Leaderboard

even in park the complaints are bad, overhearing park guests talk about how bad the park looks, the lines are moving and even overhead a family requesting for a refund due to “the day being a waste of money.” even i go with my GP friends, and they bring up how movie world use to be so much better.

We were having the same discussions about DW's appearance right before DW killed 4 people. I'm not suggesting this is about to happen at MW but it does raise the questions if MW it letting its appearance slip, what else is MW letting slip?

While there may only be about 20 people currently discussing it in this thread, rest assured, a lot of people are noticing it. Not necessarily consciously - until you mention it to them and they go 'oh yeah! i did notice that!'. It used to be - when you'd point out the horrible state of something in Dreamworld, you'd point to a similar 'thing' at Movie World and say 'see? that's how you do it'. While the tables certainly haven't turned (DW still has a long way to go) MW is racing to the bottom fast.

You clearly haven’t been on any of MW’s social pages of late. Complaints are endless.

This isn't DW's first go at school holidays.

Yeah i don't understand that viewpoint - if the safety systems worked as they should the ride shouldn't have been able to leave the ground. If the ride can leave the ground without the restraint being down, then the issue is the safety systems are inadequate.

to see that this has continued to rot without any attention except 'badly half-cover it with a hoarding' is bullshit. I suppose given the other stuff we've seen recently of abandoned audio equipment etc, this shouldn't really be a surprise. Even if the facade wall wasn't high enough, build it higher. As for view, I think Universal Singapore had a kids wheel inside the exit gift shop of Donkey Live, so view isn't super important. By all means, another more central spot (the top of the hill behind Speedys perhaps?) would be better as there would be a 'better' view of the whole land.

I was imagining the ride would be taller than that wall. But looking at the spec of the wheel at DW is just under 5m tall, so that wall probably would be tall enough

So I stopped by the park again yesterday and was disappointed to see that all of the above mentioned issues have only gotten worse. Gardens have only become more overgrown, there’s still barely any background music playing around the park and even the main entrance gate has a massive crack in it in plain sight. Not to mention the terrible operations and staff who clearly didn’t want to be there. I was hoping there might have been at least some chance that VRTP could have looked at some of these issues before the busy Easter school holiday period, but that clearly isn’t the case. Can’t see too many people being impressed with the current state of the place.

Honestly, and maybe I am wrong, but I've always considered the 'world class' thing to be more of a joke than anything else because it lost all meaning after being used for the umpteenth million time. I doubt that anybody is actually crying foul because of the usage of the word and more so just making a mockery of it, similar to how many make light of the fact that Leviathan is advertised as 'World’s greatest family rollercoaster'. It's all puffery at the end of the day. But for arguments sake, I think the difference in your comparison is that the examples you included are referring to a 'World Class supplier' and 'world-class tourism infrastructure asset' respectively, unlike Movie World which has 'Australia's #1 Theme Park' flat front and center on their website as well as Sea World having 'Australia #1 Marine Park'. I think it does deserve some criticism when they fall short of their brand's hero message and identity. I'm one of the many that will happily agree that our theme parks fall short in all regards when compared to the world stage. PhantasiaLand is a great example because VRTP absolutely wipes the floor with them in terms of attendance, yet Phantasia turns around and laughs by creating groundbreaking, legitimate world-class products with seemingly relative ease. This has a bit to do with geography, and I discuss it further here, but because of this I don't think it's unreasonable for people to criticize the presentation and business practices of what is advertised as Australia's #1 theme park. I'm in the privileged position of having visited many theme parks around the world and my bar is pretty darn high when it comes to actually impressing me, but my metric of success as a guest comes down to something fairly simple; how successfully does a park utilise what is readily available to them to improve the guest experience? And with this in mind, I just don't believe that Movie World at the moment are successfully utilising their available resources. They are performing lots of big picture refurbishments and it's clear that they're considerate of their brand and image with things such as the Royal Caribbean deal to get guests through the gate, but once you're through those gates is when they start failing in many regards on the smaller stuff. It would be fine if it was some things here and there, but this thread alone shows that it's obvious that its not. The guest experience is suffering, and you can't ignore that for very long when you're main revenue opportunity is convincing the public to enter your premium gated venue. With their neglect towards internal presentation and a further shift towards predatory purchasing practices, are they making more money than usual? Probably! But so is Disney World, and look how their lack of focus on the guest experience is going for them in terms of public perception. The benefit for Movie World is that with my metric of success it's very easy for them to turn the situation around by placing that focus back on the guest experience, which is also why it's so disappointing that they aren't doing this already.

The question that should be asked is - why is it a pile on? Are people bullying those with views different to theirs, or are people simply calling into question a questionable statement with facts and evidence that disprove that statement? I've been away for a week, and yes Gaz, looks like Mic drop! I would like to make a contribution here (and just to add - my first day back at work today so i've been writing this most of the day - well before the rest of today's comments were added!) I'll try not to reagitate the same ideals already mentioned... @Slick has spent a lot of time providing well researched sources, so in those respects i'll just say 'ditto'. I would like to add: Just going to say 'citation needed' on this 90% figure. If you're against getting this particular vaccine then you are "anti-vaccine" regardless of your reasons why. That's how words work. It is getting a bit over-used, and some may find the label distasteful, but i'm pretty sure that it is a label that is meant to be seen as distasteful for a reason. I just want to back this one up with a personal story to share my own experiences... About 7 weeks ago, my wife experienced an episode that scared the crap out of our whole family, and spent a week in hospital*. We were questioned at initial triage whether we had been vaccinated, when, where, did we have the vac card showing the dose and batch numbers, and all of this was logged by the registrar. This was double checked and verified by several wonderful medical professionals in the ED during the initial days. Nothing was eliminated at that time. Nothing was palmed off. Everything was explored. CT scans, MRIs, even lumbar punctures were explored to try to determine what was at play. Even days later while she was on ward - they were still seeking opinions of specialists in various fields - including vax related fields - as to possible causes as nothing they did was turning up results. Fast forward a little and we've ruled out at this point that the vax was a factor (completely ruled out) but we discussed this with the doctors and they even had a specialist in immunology come down to discuss with us at length what the possibilities were before finally ruling it out. Nothing was palmed off, and everything was explored to find the answers. TL:DR - wife had a medical episode and one of the first things the ED did was check vax status and any possible impacts it may have had, and continued to explore the possibilities that the vax had contributed until they were able to determine - with evidence - that it had not. (*She isn't fully recovered at this point, but we have a fair idea of the cause and the treatment and its just now a matter of time for everything to work out and fingers crossed no lasting impacts) I felt the need to share this story because I am getting sick of generalised statements without even basic details given to support the events. Medical Professionals Silenced? 😮 Sounds like a black bag job. Cold war era stuff. Can you provide any links showing any of these suspensions or sackings? Are they being silenced? Or are they being discredited by being unable to support their assertions? Are the accreditation organisations revoking the accreditation because their allegations have no basis in science, as opposed to a coverup? More generalisations without basic details. Heart Related Reactions? What about these heart statistics? Are they in Australia? Worldwide? Other countries more prone to heart disease? Were those cases medically susceptible to heart disease or defect? What sort of reactions were they? How many died? What was the total pool? 870 out of 1000 is huge, but 870 out of a million isn't much different to some side effects of other proven vaccines in long term use... It sounds like a scary number, but it reminds me of this meme: 870 sounds like a big problem - but it becomes the trolley problem. Chief Health Officers Backtracked! CHO's should backtrack. They should act on the best information they have available at the time. In the early days, the advice was that masks were not required except in a medical setting, this was later expanded to a point where for many, mask wearing is part of the daily routine - even outside. Even now that the restrictions have eased. We should not point to the CHO changing their advice as a sign of weakness, but of the strength of our systems changing the outcomes based on new evidence. The honesty and transparency is why they "backtrack". They've acted on the strength of the evidence put before them at the time. Remember - a recent Prime Minister of Australia was once quoted saying that you can only hold him to his words when they are prepared statements, and anything said 'off the cuff' when asked a question in a press conference shouldn't be treated as 'gospel truth'. The only weakness is continuing to blindly argue something despite all evidence pointing otherwise. Force and Coercion Polio. Smallpox. Things of this nature. People saw it as a duty to their community to get vaccinated. Nobody needed to be coerced or forced to do anything because the advice came from the experts and people listened to them and trusted them. <its post edit me here saying I really got carried away on this one. suffice to say the paragraphs of arguments would have fallen on deaf ears> Put simply - those who willingly support their community should be allowed to benefit from it. Those who do not wish to support their community by doing their part, should not be allowed to participate beyond their human right entitlement. access to food, clothing and shelter is paramount. Access to medical care is permitted, but probably unnecessary. However - employment is not a right, and that is why those folks are entitled to claim welfare if they cannot work. Average testing and data collection periods The covid vaccine has had some development ongoing for a decade. This is not the first coronavirus. Researchers learned a lot from SARS and from MERS. Covid-19 was far more highly transmissible but less deadly than some other coronaviruses, but the research was ongoing. The next coronavirus was expected, although perhaps not as soon. Combine that with the fact that world governments (and the WHO) labelled this a pandemic, and literally THREW money at the researchers to continue development. The covid-19 vaccine vector was developed in about 12 months off the back of years of coronavirus vaccine research. But so is the annual flu vaccine. Every year new flu strains show up and the jab they offer next winter is based off of the strains seen in the northern hemisphere right now. That's 6 months development of a new vaccine for a strain of Influenza - which will be worthless in another 12-24 months when the new strains come along. These days the fluvax is a quadrivalent vaccine based on the most prevalent FOUR strains. All of them, a different vaccine. Almost all of them, observed in the wild for the first time in the prior 2 years or so. And again (and i've said this before) they didn't start from scratch for Covid-19. They already have vaccines in testing and development for other coronavirus variants. modifying it based on years of research to fit a new strain isn't anything new in immunology. "It was rushed and hasn't been properly tested" is a bullshit argument.

Most/all of this spend was committed to before covid (and is being funded by huge debt). At its worst point, the joint had a couple of weeks left to run before it was lights out. It’s going to take many years before this is a healthy business, and right now there are much bigger priorities. There are about 20 people on the planet that notice the trivial issues being discussed here and they’re all on this thread.