Could Steel Vengeance have a media event?

^^ trust me, the people serving you are probably well aware that you don't belong, but don't care enough to do anything about it.

Believe me, a CP employee can tell whether a person is another CP employee or not.

I'm sure the park would be more than happy to ban someone who is a non-employee using employee services.

I wouldn't want to dine at the employee cafeteria anyway. I've volunteered at the park for a couple HalloWeekends, and the food didn't really feel filling. Sure, it's cheap, but I'd much prefer to get one full meal a day at Famous Dave's, Coasters, Melt, etc.

LightDark18 said:
I'd much prefer to get one full meal a day at Famous Dave's, Coasters, Melt, etc.

One of these things is not like the others... Two of these things are kinda the same. Can you tell which one is not like the others? Now it’s time to play our game!

I feel like I'm the only one in the world who actually really likes Coasters. The food isn't great by any means, but I always feel comfortable going there when I don't want to think too hard about what to eat.

There are opportunities to ride Steel Vengeance before opening day. You have the First Rider Auction, Ohio State Day and Tony made an interesting hint that there may be some other opportunities the week before the park opens. Im sure that will all be announced at WCO. I know Ill be attending the First Rider Auction and OSU Day.

As far as all of you who consider yourselves enthusiasts, where were you for Ride Warriors Club? It was a pretty cool way to experience lots of great ERT, behind the scenes tours, visiting with the park staff and a cool Christmas Party at the park. The park made an opportunities for Cedar Points biggest fans, but the turnout was a disappointment. I would like to see the park resurrect a club like that in the future.

I am going to miss Ride Warriors Club too. This would have been an awesome year for it.

I am guessing the problem was that it wasn't a free event. Cedar Point's biggest enthusiasts shouldn't be asked to pay for that kind of special experience. /s

The biggest problem with the RWC, in my opinion, is the price tag in comparison to the specifics of the added events.

Having a Platinum Pass works because the benefits that come with it are on every operating day, while RWC events are only on very specific days. Most people have very tight schedules with school, work, and family, so they will plan their trips to CP around their schedules. Ex: I would go to every Platinum ERT night if I could, but I can't because I live two hours away and can only take so much time off of work, which I would much rather save for days when the park is dead for the entire day.

The only people who truly benefit from these quick, exclusive RWC events are those that live really close to the park or those that have a lot of time and flexibility on their hands. Big events like CoasterMania and Coaster Campout are fine because you can plan whole days around them. Barring the off-season, you can't with RWC.

Don't get me wrong; I think that the Ride Warriors Club is a good thing for the park, but compared to the Platinum Pass benefits and the park's big events, it's just a $100 frosting on the cake.

RWC was priced as an exclusive club but when you take into account all the expenses the park had for the events, it really was a good value if you participated in everything. There is no doubt the RWC was geared for people who could visit the park frequently. The events were posted well in advance to people could plan but I agree it would be difficult to for people who lived far from the park plan a weekend trip to the park just for a behind the scenes tour or ERT.

Im hoping the try something new and different in the not to distant future.

DSShives said:

There are opportunities to ride Steel Vengeance before opening day. You have the First Rider Auction, Ohio State Day and Tony made an interesting hint that there may be some other opportunities the week before the park opens. Im sure that will all be announced at WCO. I know Ill be attending the First Rider Auction and OSU Day.

As far as all of you who consider yourselves enthusiasts, where were you for Ride Warriors Club? It was a pretty cool way to experience lots of great ERT, behind the scenes tours, visiting with the park staff and a cool Christmas Party at the park. The park made an opportunities for Cedar Points biggest fans, but the turnout was a disappointment. I would like to see the park resurrect a club like that in the future.

Has the First Rider Auction been announced yet? I might consider doing it. I've heard it's a bit pricey, but it's a really good event in general. (Come to think of it, it depends on my finals schedule, but if it won't interfere with my academics, I'd obviously show up to an event if possible...)

I agree, if there will be a media day, passholder preview, or other similar event, we will probably get to know at WCO.

The First Rider Auction hasn't been announced so we are just assuming there will be one as with past coaster debut's. I'm sure most of it not all Steel Vengeance opening week/end events will be announced at WCO.

Somebody asked on a CP blog post back in November about the First Rider Auction and Tony personally responded by saying that plans were in the works. I won't take his words with a grain of salt this time and say this basically confirms that a First Rider Auction will be happening; we just won't know the date until WCO, probably.

For me, I’ve waited two seasons to ride, I can wait a few days or weeks Ionger for my first ride when the park is a little slower. The auction goes to good causes but it’s too rich for my blood just for the ride.

Just curious, how high does the bidding go???

During the ValRavn event, I believe they admitted people to the event for around $50 or $60. But if you wanted a true "first ride," you needed to shell out some money. Can't remember how high they went. But I distinctly remember Diamondback's event at Kings Island, the first riders paid over $1,000 for each seat. Presumably those are donated by companies, rather than individuals.

I was hoping to join the ride warriors club this season and I was disappointed to hear that it was discontinued.

I was not aware until mid season last year that Cedar Point had such a club, otherwise I would have joined.

I am sure all that joined the club had a blast, disappointed that I missed it.

As for the 1st riders auction, I participated in the Mystic Timbers 1st riders auction. It was a blast, well put together, fun for all.

Can't wait to participate in this years for Steel Vengeance, Coaster Con with Ace, Coaster Stock at Kings Island and oh yes, Coaster Mania at the Point!

I am excited that Gemini is part of Coaster Mania this year, I can't wait to lap on that bugger a few times.

I believe after reading some of this thread I now have enough information to accurately write a Thesis about Entitlement in Hobbies. I might even have a Doctorate.

Bottomline. Enthusiasts really do not make the park nearly as much money as some of you may think.
They market to us because it is a easy way for them to get some good PR that other enthusiasts see. Very little GP know about us and I cannot count the number of times I had someone who said WAT when I said Rollercoaster Club.

The park can use us to pad their pockets some with some extra cash generated from passes and etc. We used to get better perks back in the day. They probably finally hired someone to calculate the ROI for them hooking us up. My guess is they were losing money which is why over the years we have seen the changes.

Be happy they are hooking us up at all.

Life will be much easier once you accept what you are given. Taking advantage of the perks they give you buy using loopholes to do other things is almost like keeping food stamps if you started making 70,000$ a year.

Don't be an ass.

Here is a relevant exerpt from the "Online Enthusiast Morals" essay that really eloquently showed this issue. I decided to put this here instead of the WCO thread, because ideally, the WCO thread should be for WCO, and perhaps media day debates should stay in this thread created for that purpose.

It's a long "excerpt", but I figure it sums up the relationship between enthusiasts and the industry these days (using Big Dipper as an example, but it's applicable to far more.) I've highlighted parts that I feel like I've used a lot in my arguments. Again, for those who want to read this person's entire essay, it is located here:

http://www.rollercoasterphilosophy.com/2011/geauga-lake/

My citing of this essay is not necessarily aimed at the admins and longtime members of this site, it's really a thing about the entire online enthusiast community. I must say that PointBuzz is actually one of the better sites in this regard - some sites will ban you if you so much as dare to challenge what's normal on that site. I appreciate PointBuzz for being more tolerant than... other forums.

To achieve this, a subtle form of fatalism is promoted as a virtue for Online Enthusiast Morality. The individual can do nothing to affect their favorite park’s policies or the design of the most recent attraction, and so to criticize parks along these lines is not just a waste of productivity (by the time you sit down to talk about coasters online you’ve already said to hell with productivity), it risks various forms of reprimand, even potentially getting banned from all future discourses. There’s an often unstated (and sometimes stated) commandment that a good enthusiast understands and empathizes with the fact that theme parks are a business, and (so the argument goes) businesses are in business only to sustain their own profits. Not only does this justify any decision made by the business as long as it helps their own income, but the interests of the good enthusiasts must align with the interests of the business. (This usually ignores countless counterexamples of businesses and individuals being motivated to act by other sources than immediate monetary gain.) Enthusiasts that openly reject this fatalistic norm, such as the two who tried to independently save the Big Dipper, quickly become labeled as “bad enthusiasts”.

Attempts to criticize parks on the grounds of what should be done (for example, Geauga Lake should have refused to put the Big Dipper up for auction and donated it to ACE to help find a way to preserve it, or they should not have closed the amusement park at all) are usually dismissed for failing to understand the business interests at stake in an amusement park operation. A “bad” enthusiast might say “The case is that X, but it should be that Y”, to which the “good” counterargument is often “But the case is that X, and a full understanding of the situation would probably reveal that there are no alternatives, so statements of ‘should’ are meaningless”. While a causally deterministic model of reality would support such an argument, it serves absolutely no purpose on the human level other than to enforce a norm of (usually condescending) fatalism. Many people argued the fact that Cedar Fair is a business and the Big Dipper was no longer part of their interests once they decided to close the park, while making no distinction between the factuality of the situation and any sort of ethical imperative. Some people not only demonstrate pride in their ability to show no emotional affliction at the needless demolition of a beloved ride by private interests, but seem pleased when these outcomes actually do happen, because it reinforces the perceived accuracy of their ‘realistic’ worldview. The underlying belief in this behavior seems to be that realism is mutually exclusive to idealism. This fails to make the distinction between discussions on the world as it is versus how it ought to be, while both are extremely valuable discourses that should run independently of each other.

Notice, in Online Enthusiast Morality, “criticism” is always reducible to “complaining”. It can’t even be reduced to “a complaint”, because that indicates a one-time observation spurred by a specific incident, while “complaining” is a perpetual state or attitude of the individual that can be dismissed as the trait of a bad enthusiast. The choice of language is an extremely important tool for perpetuating a particular normative standard within a community. To criticize a park within the confines of Online Enthusiast Morality, one must first take caution to signify their statements as “my honest opinion”. This is basically a way to avoid responsibility for the criticism, since a totally subjective opinion is essentially arbitrary and doesn’t impact the opinion of anyone else, unless by coincidence they already happen to share the opinion. This ‘moral’ behavior of stating harmless, subjectively-grounded “opinions” rather than harmful, objectively-grounded “criticisms” (unless the criticism is obvious and already community endorsed) is promoted under the guise of keeping civility and order in the discussion, but it really is only a means of minimizing any potential threat to the established community norms or the financial interests of the amusement park in question.

Then there is a belief perpetuated among members that the enthusiast community is of little to no value to the amusement parks. They create an entity called the “general public”, which is basically an anonymous out-group consisting of anyone who is not part of the broader enthusiast community that visits amusement parks. The “general public” is usually characterized condescendingly, as ignorant, impulsive, and of poor tastes relative to the enthusiast. Yet at the same time, the GP are of infinite more importance to the amusement park than the enthusiasts, because parks are only profit-motivated and the general public is how they make the vast majority of their profits. (As if entertainment businesses make decisions only by running focus groups with customers of the lowest common denominator, and place absolutely no higher value in the critical consensus of people with experience or good taste.) This apparent contradiction between the inherent superiority yet fundamental inefficacy of being an enthusiast is a means of encouraging people to remain involved in the community while simultaneously limiting their belief that anything they say within the community will have any material importance outside the online walled gardens. People only participate as enthusiasts for their own instantaneous gratification, and critical thinking can therefore only be harmful to this objective. Therefore, enthusiast morality states that theme parks should not be grateful for having fans. Rather, fans should be grateful for having theme parks. Unlike the general public, who only owe theme parks their money, fans owe them their money and their continued, uncritical loyalty.

As a result of this lack of critical scrutiny, the amusement industry has been afforded the luxury of being one of the most secretive and closed door entertainment industries relative to their fanbase. There are virtually no media institutions in the amusement industry that are not extended promotional tools to advance their immediate business interests, as there are with professional film or music criticism. Interviews rarely talk at any depth about craft or theory as a filmmaker or musician would (“industry secrets”), but are essentially viewed as PR tools useful for selling more tickets to a particular category of customers. The industry is in such a creative rut that it’s hard to even think about ways in which attractions could be better (conceptually, thematically) that’s different from the established order.

This lack of information flow or critical/theoretical framework has meant that “critical” enthusiasts become easy targets for derision from “moral” enthusiasts. Discussion among fans tends to be very misinformed due to the almost complete absence of any useful literature or news sources, either from within the industry or from professional criticism. This makes it much easier to keep the population subjugated under Online Enthusiast Morality because any attempts to criticize are always dismissed as being made in ignorance. But there’s virtually no way for one to become informed without becoming involved in the industry first-hand, at which point their interests will once again be aligned with the perpetuation of these norms. Accordingly, critical enthusiasts have almost nothing to talk about except exceedingly insignificant details; i.e. “I don’t like that paint selection, the paneling looks weird”. While this sort of discussion is usually (rightly) yelled at for being unacceptably negative in tone relative to the triviality of concerns, the exact same discussion in a positive fashion (I love this new paint, the paneling on this building looks spectacular!) is often commended.