General Carowinds discussion

What would you prefer?

RMC Built From Scratch
39
83%
Hurler Conversion
5
11%
No RMC, please.
3
6%
User avatar
By FamousAmos
#91992
The stats came from me walking around that section of the park almost every single day. It's just my opinion. And my opinion is that that section of the park during the week (and sometimes on weekends) was rather open and non-crowded. PvZ's queue line was hardly ever full (yes I know that the attraction can host several people inside). So of course I'm going to notice if ridership is low or high. It's in my nature to notice all of the details. Yes, I worked in Vortex area, but I still walked around the park more than the average person would. I shall now step out of this... uh... argument? or reasoning? I dunno. Whatever you think it is, haha.
By Edwardo
#91994
I was talking to Chris, not you.

He said Thunder Road in 2014 had the same ridership as it did in 2006 and that it was the highest ridership in the park, to with I call B.S. and told him to prove it.
By Edwardo
#91995
RollerBee wrote:I worked at Carowinds in 2006, they told us ridership for the major rides and the Carousel.


And what about 2014? Where did those *confirmed* numbers come from? Because I call B.S.

They spent 5 million of 7 million needed to rebuild Thunder Road so at some point they thought it would be worth it.


Five of the seven initially put aside to do it. Then GCI came in and told them the deal about the lift structure and what the issues were, and how much that would cost, and they said no because it wasn't going to total up to 'just' $7mill.

So as I said "what was the ROI on the 5 million they spent rebuilding it?


Easy. Had they only had to spend the original amount they had budgeted over a set number of years to get the ride where it needed to be so that maintenance going forward was lessened, then *that* would have been a great return on their investment. But once the cost to demolish, rebuild/redesign, and bring up to code the last section of the ride that had extensive unseen damage to it became clear, and was way, way WAY higher than they had planned for (and needed to be spent in a budget year all at once, instead of spreading it out like the other amount had been), then they made the decision that it wasn't worth it.

I understand more than your troll self does,


Obviously you don't. Because you constantly spew stuff that no sane person running a business would do, and you think they're great ideas.

plus you know **** about running an amusement park? You have done it? How many tourist attractions have you worked it?


My family has ran several successful businesses that I worked at and I've spent several years in management positions dealing with budgets, marketing, managing, and cost. Doesn't matter if it's an attraction or not, a business is a business, and Cost overruns and ROI is the same concept regardless.

And how many of those attractions that you worked at did you actually work in anything other than a seasonal, hourly position? How many did you get actual reports about attendance, cash flow, revenue, costs, investments, staffing, and expenses? How many?

I have worked at 3; Carowinds, Emerald Pointe and a railroad museum so yeah I understand how they operate.


No, you understand how to push a button and check lap bars and get fired. That's what you understand. I worked at a movie theater for a while. Doesn't mean I know how to run a studio.

Because if you really understood, you'd be working in some position at some company where you deal with stuff like this. Like I have.
By RollerBee
#91996
" How many did you get actual reports about attendance, cash flow, revenue, costs, investments, staffing, and expenses? How many?"
1 of 3.
By Edwardo
#91998
Let me rephrase, how many of those did you get access to those reports because It was part of your job to make Financial decisions for the attractions based off of said reports?

And as per usual you fail to answer any of the other questions because you have no relevant answer.
User avatar
By Jarsh
#91999
RollerBee wrote:
Jarsh wrote:
coasterbruh wrote:Hurlers here to stay . . .


I said the same thing about Thunder Road after it's major revamp... :?

So what was the ROI on that?


The ROI on demolishing Thunder Road and revamping the waterpark? I'd say pretty damn high seeing as the waterpark was slammed all the time.

coasterbruh wrote:I think TR suffered from being in a dead end area...


I think that was part of it. Although if they had left Thunder Road there and revamped County Fair in that area it might've helped bump ridership some, but again, not enough to justify keeping it over the bigger waterpark.
By RollerBee
#92000
Edwardo wrote:Let me rephrase, how many of those did you get access to those reports because It was part of your job to make Financial decisions for the attractions based off of said reports?

And as per usual you fail to answer any of the other questions because you have no relevant answer.

I answered all of the questions in the post, the answer is 1.

I meant the ROI of rebuilding the majority of Thunder Road.
By Edwardo
#92001
No you didn't...

And what about 2014? Where did those *confirmed* numbers come from?


And what about thev rephrased question?. Where's your answer for that?
By Edwardo
#92002
I meant the ROI of rebuilding the majority of Thunder Road.


This is why I know you don't understand because I specifically answered this as well.

Had they only had to spend the original amount they had budgeted over a set number of years to get the ride where it needed to be so that maintenance going forward was lessened, then *that* would have been a great return on their investment.


Do you not understand this? They budgeted work being done on thev ride to be spent over a period of several years so that the amount each year didn't affect their capital expenditures too heavily, and the ride would have been cheaper to maintain going forward. Then they got the bill for the rest of the work, which, upon inspection of the lift was going to be far more than they originally intended to spend, and it made the investment no longer worth it for what they would get out of putting all that money in.

I've explained twice. You can't get past why they spent money in the first place and then changed course because you don't understand ROI.
By RollerBee
#92004
Edwardo wrote:
I meant the ROI of rebuilding the majority of Thunder Road.


This is why I know you don't understand because I specifically answered this as well.

Had they only had to spend the original amount they had budgeted over a set number of years to get the ride where it needed to be so that maintenance going forward was lessened, then *that* would have been a great return on their investment.


Do you not understand this? They budgeted work being done on thev ride to be spent over a period of several years so that the amount each year didn't affect their capital expenditures too heavily, and the ride would have been cheaper to maintain going forward. Then they got the bill for the rest of the work, which, upon inspection of the lift was going to be far more than they originally intended to spend, and it made the investment no longer worth it for what they would get out of putting all that money in.

I've explained twice. You can't get past why they spent money in the first place and then changed course because you don't understand ROI.

I am sure they had the bill for the entire project done as whole, the bill for the multi year project for each year from the start. There is no way they got $5 million in the ROI for the parts they did. The cost of building an entire new Thunder Road was 7 million, this number was stated by Carowinds. They spent 5 mil on everything but the lift hill, station and brake runs. GCI likely gave them amended proposal In 2014/2015 as the original would have been done when they started the project in 2007. There is a great chance the amended proposal was higher than the original $7 million total. When they started rebuilding Thunder Road they must have intended on running the ride long enough to get a good ROI otherwise they would haven't started the rebuild to begin with. Obviously it was cheaper and they felt they weren't and wouldn't get the ROI they wanted if Thunder Road stayed in operation. It was silly to piss away 5 million then decide against finishing the project. Will they get a lot higher ROI on the waterpark expansion. Most likely, but there is no way they got $5 million out of running Thunder Road for 8 more years when they could have finished the project and the ride ran for another 39 or more years. The waterpark expansion could and it would have made more sense to build around Thunder Road.

Hurler hasn't had more of the structure rebuilt since GCI did turn 3. The question there is was it worth the money spent? I haven't seen much increase in Ridership and they still run one train most of the time.
By BelowThePeak
#92005
Anyway...

I'm a bit surprised that the results have ended up being so one-sided so far. Not that I disagree with them, but I'm also interested to see how KD's Hurler conversion will end up working.

Regardless, if our Hurler also got converted, one thing I wouldn't want is a clone. I really want all our coasters from this point forward to have unique layouts.
User avatar
By KIJester
#92006
Per Cedar Fair press release (6/25/2015)
"While similar market demographics to Kings Island, Carowinds has the opportunity to increase capacity through the addition of iconic, new thrill rides and the expansion of family/ children’s areas and water park"

Hence the word "iconic".
One would hope that this means no clones* (cough SIX FLAGS cough) and up to present day, we have stayed the course with that protocol since the CF takeover.

*Not to say that couldn't change as management sees fit. :think:
User avatar
By FamousAmos
#92008
I would be happy with a ground-up RMC, or GCI, or Gravity Group, or whatever others there are. For a wood coaster, it would more than likely be a GCI located in Dinosaurs Alive. That would bring the crowds back to that area of the park. There is also a bit of "terrain" back there too. You could have the lift hill start from behind the dino's gift shop, go up towards Intimidator's trim hill (or in that general vicinity), then take a right-hand twist and dive turn down to the bottom of that "valley" area.

Adding a new GCI (or any other manufacturer) back there would also open up an opportunity to finally connect the dead-end path of planet snoopy around woodstock express and the gliders. Thus making more room for a planet snoopy expansion. Killing two birds with one stone. New coaster, and kiddie land expansion.
By BelowThePeak
#92009
Yeah, I'd love to see a wooden coaster in the Dinosaurs Alive area. Ideally, I'd want them to keep a lot of that forested area inside Dinosaurs Alive intact so that the coaster could wind through it.