Paddle-wheel Excursions RIP

Chief - curious how old your kids are? My guess is that it will not be long before you can't keep them out of the Dragster, MF, Magnum, Maverick...lines.

The kids are 8 and 5 and, you are right, they aren't long for 45 minute waits in the coaster lines. And, when they ARE ready, Cedar Point will be much more attractive to them...and the family.

But, for the past 8 years...years in which we have spent considerable money for entertainment for them...I think we have visited Cedar Point twice...and we are in Sandusky at least once or twice a year to visit family. I personally think that speaks volumes.

On the other hand...we've never owned season passes to anything other than a zoo before but we have pre purchased season passes to as yet unopenend Legoland Florida. Having seen previews of the park it is evident that there is very little that we all won't be able to do as a family...including the rollercoasters. (No, they aren't Raptor and Millennium Force but we will be able to ride them together.)

To me it is similar to the difference between Universals Studios Florida and Islands of Adventure. Right now it is a no brainer...we get more value, and have more fun together as a family, in USF. We aren't too far removed for Islands of Adventure but for the last 8 years the studios park has had our attention.

That is what seems to be the obvious gap at Cedar Point. Coaster lovers, by and large, are going to continue to visit the park. If Cedar Point is looking to "grow" instead of just "maintain" then I think they need to do better than Dinosaurs. (And, for the record, even Kinzel and Ouimet admitted that families spend more per capita than thrill seekers.)

Personally I'm more upset with what seems to be the end of Terror Island. One of the best outdoor walkthroughs the park has seen in a long time.

The only good thing that could possibly come out of this is a future midway that cuts from the Gemini side of the park over to Millennium. That is something the park has needed for a long time.

I am bummed about this.

We have been riding paddle wheel since I was a child. I don't quite understand why they would remove one of the few rides left in the park that the entire family can ride together, and supposedly be focusing more on familys.

As for the dinos, count me out. No interest in seeing something that I have seen many times before at my local zoo and many other places.

Chief Wahoo said:
I'm not willing to label any of it an over reaction...or an under reaction for that matter. It is just...reaction.

When I say overreaction, I'm referring specifically to comments like, "Cedar Point is now a second tier park," or, "I'm not getting a season pass next year." The tone has been, at times, to the level where you'd think someone went out and shot Snoopy right after dismantling Magnum. :)

The Snoopy part I can accept. But they better not get rid of Magnum!

Ah, I still like Snoopy. And, I think his appeal, and the Peanuts in general, is actually underrated. I was in my daughter's kindergarten classroom earlier today and her teacher had Snoopy EVERYWHERE.

And Walt, yes...I agree with you. This doesn't spell the demise of Cedar Point. It just chips away at the foundation a little more...in my opinion.

Chief Wahoo said:
To me it is similar to the difference between Universals Studios Florida and Islands of Adventure. Right now it is a no brainer...we get more value, and have more fun together as a family, in USF. We aren't too far removed for Islands of Adventure but for the last 8 years the studios park has had our attention.

That is what seems to be the obvious gap at Cedar Point. Coaster lovers, by and large, are going to continue to visit the park. If Cedar Point is looking to "grow" instead of just "maintain" then I think they need to do better than Dinosaurs. (And, for the record, even Kinzel and Ouimet admitted that families spend more per capita than thrill seekers.)

You give a great example. Two parks with the same owner, right next door to each other. In your case you spend significant time at one park because it meets your current needs. When those needs change you go to the other park. You accept that fact. But in the case of Cedar Point which is one park, if they do not cater to both needs people get angry. Why is that when the Universal park does not cater to both, nor will Legoland, people accept that?

I simply do not understand the comment that families spend more than thrill seekers. We are a family and we go for the thrills and we spend a whole bunch of money there. Were we supposed to quit going to the park when our kids outgrew the little stuff? I must have missed the memo on that. Maybe we have a messed up family but watching my 6 year old's face the first time he rode Skyhawk was way better than watching him on PWE.

Well, for starters Shades, kudos to your kid for enjoying Skyhawk. I suspect he is in the minority of 6 year olds wanting to get on it but I am happy for you, and him, that he enjoyes it.

The "families spend more than thrill seekers" has just been my opinion over the years having gone from the later to the former. As a teen/young adult season pass holder I spent as little in the parks as I could once I owned the season pass. In all frankness, I didn't have the discretionary income that I do today. As a dad of two I get roped into more food, games, and souvenirs than I ever did as the coaster riding kid I once was. But, my long held opinion has been backed up by Kinzel and Ouimet a couple of times over the past year or two as they have specifically mentioned that as being fact for Cedar Fair parks and they were hoping to cater more to that demographic at Cedar Point.

I'm only "angry" (and I use that term loosely) because they keep giving me hope that they are going to address this issue and then they keep failing to deliver. Legoland isn't trying to be any more than a park that will cater to 2-12 year olds. They have said it publicly and in no uncertain terms. So, I can't get upset with them when my kids hit their teen years and no longer want to go.

Makes me very sad that this is going away. I don't have the money to go before labor day, or I would. One of my first trips up to CP, a friend and I rode this and the guy running it over heard us talking about how we were afraid of the "big ones like Gemini." He talked us into riding Raptor, since it was smoother and bigger. We did then went back and yelled at him for neither of us liking it. My friend passed in '04 when he was only 21, so this ride always made me think of him and smile.

I like that rumor someone mentioned about docking the boats for a while for that thing on the island, then bringing back a revamped boat ride later. I say, if they do that, they could do a lot worse than to bring us a new Western Cruise, preferably with a few measures of "blatant stereotype" and "racial insensitivity" and just enough "political incorrectness" to actually make it as entertaining as the Western Cruise was...and that Paddlewheel *wasn't*.

And when the dinosaurs leave, here's an idea for the island--

Build on the island a giant treehouse ropes-course climber like the ones they put in at Dollywood and Indiana Beach. No bridge needed to get there; you gotta climb over the lagoons; maybe use a zipline to get back.

Even better, substitute (or combine with) a giant family climbing structure like, oddly enough, the one in the Jurassic Park section of Islands of Adventure. Again, access from the shore, climb across to the island...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

If that rumor is really true, that would be something that would make many fans happy.

Chief Wahoo said:
The "families spend more than thrill seekers" has just been my opinion over the years having gone from the later to the former. As a teen/young adult season pass holder I spent as little in the parks as I could once I owned the season pass. In all frankness, I didn't have the discretionary income that I do today. As a dad of two I get roped into more food, games, and souvenirs than I ever did as the coaster riding kid I once was. But, my long held opinion has been backed up by Kinzel and Ouimet a couple of times over the past year or two as they have specifically mentioned that as being fact for Cedar Fair parks and they were hoping to cater more to that demographic at Cedar Point.

I'm only "angry" (and I use that term loosely) because they keep giving me hope that they are going to address this issue and then they keep failing to deliver. Legoland isn't trying to be any more than a park that will cater to 2-12 year olds. They have said it publicly and in no uncertain terms. So, I can't get upset with them when my kids hit their teen years and no longer want to go.

I agree 100% that families spend more than teenagers being dropped off at the gate. But has anyone from Cedar Fair ever defined what they consider a family? I would think a family that has teenagers that goes to the park together will spend more money than a family that has children. I feel this way because I am seeing it happen with my family. Our oldest brings a friend, we give them money and send them on their way for a few hours while we do rides with the 6 year old daredeveil and spend money on all kinds of junk with him. We meet with the older kids and give them more money and away they go again. Rinse, lather, repeat a few more cycles. We must be the proverbial gold mine for Cedar Fair. I have to believe we are spending more than a family with a 4 and 2 year old, and I have to believe that we are not an isolated case.

So how does Cedar Fair define a family?

A family is a group of people. I am a passholder and so is my girlfriend. For the first 5 trips to CP this year I spent $0. When I brought my friends with us for coaster mania (they are not passholders) we spent at least $40 each not including their tickets into the park. Then my girlfriend went back to our ways and we occasionally get something from Happy Friar. They define a family very loosely but it makes sense. A group of friends will stop and try to impress each other by shooting a few baskets while I just walk right by.

I'll simply repeat that Kinzel and Ouimet have both indicated that they need to do more to hit the "family" demographic. I would say that goes from young chidren riding with their parents to Grandparents riding with their grandchildren.

When my grandfather was gettting along in life I really wanted to get him to the park. Heck I worked there and could have got him in for free. But, by and large, he would have spent most of his day watching me on rides. Yes, I understand they have shows and I enjoy many of them.

To me a family is a group of people that can spend MOST of their day together. When I go to WDW or USF (and when we start going to Legoland) there are very few attractions that we can't all enjoy at the same time. No matter what anyone says, that is not the case for Cedar Point and that...in my opinion...is a huge void.

That's just one example of a family. My son is 9 and we can spend the entire together doing the same thing. When your kids are 15 and 12, their tastes in rides may change and Cedar Point becomes much more attractive. You're stil the same money spending family, right?

I mean, I totally get what your saying and adding attractions with broader appeal is certainly a win. But even WDW becomes unappealing for certain age groups in the family unit.

You are right Walt. But, if they are already pleasing your family and teenagers/thrillriders without young kids...then...where do they see "growth opportunities"?

The two leaders are stating that they recognize a void. Who do you think are members of that void? And, what would you say they have done about it recently?

There is no doubt this announcement is meant to partially placate that demographic. Of course, they are installing a $1 million attraction that they are asking those "takers" to pay for while they regularly install $5, $10 million attractions that everyone pays for, riders and non riders of those attractions alike. And, they are doing it at the expense of a ride that placated many in that demographic (not to mention senior citizens...many of home won't want to walk the island) that riders did not have to pay extra for.

I understand the business implications. I'm sure the Board is on board. I also understand the business implications of charging ridiculous prices for bad food because "people have to eat" but it doesn't mean that is right and it doesn't mean those decisions haven't degraded the park over the years.

There's something for every demographic right now. The problem is creating an attraction that two different age groups can enjoy together. Let's say they built that perfect ride - or even three of them. I think that kind of attraction would be a huge win. But it'll be something that rounds out a diverse lineup. Not that there's anything wrong with being a small part of a bigger solution.

But if you spend a couple of hours doing those things as a family, having a great time, isn't most of the day going to end up being similar towht you have in the park's current form? If not having those attractions keeps some family out of the park, is a morning of fun going to justify a full visit? Can you see a day where they have 15 of those kinds of multi-age-appeal attractions? And is any park outside of Orlando doing this beyond a two or three ride level?

Disclaimer: I don't have any hard opinions on this. I'm debating this as much in my own head as I am with you. :)

I would just say that a balance is needed. Do they need 15 "family" rides? No, I don't think so. Maybe 3 or 4 that could help get you through the day? Sure.

I like watching the kids in Camp Snoopy or Planet Snoopy. I really do. But, I don't want to spend my entire day watching them there. And, they really do want to ride with mommy and daddy. A 5 year old wants nothing more than to ride with his/her 10 year old big brother or sister.

Yes, a few of those rides would round out a diverse lineup. They have made no concerted effort to do that. And now, most parks outside of Disney aren't doing it (though I'd argue Dollywood has made a pretty good effort). But, I didn't think Cedar Point was content with "most of the parks". I thought they set their eyes higher than that.

And, not only have they not made an effort but this decision has them actually going backward a bit.

I definitely think Cedar Point has the potential to dominate that area, if they really wanted it.

My reference to other parks comes from past comments here and elsewhere. I've heard the opinions that not only is Cedar Point failing here, but that they're far below other parks. Having a dark ride is fantastic, but it's not enough to put a park on some higher, family-friendly level. Just as adding one great family ride to Cedar Point wouldn't instantly make it the superior family park.