KI Guy

Add a tunnel to the bottom of the first hill and give it a new name. Any name that has to be heavily explained to the average guest is probably not a good name, (see also Rougarou and Valravn). They could have accomplished the same story with the better name Zodiac and also called back to KI history. The park could even have a contest where they let the fans choose the new name for the coaster.

The 8 or 9 year gap was based on the time from Orion in 2020 to the next major coaster installation which you anticipate in 2028 or 2029. If the park did this the whole time, they existed they would have about 6 or 7 large coasters right now assuming none of them were torn down. That is not replacement rate. Again, I think this could be a one off. Thanks for your numbers above. You did forget Firehawk in 2007*. That is worth mentioning because the seven-year gap from Son of Beast to Firehawk is for now the longest gap between large coasters in the park's history. * Also the Bavarian Beetle, The Bat (1993), and Scooby's Ghoster Coaster.

^ You may have missed my point which was that there are longer term effects when not investing. They may not see a drop in attendance those 2 – 4 years, but in the long-term the park can start to suffer. Full retracking/refurbishment of steel coasters is exceedingly rare. I can only think of four occurrences off the top of my head. Usually by the time a steel coaster needs retracking it is no longer popular enough to justify a very expensive retrack. There may end up being a longer life for B&Ms and Intamins vs the old Arrows, but that is an unknown at this point. The 8 or 9 year gap between coasters you lay out is just not sustainable if Kings Island is to remain the Kings Island we grew up with. Note that I do recognize the unusual circumstances the park finds itself in right now so this could be understood by the park with this being a one-off.

That may be the case we really can't know for sure but increasing attendance is not the only consideration. They have to add just to maintain the park. Every attraction in the park with the exception of wood coasters has a finite lifespan. Even if everything were to last as long as Vortex then the rides go away in these respective years: Flight of Fear 2028 Invertigo 2031 Woodstock's Air Rail 2033 Queen City Stunt Coaster 2035 Diamondback 2041 To just maintain replacement rate they are going to have to up the installations unless they can milk these rides for more than 32 years... Good luck with that.

What evidence do you have that he has not forgotten how to speak English in the 24 minutes between your posts? Next time I'm going to need you to find evidence that he still does before posting a reply. Do better.

Big Bear Mountain is a nice ride, but personally I'd rather have them either commit to a definite family attraction or a definite thrill ride. We already have the middle of the road covered quite nicely with Adventure Express, Queen City Stunt Coaster, and The Bat. An attraction like Fire-in-the Hole on the family end or Alpenfury on the thrill end makes sense to me.

Yes, but Kings Island is not comparable to either of those two parks. Both combined wouldn't match Kings Island's revenue. Not to be insensitive, but at the "at least"/"be glad" we're not Michigan's Adventure has always seemed like a cope by KI superfans. I'm going to hold them to a the high standard that they've always had at least until very recently.

Under no circumstances would Kings Island go nine seasons without a major coaster installation. The current six seasons is already unprecedented. I don't know if KI would have gotten a giga post 2020, but they certainly would have gotten some type of coaster. Personally, I would have rather they had put the CGA hyper somewhere else and put a little more imagination into the KI ride.

I disagree; I see this general sentiment on here all the time. The general public makes fewer distinctions between rides not more. They go by look and feel. Orion looks and feels like Diamondback. It's the enthusiasts who draw distinctions by breaking everything down by manufacturer, model, height, speed, length, elements, etc.

Yes, this topic is mostly for fun. I would say highly, highly unlikely rather than never. Afterall, the park tossed around the idea of adding onto The Beast (survey from 2023? I think) can we really say this is impossible?

Orion is widely seen as a fun ride that is just ok. What if Kings Island had B&M change that? This is more for fun because I don't see it happening even though it should. What Id do: Make the first drop 25 feet longer and add a spiral element to the drop. This will add some much needed intensity throughout the layout. The second hill with the sideways airtime wave turn instead becomes an immelman. This makes Orion the fastest inverting coaster in the world. Where the break run is now add a zero g stall lastly add a reverse banked helix to the end before bringing the coaster up high to burn off speed for the brakes I kept the changes moderate but effective for improving the ride. The closest thing ever done to this is the transformation of Steel Phantom into the vastly superior Phantom's Revenge. How about you, what would you do? *This topic was inspired by Tower Topics who recently discussed drawbacks of Orion. Thanks for the inspiration!

To an extent, yes, I don't know if difficult is the word because innovative stuff is readily available -- the parks are just so risk averse. It may not be as cost effective on paper in the short term to risk an innovative attraction. The big parks could buy S&S Axis coasters, RMC T-Rexes, or Mack Xtreme Spinners, they just don't. Instead they put in the reliable but fairly vanilla B&Ms. The result is that people are pleased but not wowed. "Pleased but not wowed" seems to be the industry trend of the last 15 years or so. By playing it safe the parks actually run the the risk of becoming stale. Innovation was always required in the past rather than optional.

It would be hard to make the case to spend a sizeable amount of money to save FoF if it came to it. Closing the ride is always cheaper. I don't know what the condition of the track is, (metal fatigue gets all large steel coasters eventually if not retracked), or the launch system. Since these execs seem to think predominantly about cost and then marketability with experience third, then it really is in an even worse spot. FoF is only 2 years younger than Vortex was when it was shut down in 2019. I think the next coaster will launch since KI really doesn't have anything with the thrill of a modern launch and the writing is on the wall for FoF.

I hope it's nothing serious. You all are quite optimistic. Given the climate at Six Flags I can't imagine FoF would survive a major overhaul/rebuild.

Kings Island is about the worst environment for Freestyle Machines I can think of. Hot, thirsty people wait in line while kids spend 5 minutes trying to figure out what drink they want, if it will be available (have syrup), and lastly if that particular machine will have ice. Freestyle should only be used at food establishments that have some breaks in the action, At Kings Island it just slows down the line. For drink stations just do what Holiday World and Michigan's Adventure do. They run there's perfectly. If they keep running out of syrup and ice then there are simply not enough machines. I got tired of it and took the drink pass off of my pass for 2026.

Sorry, I should have looked into this more but was at work. I saw Parques Reunidos and jumped the gun. It looks like John Reily was only at Palace (Parques Reunidos) at the very end of their time in the USA so he can't really be blamed for how bad that group was. I went to Lake Compounce in its last year of Palace ownership and it was the worst operated park that I have seen. Kennywood fared a little better as their crown jewel, but they did not make a lot of positive changes during their ownership period (2007 to 2025). The turnpike was removed, Garfield's Nightmare went on way too long, and they added just two new coasters in 18 seasons of ownership – one with very low capacity and another very good, but highly unreliable. It's good to know that Reilly was not responsible for almost all of that. @Browntggrrin an ideal scenario... anyone who would operate Kings Island like a Busch Park. I see those parks as the spiritual successor of the original intent of Kings Island. Meaning that it was an elevated experience not quite at a Disney level but more special in its presentation, theming, and overall feel than a typical amusement park. Kings Island has done quite well on the coasters over the last 15 years, but the premium feel and aesthetics of the park from its early days has not come back. If Reilly can operate the parks like Busch at their peak, assuming they let him do it, then this could be a very good and effective hire.

My goodness — someone from Parques Reunidos? That company's stint in US park ownership/operations was an unmitigated disaster. The new Six Flags needed either an amusement park outsider of someone who could heighten the experience and service like someone from Disney or Universal. They've instead brought in someone from old Six Flags' smaller and less successful cousin. Hopefully it works out though...

We can't say will, since that would depend entirely on who the buyer is. A Six Flags acquired as an intact chain could end up being worse than legacy Six Flags ownership. If that does end up being the case you can know ahead of time that that ownership or the business itself will not last long at all if ran like that. It's barely lasting as it is.

I've been about the biggest critic of Fast Lane there is on these forums. I am curious though why people buy it. I understand the thought process for buying Fast Lane for a special, single trip if due to scheduling someone has to go to Kings Island on a very busy day and something else can't be arranged. I do wonder what the appeal of the season long Fast Lane is. Is it primarily...? 1) The freedom to go on very crowded days and still get to ride the rides you want to? 2) The ability to re-ride over and over on not busy days. 3) Some kind of flex/clout thing that makes someone feel special. Don't dismiss this; there are people like that. For me there is almost no appeal since I generally go to Kings Island as much as I want and ride as much as I want. I don't have much of a desire to ride anything more than once or twice. Afterall, it is Kings Island, and I've been there many, many times just as most passholders have. The pass is just access for something fun to do with friends. I can understand it from the standpoint of someone who is fairly rich and just wants to have the best experience whenever they can, but I don't believe that is the majority of season long Fast Lane. Fast Lane would just shorten my day, and I would "get through" all the rides more quickly. The waiting in line is just part of the time spent at KI with my friends and family. For those of you who have season long Fast Lane—what is the appeal?

To give you all an idea as to how poorly the company is doing right now... In 2006 Cedar Fair bought Paramount Parks for $1.24 billion which equates to roughly $1.98 billion today. That was just 5 full parks plus 3 small properties. Today all of Six Flags 24 full parks plus water parks and small properties is worth just $1.66 billion per their market capitalization. They are really in the position to be taken over by someone or some group (private equity ) with deep pockets.

Their teacup ride is a lot better than the pretty much mini version KI got to save money.

I understand your point, from what I'm seeing though Orion was $30M which if adjusted to inflation from 2018 would be $38M today. Kings Island has never built a single attraction of this magnitude cost-wise. The closest the old Cedar Fair parks have come to this in terms of investment dollars for a single attraction is Millenium Force which would cost $25M or $46M in today's dollars. The most ambitious attraction I know within the Six chain would be X at Magic Mountain which would cost $45M in 2002 or $80M!! in today's dollars. Rides this ambitious are few and far between!

I first went to Dollywood about 20 years ago and the level of growth for that park since then is truly amazing. The ride that most sums up their approach to rides might be Mystery Mine. That was when they really hit their groove. Those heavily themed not uber intense rides are what they do best. They seem to be operating with a budget and imagination that Six Flags will never reach. If KI were ever put up for sale Herschend would not be a bad buyer at all. I'd just want them to put in a thrill machine every so often.

I can understand that. They fully believe what they are doing now maximizes revenue and it's a very tough sell to switch to a rent collection model when the anticipated dollars from that are fewer than the amount they'd generate from food sales. The incalculable value of better park food and happier customers (vs. higher food revenue) would not win the day at any corporate board meeting. I am curious though how much of it would balance out as I'm confident that third-party operators could generate more money at least given some time and could pay higher rent than what we would think initially. This is a more theoretical than anything. I know they're not going to do it; I just would like to see it in action because it works so well for the private, smaller parks I've been to.

What I'm proposing is novel at large parks which is why I didn't provide any examples of large parks doing it. If you are again trying to conflate what was done at Cedar Point—the license deals for the park to sell Chick-fil-A, Johnny Rockets, Subway, and Chickie's & Pete's with what I'm proposing—again, that is not at all the same thing. Separating the park from operations is entirely the point. Was the Kings Island Chick-fil-A ran as effectively as a real Chick-fil-A? No, not at all! Each restaurant has to stand on its own two feet. If you know of a large park that has third party food vendors not operated by the park I'd like to hear about it. Your assumption is that my model would not work because no large parks are doing it. You are trying to somehow disprove the viability of something before it's even been tested. You also assume that scale and reduced cost of goods sold provide a nearly insurmountable advantage in the restaurant business. If that were the case, you there would be almost no independent restaurants out there today. Lastly you are not seeing or are dismissing disadvantages of the park's current model. The current model crushes flexibility that might be beneficial in the restaurant business. For example, a private business might decide it is in their interest to pay its employees more than Kings Island's existing food server wage. It might decide that it will have waitstaff that will work on tips. It might decide to have sales or promos. It would have expertise in its business and allow for specialization of its staff that the current model doesn't support. Most importantly the human factor is big. There is next to nothing that incentivizes performance under the current model. A private business might offer employees bonuses for throughput or seasonal bonuses. The manager and owner will truly care how the business does since they will be personally affected.