Next major ride

"It...eliminated an attraction that had a much broader appeal. The space was...used for a very popular attraction during Halloweekends." So the park took land that was not generating extra profit and turned it into an attraction that was. Why is this a bad idea for a for-profit company?

"...how many times have you paid for the up charge attraction vs how many times you have visited the park?" What difference does it make? The purpose of Dinosaurs Alive is to make money. Whether that comes from repeat visits or unique visits is immaterial.

Considering the bulk of CP's guests are repeat guests, those that visit once a year. It becomes very material. It's not something that people are going to pay for on multiple visits. A true family coaster appeals a much larger audience including the whole family vs an attraction that currently appeals to a select few. It's very similar to an attraction like the climbing wall or bungee tramp that lasted very few seasons as popularity fell. Have they made money, yes I would not argue against that, had it revenue declined I would nearly guarantee it, will it continue to fall yes. The overall revenue that a new attraction generates in gate tickets would far surpass the revenue that this attraction generates multiple times over. Proof that it's not profitable long term? Multiple parks have already removed the additional cost of admission or were free when opened.

"Considering the bulk of CP's guests are repeat guests..." I'm not necessarily arguing the point, but you're basing this on what facts?

"It's not something that people are going to pay for on multiple visits." How is that material? As long as the attraction makes money, whether it's making money off of repeat guests or one time only guests doesn't matter. The point of Dinosaurs, or any attraction, is to make money.

"Proof that it's not profitable long term? Multiple parks have already removed the additional cost of admission..."
...and being profitable in the short term is bad how?

I never said being profitable in the short term was a bad thing. It makes it a great place for a major attraction in the future. I don't know if you assume I am saying it should be torn out tomorrow. In a few years when they are ready for a major attraction it make a good spot for a new ride. Hell they could keep the animatronic Dino's as part of the theme of a family coaster. DA is not something that will last in its current setting for more then a few years. They could make it free in a few seasons, they could do it a lot of things. I greatly dislike the attraction and know a lot of people who feel the same way but again the post is next major attraction and I see that as a location that fits looking at 2016/2017 and I like the idea of a themed family coaster which is something CP does not offer. Cedar Creek Mine Ride is the closest and that's a stretch.

I'm not assuming you are saying it should be torn out tomorrow. You, and people who share your opinion, may not like DA, but apparently enough people do, season after season, at multiple parks, to justify it remaining. I'd guess that 2017 is too optimistic a timeline for DA to be replaced.

20 years from now, the grown-up kids will be reminiscing how great Dinosaurs Alive was and too bad CP got rid of it!

Actually, I don't think that much love will be lost over it.

Someone mentioned the Smiler coaster and I'm just going to point out that if any coaster should display the clown or My Little Pony colors it would be one called Smiler. Instead it's a dingy gray.

So everyone thinks a coaster should go on the island and not some kind of Tom Sawyer island or Treasure Island type of attraction?

Noggin. The attraction was and still is extremely successful in its first installation. CF signed a deal to add it to the bulk of their parks just prior to the end of the 2011 season. The only reasons it didn't make it in to all of the parks for 2012 was plans that were already in progress and the production schedule needed to produce that many items by the Canadian company that creates the "dinos." None of us have the sales figures or I think we could clear this for the most part very quickly. Seeing as they contracted so quickly after KI's success it's not easy to gage the success at each location. If they begin adding additional Dinos as they are at KI that will give us a better idea.

3snoH un=1. I like the idea and the location fits however with MF flying by over head it would be hard to theme it well in my mind. Also I still have that view that CP has done a piss poor job on any theming outside of Frontier Town and the trail. Most of which has been touched very little over the years. I would like an attraction like that but if CP can't do it damn good I would rather they not do it at all.

When they place a dark ride in the park (which I think we can all agree is coming sooner rather then later) we can see what the new CEO brings to the table and how it is themed.

If I remember correctly Dinosuars Alive was advertised as a temporary addition to the park. It is scheduled to be removed, we just aren't privy to the information. It was a cost free addition to the park/parks it was built in. The company that provides them gets X amount of $s. I want to say 2.5 million, but can't remember the amount so lets stick with X. Any amount after X is total profit to the park. And if they don't make the money they are not liable for the loss. As a business decision it's a can't miss. As far as the location I don't think CP could have placed it anywhere else. At the other parks that aren't on a peninsula they probably had a little leeway as to the placement.

After the debt they aquired with the Paramount Park purchase the banks nearly collapsed and put them in a bad position. In the last few years it seems they have started looking at different ways to allocate moneys for new attractions. They sold a waterpark to refurbish Breakers, even if that is just a repaint of the exterior. Who wants to stay in a hotel covered in bird ****. I think eventually Dinosaurs will support the addition of rides not just to CP but to all the parks that have the Dinosaurs. Borrowing money is not always in the best interest to CEOs or stockholders.

I don't think Cedar Fair needs to justify the attraction by telling people what they are planning 3 years in advance. I am confident that it is already in development. It takes time to engineer an attraction to fit the landscape and make it rideable. It's nothing like rollercoaster tycoon.

I haven't been through the attraction so I don't know if it's worth 5$. There is never a line when I am in the smoking area next to it, but I do see people going into it occasionally. I'm not a big fan of the whole thing, but if it helps them aquire the money to build something on land that would have stayed vacant I am all for it. Especially since it is only a temporary exibit.

djDaemon said:

Dead Sexeh said:
^ one reason would be that dinosaurs alive is an up charge and because it is an up charge it limits the amount of consumers it appeals to. By putting something else in its place it could broaden the appeal of that area of the park.

But would another coaster in place of DA broaden the appeal of the park in general? Doesn't seem logical that it would.

It makes logical sense if you open your mind of what a coaster can be. You seem to be stuck in thinking a coaster has to be massive and be geared towards thrill seekers. They could add something along the lines of a wild mouse which is family friendly and included with park admission which would have a greater appeal than the existing attraction

Like a state-of-the-art darkride/coaster hybrid. Come on CP, I know you can do it!!

As much as I think DA is dull, I think it was one of the best recent investments for the park. From a couple of online sources, the attraction only cost Cedar Point $1million to build and will only be in place for 5 or 7 years (I can't remember which one). Now, an attraction that cost $1million to build while charging a $5 fee equals out to be 200,000 guests. I guarantee they have had more than that already, therefore, the attraction has basically paid for itself and then some. It was a good investment for some quick extra money for the park whether you like it or not.

TheRealMaverick said:
It's not something that people are going to pay for on multiple visits.

According to who? If that were true, why would anyone visit CP in the years when nothing noteworthy is added?

The overall revenue that a new attraction generates in gate tickets would far surpass the revenue that this attraction generates multiple times over.

According to what data?

Proof that it's not profitable long term? Multiple parks have already removed the additional cost of admission or were free when opened.

Which parks have done this?

Dead Sexeh said:
You seem to be stuck in thinking a coaster has to be massive and be geared towards thrill seekers. They could add something along the lines of a wild mouse which is family friendly...

And you seem to be stuck in thinking the park needs more coasters. The park needs family-friendly attractions. And the most obvious missing piece is a dark ride.

...and included with park admission which would have a greater appeal than the existing attraction

According to who?

Let real maverick keep complaining..it seems to be all he/she/it does in here

thedevariouseffect said:
Let real maverick keep complaining..it seems to be all he/she/it does in here

Who is complaining, I voiced an opponent and supported it. You don't support it that's fine I won't lose sleep at night over it.

djDaemon said:

Dead Sexeh said:
You seem to be stuck in thinking a coaster has to be massive and be geared towards thrill seekers. They could add something along the lines of a wild mouse which is family friendly...

And you seem to be stuck in thinking the park needs more coasters. The park needs family-friendly attractions. And the most obvious missing piece is a dark ride.

...and included with park admission which would have a greater appeal than the existing attraction

According to who?

No i don't think they just need to add more coasters, i was trying to point out how dumb the statement you made was.

djDaemon said:
What sense does it make to remove an attraction that provides variety (Dinos Alive), only to install yet another coaster?

As for it having more appeal i don't have any data to support it, but common sense says a free attraction will be more appealing to people than one that is an extra charge

You kind of suggested adding a mouse coaster as an alternative.......so you obviously think they need to add more. Don't mean to sound like an A-hole but don't say you're trying to point out how "dumb" someones post is while contradicting yourself at the same time.......just sayin.

And another thing. Common sense to you is not a good argument to use to suggest that Cedar Point, in any way, made a bad decision with DA when you have no data to back it up. In reality, your opinion is very one sided unless you have kids. It IS your opinion, but the attraction is not geared towards you as an enthusiast....plain as simple.

The fact that it occupies an area that could be used for future expansion is irrelevant since it's park management to utilize and not ours. I don't even want to know what Cedar Point would look like if hardcore enthusiasts had their way.

Good Call Adam. I agree with you 100%. I mean I don't go into Dinosaurs Alive that often, maybe once a year to get a few good shots of Millennium Force. Yes there isn't too many people there, but Cedar Fair probably is getting good stats off of it. As Enthusiasts, we never see that because we're too busy riding the rides. As much as I would love to see something new, I wouldn't want to take out something family related unless they did it due to high maintenance costs along with low ridership.

Dead Sexeh said:
As for it having more appeal i don't have any data to support it, but common sense says a free attraction will be more appealing to people than one that is an extra charge

Common sense may say that to you, but logically, Cedar Fair, a company which carefully tracks data, wouldn't keep DA around if was not generating sufficient profit. By your own admission, you have no data to back up your opinion.

Does common sense sayd DA should not be kept? Cedar Point has a number of upcharge attractions -- Skyscraper, Ripcord, Challenge Racing, Challenge Golf, Soak City, North Coast Parasail, Waverunner Rentals, fishing charters -- that have been around for a number of years. If your supposition were true -- that Cedar Point could attract more guests with no upcharge attractions -- all of these would have disappeared years ago.

I never said it doesn't create a profit, actually i have said the exact opposite. Try to read all the posts before chiming in. The ride makes profit, but does not have as wide of an appeal as a replacement attraction would. It is not about how many people you can attract, but how much profit that you can make. As to whether or not DA should stay that comes down to profit margin.