Dive Coaster coming to Cedar Point?

If a dive coaster is indeed on the way, in CP fashion, it'd be unique and different. How, I don't know. Perhaps the leak is enough for the park to elect another style coaster. The future is exciting!

I doubt they would change their plans just because of a leak that hardly anyone believes to be fact. If it is true and it is coming in 2016 , it would most likely already be set in stone now. Since the park has said it is an option they are thinking about, then that would have to be an attempt at a cover if indeed it is coming in 2016. If they are still thinking about it and decided to go forward with it, then it would probably have to come at a later year. I find it hard to believe that they would demolish the theater and not build a significant ride/coaster in 2016, since they could just use the theater until the year before a major replacement. I hope that it is set in stone or they are seriously considering it for a later year. I really want this dive coaster to happen. If it did I think I would melt with excitement.

It's also plausible that the dive coaster in question was indeed one of several proposals considered for 2016. The park's short and long term plans have room for flexibility, and in all likelihood the decision was made to build coaster "x" in 2016 narrowed down to a small number of possibilities, all of which would fit in a pre-arranged footprint. Of course there would need to be a date when a final decision would have to be made based on the coaster-building companies' needs, but I'm not sure many among us know enough about the timeframes of these decisions to know if even now that time has come and gone.

I'm not a big fan of dive machines. They are just run-of-the-mill coasters by today's standards with a gimmick added. By run-of-the-mill I mean that you can find a coaster of similar scale and intensity at just about any major thrill park nowadays. At CP, when it comes to thrill rides, I expect cutting edge. I expect something above and beyond the scope of what you can experience somewhere else. Gimmick aside, I don't think a dive machine meets that standard. It's best reserved for parks with height/space restrictions.

I've been on Sheikra and it's OK but the ride experience doesn't hold a candle to the 26-year-old Magnum IMO. In fact, I rode Sheikra on media day and haven't ridden it since despite a number of subsequent visits to BGT. Isn't that the foot-traffic test that damned Mantis?

If we're not going to get a revolutionary new coaster, I'd much rather see a good new woody to fill that gaping hole in CP's ride lineup, or a Texas Giant conversion done on Mean Streak.

And, since I indirectly touched on the topic of CP seemingly shying away from putting in the latest and largest of everything after getting snakebit by TTD... I think it is a travesty that the 400' Funtime Starflyer went to SFoT instead of CP. While Windseekers are fun, they are not even remotely close to the intensity of the former.

I think dive coasters are one of the best types of coaster. All coasters have a "gimmick" in my opinion. They have to in order to be marketed. The only thing about Magnum that is different IMO is airtime really. I don't think airtime makes or breaks a coaster at all. Neither does intensity. I also love a really smooth coaster, and B&M comes to mind in that department.

DA20Pilot said:

but the ride experience doesn't hold a candle to the 26-year-old Magnum IMO.

Wow, I cant believe that Magnum has been there for 26 years, ....and still a great coaster! It's the first big coaster my hubby ever drug me onto~ was always a family favorite. We even had a dog named Maggie after the coaster!

She's has held up well -since she's supposedly began to sink in to Lake Erie so many years ago. LOL~people and their rumors.

Magnum is still my sentimental favorite, and still a fantastic ride with airtime galore and stunning lake views.

The level of thrill and intensity are only a small part of the whole. Look, they could have built a 400ft star flyer, but instead they opted for the windseeker because it has way better capacity. You think the general public notices a 100ft difference?

Besides, how can you complain about gimmicks when TTD is by all definitions a gimmick with the added bonus of being closed for the majority of its first few seasons. Do you want a fun ride with high capacity, reliability, and thrill? Or do you want them to spend the 30 million on a ride that holds the record for a year and becomes a maintence nightmare? Or do you want a top of the line Dive Machine with multipule drops, maybe a launch ect?

As a side note, SFoT will lose its height record in the near future to a new install in Florida. Anyway, for me anyway, being three or four hundred feet in the air makes no differance, especially when there is nothing to compare the height to. (Like the one in SFNE, I have not been to SFoT yet.) Anyway, Windseekers have nearly twice the capacity of Starflyers, I do not like high draw low capacity rides.

Anyway back on subject, a quick summery of what makes this rumored dive coaster plausable.

+ Picturesque

+ High Capacity

+ Compact Foot Print (Comparatively Speaking)

+ "Different" Looking Ride Vehicles

+ Undoubtedly Great Ride Experience

I could keep going, but I think I proved my point why this is a (mostly) popular rumor.

DA20Pilot said:

At CP, when it comes to thrill rides, I expect cutting edge. I expect something above and beyond the scope of what you can experience somewhere else.

I've never understood this expectation. After you've been on anything a few times, the novelty wears off and you're left with a great ride or not. The dive coasters (at least the one I've been on) are great rides. There was nothing cutting edge about Maverick, and it continues to be one of my favorites.

Dragster was cutting edge when it opened... and I find it not even remotely worth the wait. I was over it in the first year.

CoasterCam said:

The only thing about Magnum that is different IMO is airtime really.

While that is true by today's standards, as Hypers and the like are relatively commonplace, when Maggie was new she was shockingly revolutionary. Nobody had ever built a coaster that tall, fast, and steep. Industry professionals (engineers, executives) were quoted in the newspapers saying things like "I didn't think we'd ever be able to build one this tall." It was nearly the rollercoaster equivalent of the moon landing. It created a sensation. It redefined the level of thrill a coaster could deliver. Remember, just 11 years before Magnum was built, Gemini was the Guiness world record holder for height and speed. It was a benchmark for what was possible as far as the euphoria and excitement a coaster could deliver. Today (and by comparison to Magnum even), it seems almost like a family ride. Magnum was groundbreaking and awe-inspiring. Cedar Point did something very unusual with its marketing campaign for Magnum's first year. NO PHOTOS of the ride were available on any postcard, video, book, TV commercial, etc. The ad slogan was "Even when you see it you won't believe it!" And it was true! Back in the days before Magnum, you couldn't see anything rising above the CP skyline from a distance other than trees and Space Spiral. You couldn't see any ride superstructures rising above the treeline from the Highway 2 bridge like you can today. You couldn't see much of anything until you were on the causeway. Until Magnum. From miles away, you could see this one towering superstructure rising out of nowhere. It was awe-inspiring and unprecedented. The energy in the queue line was analogous to tailgating at a Super Bowl. That one coaster drove such a buzz that it redefined how an attraction could drive attendance and kicked off a huge new wave of coaster installations.

And in my opinion, it is one of the most fun coasters to ride anywhere still to this day.

I highly agree with the last four posts. I was not trying to down on Magnum. Great coaster.

Jeff said:

DA20Pilot said:

At CP, when it comes to thrill rides, I expect cutting edge. I expect something above and beyond the scope of what you can experience somewhere else.

I've never understood this expectation.

I'll try to explain. Imagine if CP (or some other park) had never built Magnum, and Gemini or KI's Vortex were the limits of the experience a coaster could deliver. Or if CP had never built MF and the Arrow/Morgan Hypercoaster was the pinnacle of available coaster thrills.

Sure (to use your terminology) Gemini and your typical hypercoaster are great rides. But as you alluded, after the novelty wears off you get used to it and it just becomes another great ride.

Somebody in the industry has to be a leader and take the next step and deliver the next big thrill. Somebody had to create the iPhone lest we'd all be still using clamshell Motorolas and loving our "great" phones.

Since at least the late 1980s, that "somebody" in the amusement industry has been Cedar Point. Cedar Point would still be a wonderful park if it didn't have Magnum and MF. But the fact that it offers those world-class thrills that you can only experience at a couple places on Earth. And that causes me to visit CP a lot more often than I otherwise would.

Back in the mid 80's and before, Kings Island was widely regarded amongst Midwest thrill seekers as the far superior park for coasters. CP just put in run-of-the mill attractions that every other park put in. Giant Wheels, Intamin Rapids, Intamin Bobsled, etc. They had coasters (Corkscrew and Gemini) that years earlier had been state of the art, but by then had become entirely unremarkable.

I would prefer CP to keep its edge as the destination that has the greatest collection of thrill rides and redefines what is possible. I don't want to see it become the CP of the mid 80's that was an also-ran and afterthought amongst coaster enthusiasts.

The reason I go to CP more often than most any other park is because they have attractions that offer a level of thrill that you can't find hardly anywhere else. I'm not saying it's the only thing that brings me to the point, I'm not saying I'd never go otherwise, and i'm not saying they should focus exclusively on thrill rides to the exclusion of family rides and other attractions.

But if you've spend decades and millions cultivating a world-wide reputation as an industry leader and pioneer, why let that crumble?

If you're Apple and you've spent a dozen years since the second coming of Steve Jobs redefining and revitalizing your brand as a company that makes stunningly beautiful products that redefine categories and change people's lives, why would you ever go back to making middle-of-the-pack products?

On another note, I agree with you IRT Dragster. It isn't anywhere near as big of a deal as MF and Magnum were. To me, this is because it is a 17-second one-trick pony. If it had 6000 feet of track and a number of elements after the 420' drop, it would be an entirely different story.

Cedar Point doesn't need to take any leadership position. If the market wants to build "better" rides, someone will build them. To me, it doesn't matter if Cedar Point builds them first. If they didn't build any new coasters for the next ten years, it's not like the park will cease to be fun.

Your comparisons don't really match the amusement industry. Outside of Orlando, these are regional attractions with a regional audience. I'm not exaggerating when I say people believe that what they have locally is as good as it gets.

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't entirely agree.

Disney is not just a regional park. Why? It offers something unique that rises above what the average amusement and theme parks offer.

While admittedly CP is not on the same scale as Disney in this regard, I think they are in a different league than the typical regional amusement park. CP is a resort destination with hotels, beaches, and history. It is also much larger than most parks. Most regional amusement parks are day trips without substantial numbers of overnight stays. CP is much more widely visited as a multi-day / overnight destination than a Six Flags or even other parks in the CFLP chain.

I agree that CPs core market is the surrounding region, but I don't believe its market is limited geographically to the extent most parks are. I believe it has ingredients to appeal to and attract from a broader market and that it has done so, in large part because of its international reputation for cutting-edge attractions over the last 25 years.

If you are a business and your current market is saturated, you look to expand your market and/or expand into other markets to keep growth coming. To use Apple as an analogy once again, once the iPhone (and modern smartphones in general) had begun to saturate in the US, they looked to expand into other markets with greater growth potential, such as China.

In CPs case, the attendance trend has not been rising in recent years, taken as an aggregate. Revenues have increased due to increased per capita spending, not due to blossoming attendance figures. If Disney and places like Key West or Colonial Williamsburg for example have been able to attract tourists from across a broad geographical area in addition to their local markets, why can't CP do so as well? I'm obviously not saying that CP would remotely approach Disney's scale as a major international destination. I'm simply saying that you can, to varying degrees, take any destination and expand it's appeal and reach beyond the local market if you offer something above and beyond what is offered elsewhere.

I would argue that over the years CP has supplemented its attendance figures by attracting visitors from beyond the region. While the increase in market reach may be incremental in nature in CP's case, I think non-local visitors certainly contributed meaningfully to the growing attendance figures witnessed post-Magnum, through the 90's, and post-MF. I know of a number of families that travelled to CP from Pennsylvania, Southern Ohio, Kentucky, and Illinois, for example, specifically because of the world-class attractions and resort-destination aspects when they otherwise would have gone to Six Flags, Kennywood, Kings Island, etc.

Lastly, CP receives millions of dollars in free publicity when they open a world-class new attraction that shatters previous limits. This translates into increased revenue from the local core market. Remember the international media zoo the park was on MF's opening day? This translates into a ton of local buzz that drives regional attendance and interest well beyond what Gatekeeper did. And this buzz had a spillover effect for CP as a place to visit that summer beyond just the thrillseeking crowd.

You're right- CP doesn't need to continue to be a pioneer and a world-leader in terms of boundary-pushing thrill rides in order to be a fun, successful park. But, continuing to do so via the right attractions could arguably make the park better than it otherwise would be, for guests local and distant, and shareholders alike.

DA20Pilot said:

Disney is not just a regional park. Why? It offers something unique that rises above what the average amusement and theme parks offer.

Walt Disney World is the world's number one tourism destination (or so they say on the Internet) because: a) Walt Disney set out to create a year-round vacation resort destination and b) the company has continually developed the resort as such. WDW and Cedar Point are not in the same league. At all. Disney didn't acquire 27,000 acres of land just to play at the same scale as amusement parks.

CP is a resort destination with hotels, beaches, and history.

...

Most regional amusement parks are day trips without substantial numbers of overnight stays. CP is much more widely visited as a multi-day / overnight destination than a Six Flags or even other parks in the CFLP chain.

I disagree. Any regional park you go to has close-by chain and independent hotels and motels, all of them as close as they can get to either the park or the expressway exit. Some, like Hershey, Darien and (soon) Dollywood, have their own hotels. Cedar Point has two large metropolitan areas with an hour's drive and (bankrupt) Detroit also with a day's driving distance. I wouldn't be surprised if Cedar Point's day trip v overnight visitor populations are fairly consistent with other regional parks.

noggin said:

WDW and Cedar Point are not in the same league. At all.

I disagree. Any regional park you go to has close-by chain and independent hotels and motels, all of them as close as they can get to either the park or the expressway exit. Some, like Hershey, Darien and (soon) Dollywood, have their own hotels. Cedar Point has two large metropolitan areas with an hour's drive and (bankrupt) Detroit also with a day's driving distance. I wouldn't be surprised if Cedar Point's day trip v overnight visitor populations are fairly consistent with other regional parks.

I never said CP and WDW are in the same league. In fact, if you read my entire post, I explicity stated they are not. I was simply giving a classic example of an amusement industry attraction with a reach beyond the local market. My point was simply that it is possible, to varying degrees, for any attraction, amusement industry or other, to expand beyond the local market by offering something world-class and unique.

And, my comments about CP being more of a resort/overnight destination than Six Flags etc. are not just my personal opinion. I summarized those points from major Wall Street analysts' research reports on Cedar Fair's stock, which made the exact point I did.

I like the park as it is and will be. If we start thrusting "shareholder value" around I may vomit. The most destructive force known to man, especially when it comes to things such as a Cedar Point, is and will always be the single minded chase for "shareholder value."

One has to look at CP for what it is, the best collection of coasters, period. If they aren't record breaking now, who cares, quality wise they have the most formidable collection overall.

The future is creating value for the guests. The improved meal plans, ticket packages, resort packages, shows, and the mix of rides and experiences.

Whatever they build, if it is a high quality experience, that will trump records or "cutting edge." CP is a nexus unlike any I've been to from California to Florida. The resorts, marina, beach, rides, water park, excursions, shows, all so tightly packed and yet distinct. It is my regional park, there are others, nobody has an experience they love more valid than what another person has. But CP is I think special among a select few places anywhere on earth.

I don't need cutting edge in my face. I see fleets of so-so coasters built to break a record, because bean counters think that record is the key. MF was a brilliant design. Maverick is short but intense. Raptor still rates as my favorite because it is simply a smooth and satisfying ride.

Of course, sharing it all with my kids as they are growing up? That makes it all worth while.

Cedar Point is very regional in nature. Ask people around there who know where people are coming from, and that's what they'll tell you. Magnum, Raptor, Millennium Force, Dragstger, etc., have not changed that, and future rides won't change it either. In fact, nothing has brought them close to their Raptor (1994) attednance, and one might argue that year was just a fluke.

CP is regional, yes. But, it is a regional destination resort. It doesn't have a world wide draw (though it gets European coaster enthusiasts) like Disney, but that makes it no less of a destination for guests in it's market area. A significant source of revenue each year comes from guests who stay on property for multiple nights. Its the resort aspect and the beach which has always made CP a very different place to me from your average Six Flags, etc.