KI Guy

Remember that within the scope of Kings Island new attractions, Adventure Point is a modest addition. A less expensive addition will have less marketing hype/promotional dollars attached to it. This is because modest additions bring in a modest amount of additional money or just maintain the baseline revenue. Similarly, even with so called "free marketing" in social media, they would want to promote but not overhype to the point of disappointment. People know when they're being "over-sold" on something. A modest addition simply won't generate the buzz of a major one. To KICentral (largely local) superfans a couple flat rides and some additional theming can be a big deal. To someone who normally comes once or twice a year they might not be inclined to make a trip if they live two hours away and money is tighter that year. There are up and downs in the industry and limits to how far promotion can go. For those reasons blame can't rest squarely on one guy's shoulders.

Although this is just a concept at this point, I'd like to add this to the imaginary KICentral "wishlist" for Kings Island. I'd put it in Rivertown where the Crypt building is. Rivertown is in definite need of a flat ride and Kings Island hasn't added a "big" flat ride since WindSeeker. *Notice the seats actually rotate independently of the main ring. Wow!

What percentage of KI's annual attendees do you think complain about the similarity? The overwhelming majority of guests don't think the way enthusiasts do, and thank goodness for that. The general public is much more inclined to see Orion and Diamondback as more or less the same than enthusiasts would. It's the enthusiasts/diehard fans who draw minor distinctions and obsess over every detail or statistic. Since the two coasters look and feel similar, they're going to be viewed as the same. I don't think this could be said of any other two coasters in the park. Definitely though the level of and visibility of complaints will be different largely because rides mean more personally to enthusiasts. An enthusiast will rant or rave. A general public guest will say "that could be better, oh well", or "that was pretty good."

Your thoughts on happiness are admirable when used as a general outlook on life. However, at an amusement park the average guest will have the best time when their rides-to-time ratio is high. Nobody likes waiting. This is why paid line skipping systems now exist. Also, many consumers (to their detriment) do base their contentment on their position relative to others. There's a reason the newest pass is called a "prestige" pass and that it includes a "V.I.P." area. Yes they would, but there's a breaking point. As sales of Fast Lane and its growing number of variants increase the less relative benefit for each Fast Lane customer. Also, as Fast Lane grows the lesser the experience for the traditional "non-premium" guest. Some of these guests will not come back also lessening the benefit of Fast Lane and potentially threatening the health of the customer base. What you may not be considering is that long-term negative effects of business decisions are not always readily apparent or initially understood. And with stock trading corporations business decisions can skew towards the short-term to grow stock prices for a quarter at the expense of the long-term health of the business. Hopefully for Cedar Fair they've done their due diligence researching this. One of the last things they would want to do is slowly corrode the goodwill they've built up over the decades with their bread and butter guests. Fast Lane's making them reluctant or unable to do this is another less obvious con of having the system. As we've discussed here, lower price points, (and meal plans) encourage using the park as a daycare which has helped give rise to some of the problems the park has faced the last several years.

No, it's not. From a business perspective their goal is to maximize revenue in both the short term and long term. There are not enough "premium" buyers to sustain the business on their own. Not only that, but if even theoretically everyone becomes a premium buyer, no one is a premium buyer and no one is happy. The bedrock of Kings Island's business model is families who buy season passes or who go once or twice a year. If you provide a lousy experience to today's "regular buyer," why would he become a premium buyer when his financial situation changes? Lastly, I'd imagine very few guests are premium buyers their first time at the park, (or after a long time away), so it has to be leaving some with a less than optimal first impression.

The seats aren't benches like on a Scrambler or Shake, Rattle & Roll. They're molded seats with a divider and individual harnesses. They wouldn't leave seats empty, just as they don't on WindSeeker- so capacity would have essentially doubled, (assuming equal ride cycle time). Regarding Cargo Loco, I'm glad to hear they're opening things as they become ready. That's the best thing to do at this point

One thing you may not be considering is that a lower capacity means less theoretical ride time. They could run a 48-seat model for 2 minutes rather than a 24-seat model for 90 seconds and still come out ahead on capacity. Unless the line is empty you will be waiting more than you could have, and and you could very well be riding for less time. I wonder if this means they could just bolt on the 2 seat units at some point in the future if the capacity proves to be a problem.

@super7 put "cheap" in quotes meaning that the 24- seat model is cheap relative to the 48-seat model. To me, this complaint is legitimate. The $5-7 million is for all park upkeep as well as the new rides and theming. Even an off year with no new attraction will cost a couple million spent on small things here and there. Following your point though, If they are spending $5-7 million shouldn't the ride be capable of handling the volume it will likely need? If $5-7 million is being spent what is another $100k or $200k for the 48-seat model? (I have no idea the actual amount, but I can't imagine it's more than that). If the extra money really was a sticking point, I find it hard to believe that the difference in cost could not be taken from something else in the park's budget (at least for the this year) just to make it right. This is the first investment in three years and some could reasonably argue they're cutting corners with the money spent on capacity and the money put forth to get everything open on time. Maybe it'll be a non-issue and the line doesn't back up, but seeing how long they built the queue line they likely expect longer waits.

Hopefully, it will be a non-issue regarding waiting times. Should it it prove to be a significant problem, they very easily could relocate Sol Spin to smaller park and replace it with a 48-seat model next year. The silver lining of this is that riders get a little more of an open feeling having nothing around them on all sides.

If it is in fact the 24-seat model, this is the definition of a short-sighted decision. The equivalent (24-seat) ride at Kentucky Kingdom gets a line and far less people go there. I could understand the 24-seat model at a smaller park like Michigan's Adventure, but not Kings Island. For the relatively few dollars saved (or time saved on the build date?) they are getting half the ride in terms of capacity.

Diamondback may have looked different had it been built just a couple years later. Had management known the Crypt was not salvageable, they could have put the station and brake run on that site, (assuming the lack of a splashdown was not a dealbreaker). Diamondback is an anomaly in that it's not built entirely outside of the midway. OR Had they known that Son of Beast was also getting the ax, they may have put Diamondback on the Son of Beast site/future site of Banshee. Banshee or Mystic Timbers could then utilize the former Crypt site, today's Diamondback site (not including Swan Lake), and today's Mystic Timbers site.

This is correct. Previously they might have needed something egregious to kick someone out and even then it would only be one of two people. Now they can kick out a whole group (after 4) under the cover of the policy if they even see signs of trouble coming.

For those that go to the park very frequently: Over the last few years have you been seeing significant Issues more often with kids under 16, or is it just being covered more in media and social media?

It may have been that the approval to paint came before the decision came down to close it. A different person may have decided to remove it than the one who decided to re-paint it. If SlingShot was losing money the re-paint was a small sunk cost and running it at a loss wasn't going to help anything.

It's speculation on my part, but I think it just wasn't making them much money anymore. 2005: Paid a crew of three $5 an hour and charged usually $10-15 to ride. 2021: Paid a crew of three $13-15 an hour and still charged around $15 to ride. This coupled with decreased ridership due to age and the better rides now available leads me to believe it wasn't making much of a profit, if at all.

TAER IT DOWN! ... and put an S&S Screamin' Swing in it's place.

It would be very hard to justify any investment above standard maintenance. It was a [much] less than spectacular ride even in April 2005. Its theming has been a shadow of even that disappointment for 17 seasons this year. Even so, I don't see it being removed soon unless it's costing them a lot of money in maintenance and operating costs (anyone know?). After The Vortex plot is filled, and Action Zone is re-done, they may choose to address it.* * Or maybe even Flight of Fear which is 27 years old.

New Swan Lake on one spot, new coaster on the other. :)

The Coney Island theme was supposed to be Coney Island "after the turn of the [20th] century." If a coaster is to go on The Vortex plot, I say build an RMC hybrid inspired by the look of the Coney Wildcat.

Good thoughts, but I would just as soon ship Backlot (coaster only) to Michigan's Adventure. On the site make a new Swan Lake. This would bring back some of the beauty we lost in 2008.

IF they wanted to re-theme Banshee as part of an AZ re-theme, I don't think that would be the expensive or difficult part of the change. It would need a sign, new paint scheme (will need new paint anyway) and tombstones (if they want to keep them). Nothing else is strictly Irish. Call it Poltergeist assuming Six Flags Fiesta Texas is ok with that, if not something similar.

I hope you're exactly right. I think the big question is which happens first The Vortex plot or AZ. Invertigo, Congo Falls, and The Bat, all could be nearing the end given age and ridership. All those things will need replacements at some point. With that considered the AZ revamp/retheme seems more pressing. I think Invertigo could be replaced by a flat ride or two without complaint. The Bat would probably need a large coaster to take its place and if Congo is to be replaced I wouldn't mind some type of new water ride. If it happens, I could see this being a two year project like the 1999-2000 expansion.

Not all this relates to your post directly, but I will say I like the way they did it. Reserving hype and pomp for the biggest additions means people take you seriously at those events. How much better is this surprise announcement as opposed to the ultra-hyped "shed"? They overdelivered relative to expectations here which is a lost art in the social media age. Many people know what is marketing over-hype (the shed) and what has substance (the great coaster itself). Those who don't often end up disappointed.

I guess we all spoke too soon. It's so nice to have a surprise! That's an excellent choice of flat rides, probably the two I would have chosen myself. Traditionally sized flats are just what the park was missing. I do hope that Oktoberfest can live on in another iteration at some point. As long as Festhaus exists, we can hope it may be re-born as an Action Zone re-theme at some point. That would be a lot of work though as it would likely require a new Biergarten to be constructed and new facades for all the buildings.

@robintodd reading the above @DeltaFlyer is not a whiner who only buys passes when there's a new coaster. Ten straight years of passes is pretty solid. It's good that you are enjoying the park. However, most of us are (or should be) glad "on- again off-again" visitors exist. Without them there would never be a reason to make any new additions to the park (above maintenance/replacement). The fact that amusement parks add things on a regular basis rather than simply maintain the status quo means that they bring people and money through the gate. We'll see in some capacity how this might affect attendance and per capita spending-- although KI is just one piece of the CF pie.