Mystery Construction

I have to add another point I just thought of, how many parents posting here are posting with a known/unknown influence directly related to one or more visits to a place like Disney? I have a feeling that in some, not all, but some cases, once you've visited Disney with your kids, automatically everything else is subpar in their offerings for kids and families..

Chief Wahoo said:
...and built the family "Maverick" rollercoaster that had to be tamed down before it opened because people might have passed out while riding it.

That's not correct. There was no taming, though they removed the roll because of concern for the wear and tear on the train axles and bearings.

^Didn't they remove the roll also because of an extreme head bang too?

Whether you think the park is family oriented enough or not, it could use a modern Mill Race, Pirate Ride, SF Earthquake, or WWL. If CF ever stops their "promote from within" philosophy, it might benefit them to recruit someone from Disney and that wouldn't be a bad thing. I'm an enthusiast, but this "Park X needs to build a new coaster" mentality is pretty ridiculous.

I also think a GCI woodie will be the next coaster. Cedar Point does not have a good wooden ride and I think a GCI would be a great addition to the park.

Whatever they build, that amount of space is plenty to build somehting awsome. Just look at Mantis or the Raptor. Those two rides take up very little space.

I've heard different versions on the removal of the roll but I'll go with your thoughts on it Jeff. Bottom line, even without the roll it could hardly be considered a "family" coaster...certainly not if you compare it to the likes of Iron Dragon. The launches and inversions alone would keep it off the must ride list of lots of people, including kids.

I don't think I've ever said Cedar Point isn't family friendly. If I did it wasn't my intent. It could be MORE family friendly and most of the attractions added in the last decade (with the possible exception of the ice show and the BMX show) really can't be described as family attractions. Planet Snoopy is undoubtedly good for most young kids. Maverick is undoubtedly good for most thrill seekers.

The big coasters, while appealing, don't seem to be driving attendance numbers significantly higher. Cedar Point has made public statements in the past that they wanted to be more appealing to the family demographic. I don't see lots of examples of them putting their money where their mouth is.

Jeff's statement is exactly what the park said when it was asked at Coastermania that year.

Chief Wahoo said:
Cedar Point has made public statements in the past that they wanted to be more appealing to the family demographic. I don't see lots of examples of them putting their money where their mouth is.

I agree. Plus, this isn't the coaster boom of the 1990's. Building a shiny new roller coaster doesn't have that effect as it did in the past.

Says who?

Has the same effect on me and all the people I know that go to amusement parks.

But not on the bottom line, which is infinitely more important than you and the people you know.

I saw the ride operate with the roll in place. It did not appear any more intense than the turns or the Stengle dive, and was in fact a very long roll. Only a couple of humans know for sure, as far as I know.

But yes, I get your point that even now it was hardly a "family" coaster.

I am not buying the "bottom line" argument eather.

Parks that build coasters have banner years. Just look at michigans adventure and canadas wonderland as an example.

You get more butts thrue the gates witch means more in park spending, and you sell more tshirts/ souviniers. Not to mention all the hotel rooms that are also booked.And all the other nickle and dime things that come along with it as well, like parking fees, fast pass..ect.

That kind of plan doesn't work. A park has a 'banner' year due to good planning. For those parks, it was the right ride at the right time.

Your plan sounds like the one used at Six Flags:WoA around 2000. Build lots of coasters and people will come! It didn't work.

On the coasterdom podcast, they said that when Cedar point announced that they were taking the roll out of Maveick it was because it caused somethinglike 7 g's or something ridiculous like that.

Sfwoa failed because of bad management and customer service. They also built a bunch of coasters in ONE year instead of over time.

Cp builds a coaster every few years.

Darn it...I deleted my post.

Ok...I still like thrills. I'm glad Cedar Point has lots of them. I ride them when I can though it is difficult to do so given my family demographics. My kids like Camp/Planet Snoopy. They enjoy running around in there (at least for some time). But, it ain't much fun for mom and dad to sit and watch.

We can ride the car rides together, the train, skyscraper, paddlewheel, etc but I'd sure like to see some new rides (not spin and pukes) that we could ride together.

Cedar Point continues to cater to the thrill seekers while also saying they would like to boost the appeal to "families". Ok, then tell me why do one thing after saying the other?

I spend more in the park now than I ever did as a young, single thrill seeker. I suspect that is not uncommon. If they want more of us big spenders to spend, give us a reason to bring our family of four back more often...and provide us some more things we can do together.

The roll of Maverick is irrelevant. Sorry I brought it up. Maverick is a thrill ride...not a family ride...unless your entire family is made up of thrill seekers. Someone else put it better...a family ride, in my opinion, is something a 4 year old to a 74 year old can do together. (Yes, I get that SOME older folks ride coasters...and SOME younger folks can ride the bigger rides...but ya'll know what I'm getting at.

I don't expect this argument to sell on a site made up overwhelmingly by the very folks that Cedar Point has catered to for the past 20 years. I get that. But, I don't think it makes my argument any less relevant.

Last year Cedar Point reported attendance up (or strong anyway) and per cap down. That is the first time that has happened in my somewhat long memory. I'm sure that was partly due to the economy. I think it was also do to the spending habits of the typical Cedar Point guest who seeks thrills.

It's interesting that the attendance is up, but the spending is down at amusement parks.

At our church, we have the same situation. Attendance is up, but donations are down 3%.

Well, there is no doubt that people are watching their money. I believe Disney is having the same issue right now. They are making cutbacks but my last visit to the park (in February) saw huge crowds.

I think it is shortsighted to think that is the only symptom to Cedar Point's issue specifically. And again, I think they have acknowledged they could do more for families...I just don't think their previous ways of addressing that have made an impact.

Planet Snoopy was gettting some criticism for "duplicating" Camp Snoopy. I think that was a little unfair and Planet Snoopy isn't bad. But, Planet Snoopy isn't a "family area" in my mind. It is a "kids area". It is a fine kids area, to be sure, but it doesn't address the family issues that I criticize or that Cedar Point itself has made clear they are hoping to draw back to the park.

crazy horse, I don't know if it's possible for CP to have "banner" years when their attendance have been pretty consistent (give or take 5%) since the 1970's. Also considering their schedule has been extended 2 to 3 weeks in May and even more in September and October since then that should say a little more about attendance. I think the last time CP saw huge growth in attendance was around Magnum and Raptor's inaugural years.

This topic comes up every time footers or land clearing happen at the point since at least 2003 (probably even further back with some of the original members) and it turns into "gee... this would be a great opportunity to build something that everyone in the family can enjoy" vs. "another thrill ride will really put CP on the map and fix all other problems"

All I can say is that I hope it's a flume. I think it would be a step in the right direction if they truly want to recapture the family.

~Rob

crazy horse said:
Parks that build coasters have banner years. Just look at michigans adventure and canadas wonderland as an example.

Both parks were underdeveloped, especially Canada's Wonderland. Cedar Point is far from that. The impact of Maverick did not elevate the park to the kind of spike brought on by Millennium Force or Raptor, and in fact I understand that 2007 was only marginally better than 2006 in terms of attendance. New coasters may help maintain the status quo, but CP is definitely in a ceiling position.

Wyatt said:
On the coasterdom podcast, they saidthat when Cedar point announced that they were taking the roll out ofMaveick it was because it caused somethinglike 7 g's or somethingridiculous like that.

And they would be absolutely wrong. Don't you think they can calculate these things virtually before they fabricate even a single part? Besides, G-forces are not a measure of danger, duration combined with them are.