Funtime Group says Wind Seeker headed to Cedar Point, threatens legal action

http://pointbuzz.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=1566

If any of you guys subscribe to the e-edition of Amusement Today you probably saw tht there is a story toady that says it is now up in the air ( pun apology offered) due to a patent suit problem between the Wind Seeker and StarFlyer

Interesting. Especially since Funtime stated they are suing Cedar Fair/Point and not Mondial.

So, in reality, Funtime should be facing lawsuits from:

1.) Gravity Works for its Skyscraper knockoff - http://www.funtime.com.au/data/index3.htm

and

2.) SkyCoaster for the knockoff: http://www.funtime.com.au/data/index4.htm

Not to mention the numerous other companies that had reverse-bungee/slingshot style rides out before they might have.

I don't mean to be a downer, but just from looking at that picture they keep posting, is either version of this ride really appropriate for CP in terms of capacity? It looks like it holds 12 people at a time. Maxair generates a 30 minute line with 50 seats pretty consistently. I wouldn't wait two hours to ride a super-sized Wave Swinger.

As far as the actual story, seems to me like they ought to be suing Mondial, not CF.

Uhhhh Dissapointing I wish they still cared about the coaster wars, it was much more interesting. and how was this suposed to suprise and not dissapoint?

Matt,

Both companies offer a 25 swing version, with 2 seats that are molded side-by-side, for a total of 50 riders per cycle.

Ahhh - probably should have looked into it more. 50 sounds much better than 12. :)

sabers22 said:
Uhhhh Dissapointing I wish they still cared about the coaster wars, it was much more interesting. and how was this suposed to suprise and not dissapoint?

The "coaster wars" were over in 2002-2004.

I wanted a wood coaster as much as the next guy but there are still quite a few rides there I love going on. Anything else new to me is like a bonus.

sabers22 said:
Uhhhh Dissapointing I wish they still cared about the coaster wars, it was much more interesting.

Yeah, rampant coaster building led to the bankruptcy of Six Flags, industry consolidation and out-of-control maintenance budgets. That was really interesting.

There were no wars. They were a figment of enthusiast imagination.

Yeah, that's why Six Flags built Kingda Ka 36 feet higher than Top Thrill Dragster. They definitely weren't trying to compete or anything. There was a time when they all had a competition going on, whether it be who had the tallest or the most, but these days they seem to be more sensible, which is refreshing. Quality over quantity.

Jeff said:

sabers22 said:
Uhhhh Dissapointing I wish they still cared about the coaster wars, it was much more interesting.

Yeah, rampant coaster building led to the bankruptcy of Six Flags, industry consolidation and out-of-control maintenance budgets. That was really interesting.

There were no wars. They were a figment of enthusiast imagination.

Yea, but with the cost of some of the new rides they are installing, it's not really that much more for a coaster. In some casses, it's less for a new coaster than a new spinning ride.

For example, Evil Knievel at six flags St Louis cost 7 million to build. How much does this new ride cost? Or how much did shoot the rapids cost?

I don't know how you can say there was no "wars" when it came to coaster building in the 80's and 90's. If that was the case, we woulden't have nearly as many of the bigger coasters we have today. Do you think they built magnum or millennium force taller than other coasters out there only because they thought it would be cool? No...they wanted a bigger coaster than what joe's amusement park had. Why?...So they can claim to have the biggest. That is one of the goals of most of the big parks out there.

Cedarpoint made huge statements when magnum, millennium, dragster were built. Everyone wanted to beat them.

It was not just in the minds of coaster enthusiasts. It was an industry wide thing.

When I first heard the rumors of CP's Starflyer, I made sure to ride the one on I-Drive here in Orlando. Here's a decent photo of the two-seat vesion.

I have to say that I was a bit disappointed because it wasn't at all scary like I had hoped it would be. While I had fun and the view was awesome, it just didn't live up to the terrifying ride most people envision.

While the seats are on chains, there's also a cable that goes from the back of the chair up to the arm/star. The seats themselves also had a ton of steel reinforcing-- with a bar across the back and a couple across the bottom-- meaning there was no give in the seat position. Because there was no "yo-yo" feeling like you would imagine there would be, it was more of a smooth and peaceful (and borderline, "okay, when is the cycle going to be over?") type of ride for me.

I can't decide if it will be a good addition to the park. My personal opinion is that most thrill seekers will be disappointed seconds into it, and the crowd that would really enjoy it will be too freaked out to give it a whirl. The one here in Orlando can be seen for miles and is visually very cool and exciting, but still never gets riders. Of course you can argue that it's pay-per here, but if I were a CP regular I probably wouldn't ride it more than twice a season.

Figment of imagination? I remember hearing DK saying many times that the construction of Magnum was the start of the coaster wars. And it was alot more than rampant coaster building that lead to Six Flag bankruptcy. The general public wants coasters too not just us enthusiasts, read facebook comments, floorless, flying, wooden, 4D, so when clues started to point towards a thrill ride and not coaster the comments turned toward MEH, that sucks, maybe next year.

Couldn't have said it better crazyhorse, I agree with your post 100%.

airee85 said:
Yeah, that's why Six Flags built Kingda Ka 36 feet higher than Top Thrill Dragster. They definitely weren't trying to compete or anything. There was a time when they all had a competition going on, whether it be who had the tallest or the most, but these days they seem to be more sensible, which is refreshing. Quality over quantity.

Yes, STR represents a level of quality never seen before in log flumes--ALL of the old flumes were/are technologically, how should one say this, ummm, functional.

Now the new rides feature, not coaster wars, but legal battles

I am looking forward to riding the new ride....CP is my home.....i have faith in the vision of those who do this for a living.....they very seldom dissapoint....HAVE FAITH and enjoy what we have, everybody else would love to have what CP has.

I don't know if I have anything but DK said that he was not commenting about the lawsuit and that the announcement will still come next Tuesday (all from the Sandusky Register). Maybe (just maybe) they aren't planning a StarFlyer but something else (like the woodie some people want). Just a thought but it may be nothing. :)

^How many years did Cedar Point spend planning for Maverick? -Since Top Thrill Dragster was being built. Cedar Point's not going to just call GCI and tell them to come out tomorrow and start building a new coaster. It doesn't work like that. We already know what Cedar Point is "supposed" to get assuming the lawsuit doesn't interfere. I'm not sure I'll be able to handle the spinning, though. :)

crazy horse said:
For example, Evil Knievel at six flags St Louis cost 7 million to build. How much does this new ride cost? Or how much did shoot the rapids cost?

I'm not sure the cost would have been dramatically different. But, Evil was an exact copy of another GCI over seas. So, there would likely have been a substantial engineering savings. This is one of the reasons Six Flags used GCI. Six Flags was looking for a very fast turn around on a ride (less than a year IIRC) GCI was the only company contacted that had a design ready that would fit on the available plot of land.

STR was $10M I believe. But, there was likely a lot more work required to prep the site for the rides use.