the tall inversions, the speed, etc. makes it more than just another "good but not great" ride.

Also, Gatekeeper was a spur of the moment buy, and wasn't part of the 5 year plan. It could be very plausible that this was in the makings in 2011 before Gatekeeper was even being looked at by Cedar Point.

^^ And current management knows these things and has much more information than we do. Once again, there is a reason you and I are talking about this on a message forum instead of being the ones actually paid to run the parks. In other words, Matt Ouimet is better at running a billion dollar amusement park company than you and I are.

They should take this drop beyond 90 degrees

Taking these leaked plans as fact, I am pretty sure Valravn did not come about while management was walking through the roller coaster store and saw a bright shiny dive coaster and bought it on the spot. There is research into these investments, market analysis etc... If a brand new family coaster, or a few family friendly rides, or a brand new iMax theater fit the current goals of the park better than a dive coaster then that's what they would have built.

I guess the bottom line is that, believe it or not, Cedar Point and Cedar Fair are not going to base all of their decisions on what the experts here know is best. Instead they would base them off of facts, and the real information they have.

And it would seem you view them as utterly infallible. Some of us disagree with that view.

Not at all, but I do view them as much better at running an amusement park than we are. Especially since they are privileged with much more information than we have.

A dive coaster certainly wouldn't have been tops on my wish list. I'd love to see a playground, a family style coaster, trying to do something to safely relax some height requirements on Gemini, mine ride, Iron Dragon etc...

However, I realize that CP will not do everything that I want, and they have reasons they invest money where they do. Obviously, at this time they have information that tells them a dive coaster is the best investment to achieve their goals at Cedar Point. Again, I am taking Valravn as a fact under this discussion.

Sounds like some of you are suffering from entitlement and expect the park to cater to YOUR needs. News flash, you are just a few out of over 2 million people that visit the park each year. None of us here have access to the data they use to base their decisions on. Would I be disappointed if the big addition was something I didn't want? Yes. Would I quit going to the park because of it? Hell no. I know that they made their decision to add what they felt was necessary based on data which I have no access to and that it was best for the park. Their plans for the next 2 years are probably already set in stone.

TTD6262 said:

Also, Gatekeeper was a spur of the moment buy, and wasn't part of the 5 year plan. It could be very plausible that this was in the makings in 2011 before Gatekeeper was even being looked at by Cedar Point.

It would take a massive ego to spend $30 million that wasn't part of a 5-year plan (and budget).

Again, the plan is just for planning and budgetary purposes. They had some idea of what they wanted to go in, but the specific manufacturer, ride model, and layout were not yet planned out. That all happens in the last 12-24mo before opening a coaster.

I did hear at one point that GateKeeper did not come out of nowhere under Ouimet, but he did make some significant changes to the project just before Rob made contact with B&M. Ouimet wanted to open up the main gate and beach views, so there we have it.

Think about it.. You wouldn't want to plan today exactly what you're going to buy in five years (well, more like four if there's a one-year lead time and you need it in five). Especially not in an industry where innovative technology is fairly common. Five years before GateKeeper opened, in 2008, I do believe that wing coasters were but a concept that was being developed. Today, B&M can't do a launched coaster beyond a wing coaster due to the weight of the trains requiring too much electricity. Even that's a relatively short 5-row wing train. In five years, they may well have at least the same size flying train that they can launch. If you bought based on what was available today, you would always be five years behind.

It's the same way in computers, and really, the corporate IT department surely has a similar extended plan (might also be five years). They'll know when they want to put in network upgrades, buy new computers, etc. They might even have a rough dollar amount for what they'll spend on new hire computers over the next five years. Computers improve, though, and prices change. A laptop with the same performance you got a year ago would cost less today, and have better battery life.

My point is that the plan really is preliminary, so they know roughly what they'll do and when. They likely knew back in 2011-2012 what they wanted to move/remove when they opened up the site Good Time Theatre, Dodgem, and Turnpike Cars occupied. They also likely knew that they would put a coaster on that site. They might've even had a list of concepts they were interested in, but beyond that? TBD.

They don't know exactly what is going in and where for the 2019-2020 seasons yet. How much they hope to spend, what they hope to do with the land, sure. Not specifics.

Luminosity, however.. That did scream "spur of the moment", particularly with the way they removed Wildcat to put in grandstands about a week before the park opened.

Well then I guess he has a "massive ego" (No idea how being interested in a new type of coaster means massive ego in your mind, but whatever) because he's said several times that they went to that convention and B&M had their Wing Coaster model out as one of the displays and they were instantly interested. I know for a fact that they've said it wasn't in the 5 year plan.

Also, the whole "5 year plan being only for budget" idea doesn't really have any factual basis as far as I know. Is that just your opinion of how they do things, or have they actually said that in interviews? You're trying to say that I said the $30 Million wasn't part of the 5 year plan, but that is a worthless strawman argument, unless of course you can kindly quote where I said that they weren't planning on spending that much. I said it was a "spur of the moment buy" in that they had no intentions of putting a wing coaster in until they saw it at that convention, whereas it is completely a possibility that they've been looking at their coaster lineup and saw that a dive coaster would fit for much longer than when they started looking at where to put it and what rides to take out.

I recall them saying the deal for Gatekeeper with B&M was made on the floor of IAAPA.

JUnderhill said:

Not at all, but I do view them as much better at running an amusement park than we are.

Well, sure. But I do see indications that they're talking out of both sides of their mouth.

Consider opening day/weekend/month this season. The park was wholly unprepared to be open, to say nothing of being prepared to provide guests with the "best day" experience Ouimet loves to talk about.

And over the last 30 years, they've removed an awful lot of family-friendly attractions, and the installation of suitable replacements hasn't come close to maintaining the balance. Ouimet also loves to talk about sharing the experience through generations. That is, the experience that many of us had as kids can be shared with our kids, and so on. At this pace, I won't even be bringing my daughter to CP regularly until she's old enough to ride the coasters. And at that point, she'll likely have little interest in my being there.

Maybe the expected balance has shifted from the one I experienced as a kid. Maybe families today don't want things like African Safari, Paddlewheel Excursions, Pirate Ride, Kid Aurthur's Court, Sky Slide, and so on. But if Ouimet is trying to get me and others of my generation to bring our offspring there to recreate that magic, he's certainly not going about it in convincing fashion.

Thabto said:

Sounds like some of you are suffering from entitlement and expect the park to cater to YOUR needs.

What are you even talking about? Since when does discussing and critiquing the park's decisions amount to being entitled?

djDaemon said:

And it would seem you view them as utterly infallible. Some of us disagree with that view.

Myself included. What I would ideally like to see over the next couple years is the dark ride (even though I'm on the record as totally disagreeing with the interactive type that's apparently coming), and what Cedar Point really needs from my perspective: a true family coaster. And to be clear, this means a height requirement of around 39 inches, but not Wilderness Run or Woodstock express...something on par with Firechaser Express (Dollywood).