Jamberoo Fan

This is my theory: As Jamberoo has stated, their attendance is declining & they do not expect this new investment to significantly increase attendance permanently. I'd say this is due to the 'water park' model reaching market saturation hence the lack of investment at major water parks in recent years. Water parks are not as in demand as before as they are too many of them. Kangaroo Island was proposed about a decade ago to handle additional capacity and this recent announcement is not about adding additional capacity. This recent announcement is about a shift from an 'expansion' strategy to a 'rejuvenation' strategy. They are replacing their current attractions with more modern versions of them (see dot points below). They are moving with the times. The Alpine Coaster though could also be a reaction to the 'water park' saturation by shifting back to regular dry ride/attraction investment. Bobsled > Alpine Coaster Splash Out body slides > 2 SkyBox Multi-Bump Speed Slides Surf Hill > 8-Lane Octokraken Racer Splash Out pools > Koala Kove Koala Kove also features mushrooms (though not as large as the ones at The Rock). It may be that Koala Kove is also a replacement for the mushroom pool area of The Rock. This could indicate The Rock may be up for redevelopment but The Rock area is a pretty unique part of Jamberoo (probably either it's most or 2nd most well known attraction even if it is not just as popular as the Bobsleds) and it fits in with the soon to be added gorge theming in it's neighbouring site so I doubt they would remove it completely - maybe an upgrade involving a reduction down to only the jump area soon & maybe that will also be the final water ride upgrade of Jamberoo? Upgrades for the rest of the water rides (apart from the ones mentioned below) are either too soon, too costly or not needed. If my 'rejuvenate instead of expansion' theory is correct, this could mean Billabong Beach can be made redundant by the already operating Banjo's Billabong and/or the future Koala Kove while Rapid River can be made redundant with the proposed Platypus River, which should be the next ride built after Grand Gorge Falls/Koala Kove. Platypus River is featured (but not mentioned) on the plans above so they are still thinking about implementing it. Platypus River was initially just to accompany Rapid River in the park but to service the Kangaroo Island area with it's additional capacity. Clearly, that role is currently not needed as the attendance is not high enough. With water park market saturation & with Surf Hill's future now in question, this makes the whole Rapid River/Billabong Beach/Surf Hill area most likely redundant with replacements built elsewhere in the park possibly by summer 2021. Maybe Jamberoo are planning to remove this area in the future then? However, upgrading rides alone won't increase attendance - a point of difference does. Grand Gorge Falls, whilst having some similarity to Surf Hill, I think does this with it's grand scale & theming. If completed in summer 2020, it will be Jamberoo's most significant investment to date regardless of price tag/ride type. I mean, look how large it is! Look how well themed it is! If you know the size of Splash Out, well you know how large this is going to be. It will be larger than what it seems to look in the artist impressions (most accurate to give you a sense of it's size is probably the 'View From South' impression). It will be towering. I feel Jamberoo may underestimate how great this investment will be. It may increase attendance on the theming alone. And that will send a big message if that happened! Kangaroo Island's theming hasn't come to full fruition yet (though I expect it will mostly when Platypus River is built) but Grand Gorge Falls' theming, if approved & built on time, will be and I'm confident it will be one of the most aesthetic water park rides in Australia (though they are not many to choose from). Theming wins big here. This is the opposite of the problem with The Perfect Storm, which, whilst having unique & brilliant narratives/theming, had it's colour scheme nearly identical to Funnel Web, which is located right next to it. Worse than that, it was the next major attraction after Funnel Web to open. They looked too alike & too soon. Grand Gorge Falls & Surf Hill won't get mixed up with their contrasting theming & near 20 year gap between opening dates and we all know which of the two will capture the public's imagination from now on. Remember, this is only a theory. It may be completely incorrect. I think the tunnel will remain - it just will not have a slide on it if Surf Hill is removed. You can see in this photo that Surf Hill & the tunnel are separate particularly since they need piping for the tunnel's waterfall. However, as stated above, maybe they plan to remove Rapid River too and shift it to the proposed Platypus River?

Well aware of that as I pointed out at my post's conclusion: The fact it was not announced yesterday along with Grand Gorge Falls & Koala Kove indicates, to me, it is not part of that project at least. In the end, there was a plan at some point in the past 4 years (as the plans mention The Perfect Storm) and that is significant news in itself.

It seems, in their DA for Grand Gorge Falls & Koala Kove, they have inadvertently revealed a plan for an Alpine Coaster: Since it is difficult to see, I have highlighted the route of the the proposed Alpine Coaster. You can see the long lift hill (but it's fair to assume the queue will be via the Chairlift). The exit station is planned for the grass area immediately north of the bottom Chairlift station while the entry is planned for the rear of the top Chairlift station. And here it is with the Bobsleds & Chairlift highlighted: Superimposing it over Google Earth gets this roughly: (I'm sure it extends around to the rear of the top Chairlift station though as per above plans): No other details about this have been found, including whether or not they plan to proceed with it. It seems it will be in addition to the popular Bobsleds.

Here is the landscape plan (colour version): Grand Gorge Falls' 8-Lane Octokraken Racer: "With an overall ride length of approximately 160 metres and an elevational drop of 21.59 metres, this combination racer will be the largest of its type installed to date"(assuming that is still the case in summer 2020) "approximately five metres below the natural ground level" The general Grand Gorge Falls area is themed to gorges "such as Kings Canyon, Katherine Gorge and Finke Gorge / Palm Valley". Grand Gorge Falls' SkyBox Multi-Bump Speed Slides: "only one and three metres above natural ground level" Koala Kove: "This waterplay zone provides a wet deck approximately 25 metres long and 15 metres wide" It is anticipated, according to the DA, that Jamberoo Action Park "...will experience a slight increase in numbers in the short term, but in the medium to long term the owners aim to achieve sustained visitor numbers in line with current attendance rates" Some other interesting quotes from the DA: The DA mentions these new replacements as part of "Master Plan 2016". This very likely refers to Jamberoo Action Park's hints to a newly proposed $6.5 million large major custom-designed hybrid world-first ride back in 2017. Clearly, Jamberoo Action Park defines 'hybrid' differently. So what does everything think?

Kiama Municipal Council has put on exhibition an around $7 million plan of Jamberoo Action Park to demolish the Splash Out area which consisted of 2 body slides, 1 slow & 1 fast, both the 3rd oldest body waterslides in Australia (built 1981) & a couple of pools (also built 1981) which were upgraded in the past decade to add a rolling log & an octopus slide set. The bodyslides are to be replaced them with GRAND GORGE FALLS!... ...the pool set with KOALA KOVE! Of note, this is a slight drift from their Kangaroo Island masterplan, which was to happen completely in the surroundings of Funnel Web. The Illawarra Mercury today also reported: I know Surf Hill is right next to Grand Gorge Falls. The future of Surf Hill now will be interesting. I must say Jamberoo outstands me with their commitment to theming. Here is the queue & shade shelters design: Unlike The Perfect Storm, which received zero media attention during the DA process, this one has so hopefully the local residents have no issues with it. Otherwise, expect delays. The local residents biggest concern has always been the colour blending into the natural surroundings. Stay tuned to this and further posts for more new developments.

Jamberoo Action Park have revealed Grand Gorge Falls & Koala Kove! You can read more about it in this dedicated topic.

@Skeeta, this might be a bit off-topic but you might be able to help here: Another application was "lodged" to Gold Coast City Council the same day as the Thunder Lake Stunt Show one. This application was for the Oxenford property: It has 12th of December as the "decision date", which would make sense since Aquaman - The Exhibition opened the day after but this is despite any form of 'construction' occurring roughly a month prior to opening day and the "decision date" & still why was it only "lodged" on the 28th of February? Again, as far as I am aware, these plans have not yet been approved by a private certifier (I know Aquaman - The Exhibition has been open for nearly 3 months now & some sort of decision was made on the 12th of December) but according to Gold Coast City Council, this application is still "in progress" of being assessed by the private certifier. All the applications I've ever posted since June 28 last year also have had the "Application Type" as "Private Certifier Archiving", which I assume is related to the Council receiving the application from the private certifier & archiving it. However, since everything on the Council's website is so vague, I can't be 100% sure if any of these applications I've posted have been approved - not until "In Progress" has changed to "Completed", which I assume means it finally got approved. This Aquaman - The Exhibition application might be a good one to clarify things on - not just for me but everyone - as as soon as the Coroner's Report is released into the Thunder River Rapids incident (which should be in the next few months), I probably won't be following the Gold Coast applications as much anymore - not unless something else extraordinary happens in regards to DW's future or a new major ride (like DC Rivals HyperCoaster) is built at any Gold Coast theme park.

An application was lodged to Gold Coast City Council (not a link to the application - see the paragraph below the quote) on the 28th of February: I'd add a link to the relevant Gold Coast City Council application but from previous attempts to link applications from there in recent months, I've found it will just lead to an error message for you all due to last year's information technology system upgrade the Council implemented. As far as I am aware, Sea World's plans have not yet been approved by a private certifier but according to Gold Coast City Council they are "in progress" of being assessed by the private certifier. Now does the application description mean 1 performance stage or 'Stage 1'? If it is 1 performance stage, then that might be what they are building on the island and maybe there are multiple performance stages? If it is 'Stage 1', then what is 'Stage 2' and/or how many 'stages' are there? 🤔 I'd probably say it's the latter - 'Stage 1' of a masterplan. This would fit in with some recent rumours.

I understand people's disappointment in this announcement but whilst I think it's unlikely Ardent would do this, it would be cool if they let WipeOut's giant wave stay, get the water features on it working again and convert the pool where the shark was into the 'chill space' but with a circular water feature surrounding it featuring fountains (similar to the ones that shot up during the ride's cycle but on a smaller scale) and small cascades coming from the bottom of the wave and going around either side of the 'chill space' before disappearing underneath the footpath to enter the 'chill space' where the water would be cycled back up to the wave. A nice tribute to WipeOut & a great place to relax and cool during summer. But I feel Ardent would wipeout WipeOut 😜completely and just put a couple of umbrellas, chairs & tables there with some artificial lawn.

16 days later & SkyVoyager is still not opened. 10am is when the results are released, which is not far away. When the results are released, how many think Ardent will explain why SkyVoyager still has not opened or why they are reducing ride operating hours?

From The Daily Mail (Video which was part of the article can be found by clicking here) : I'm pretty sure the people who filmed the e-stop were ironically breaking safety rules (Quote from Tower Of Terror II's official webpage😞

From The Australian Financial Review (subscriber-only article): 3 key points: According to David Prescott, Managing Director of Sydney-based funds manager Lanyon Asset Management, Village Roadshow's overseas theme park assets are a "distraction", which should be sold to improve shareholder returns. Mittleman Brothers, Village Roadshow's 3rd largest shareholder support assets sales to focus on accelerating better theme park (and cinema) business profits. Chris Mittleman of Mittleman Brothers, Village Roadshow's 3rd largest shareholder, "would be willing to talk and consider proposals from anyone...outside of Village Roadshow who seemed to have reasonable ideas on how to improve the business and thus its returns for shareholders" Regarding the 2nd dot point, if anyone takes up his offer, remember Village Roadshow is not all about theme parks. I'm sure some of you would have "reasonable ideas on how to improve the business", theme park wise, though.

As I posted on Parkz last October, Ardent has made it clear in their public documents that they have received civil claims and some have been settled: However, one is now gaining prominent media attention: Whilst the above Twitter post & video of The Front Page does not point it out, the article published in The Courier-Mail emphasises (through their online headlines) the fact that the family is suing Dreamworld. The Courier-Mail's article can be found here (subscriber-only article).

I think it should be pointed out that we have found out recently that SkyVoyager was never built to "save the park" as you say @joz. A ParkChatLive interview early last month with DW's COO revealed they had planned SkyVoyager 3 months prior to the Thunder River Rapids incident occurring. Since SkyVoyager was announced after the incident (13 November 2017), we've all assumed this is what they were banking on to "save the park" but since they were planning it before the incident, that means the Whitewater World expansion is now most likely their 1st true reaction on how to "save the park" after the incident. How that & their other post-SkyVoyager plans occur should tell enough about how Ardent have been dealing with DW's future. SkyVoyager seems to have never been built to fix DW's attendance and finances. It seems to be just a coincidence that the ride's development began roughly when the incident occurred and after the incident, it seems Ardent just 'hoped' that in 2 years it would open, fix all their problems and everything will be back to normal. Also, can anyone explain to me why the COO's name tag says 'Melbourne, Australia' on it? (See 47:56 in the video)

Ardent Leisure Group announced today that it will announce it's HY19 Financial Results on Friday 22nd of February 2019 at 10am (AEDT). This should be an interesting announcement on 22nd of February given how DW's state has changed since the last financial results were released - their major new ride, SkyVoyager, has still not opened & ride operating hours are reducing. All the answers to these issues should be answered during that announcement. And it should be more interesting if the Thunder River Rapids Incident Coronial Inquest Findings are released prior to then or coincidentally, at the same time.

An interesting article from The Sydney Morning Herald: The article which brought this "feud" to light 5 days ago only refers to the selling of Village Roadshow Pictures, "Village Roadshow's British marketing business, its stake in the American iPic Theatres premium cinema outfit, and its Hollywood holdings" as the closest thing to John Kirby's proposed 'break up' of Village Roadshow which is referred to in the above article. Is that what is meant by "break up"? Or is it the 1st stage of the "break up"? Or would the company split in 1 go forming a new theme park-cinema-studios-only company? Or will nothing happen? Regardless, the above article is interesting enough because of it's theme park-related content.

Ah, ok. So where is the 'excess land' that Ardent talks about lately then?

From The Daily Mail: The video can be found here. The thing I'd like to point out from that article is that DW says they don't own the land the Big Brother House sits on anymore but the Queensland Investment Corporation does instead. How does this fit in with Ardent's 'excess land' talk?

This is 12 days ago. Whilst I'm still not 100% convinced that Dreamworld's future lazy river is going to go past wildlife exhibits, I have since been convinced that Whitewater World is going to have wildlife exhibits added. However, if the former is actually going to happen, it seems Jamberoo's local wildlife heard about it 😜 and thought they would demonstrate the risk of having wildlife near a water ride (like if the enclosure fails and the wildlife somehow ends up in the water). They went to The Rock first: But Jamberoo wasn't having any of it: Hope Dreamworld sees this. This 'demonstration' by the snake shows: Alert staff are needed (According to social media comments, Jamberoo's staff were very alert) Ride's popularity immediately drops Ride is immediately closed Wildlife catchers called Wildlife subsequently appears on social media Wildlife subsequently appears in local media (or if it happened on the Gold Coast, possible state/national media) Judging by social media comments, snakes regularly appear around Jamberoo Action Park so that probably explains the alertness of their staff.

It seems Luna Park Sydney's Ferris Wheel won't be restricted to just the Calling Country ceremony. It seems it will play a part in all elements of Sydney New Year's Eve (such as the fireworks) today. From today's Sydney New Year's Eve media release:

Ardent, DW and this topic remind me of this Fawlty Towers scene, which I've reworded below:

Warner Bros. Classics & The Great Gremlins Adventure closed in mid-2001 & Scooby-Doo Spooky Coaster opened on June 17 2002. So Scooby-Doo Spooky Coaster's installation took no longer than about a year. This photo shows that theming and track installation were happening roughly around the same time however it's fair to say the track was installed before theming was added. This photo shows track installation took no longer than 4 months (February to June 2002) while this photo and this photo show the 'Spooky Castle' exterior theming alone took no more than a month and a half (Early April to late May 2002). All this should give an idea of how long it took to create/install the overall theming, though the duration depends on how many people were helping install the ride. General Comment Whilst I understand people's disappointment due to their exaggerated marketing, I'm amazed that so many theme park enthusiasts thought the ride would be completely new from start to finish when firstly, the exterior 'Spooky Castle' theming remained (that should imply the queue would be similar & the ghost train section would be fairly similar. After all, it is based on the movie - there were some parts of the ghost train they could add (such 'The Dinner Show') but most of the ghost train section from the movie was already there so there would be minimum change) and secondly, the trains were the same (they were in the new TV commercials too), which meant the ghost train section would be there, which I just detailed. Otherwise, why have 'Spooky Castle' and the same trains if they weren't going to travel through the ghost train section of the original ride? They were never going to stray from the movie's 'Spooky Castle' plot device (not to mention a fully-projection mapped ride would look unconvincing after a while) and I tried warning fellow forum members of this 2 years ago: It would be very difficult to do a Scooby Doo re-theme - it has to be based around Spooky Castle as that is the entrance to the ride and the carriages are the same as Spooky Castle's carriages. Unless MW changes the carriages (or re-themes them - I don't know how easy that is), it has to be themed to Spooky Castle. So naturally, it would be the mostly-the-same 'ghost train' section with a few technical changes - mostly the touted projection mapping, which so far it is not and if it is, not applied well. Those technical changes though I'm waiting until they finish 'technical rehearsals' before making a final opinion on them. But one change that can be deemed 'finished' (in a way) is a change in narrative. The original ride's narrative was just trying to escape monsters inside the 'Spooky Castle' ghost train. You then try to find a scared Scooby-Doo who has escaped up into a disco up on ground level in the 'Spooky Island' theme park. After you escaped the 'ghost train' though and found Scooby-Doo, you 'fall' back into the 'Spooky Castle' ghost train but quickly find a safe way out to go back into the 'Spooky Island' theme park. My theory (due to technical rehearsals still ongoing) on the narrative of the new edition is below:

Maybe this topic's title is becoming literal?: From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation: Now, the question we all have to ask: Is this world-first rollercoaster better than MDMC? 😜

A 'successful' park does not have to be one that solely makes a profit. For the purposes of expanding the park, a profit would be great but when did DW last expand? Probably just over a decade ago when Whitewater World was built. The only thing Ardent has been expanding in the past decade is Main Event. The problem with relying simply on the financial status to determine 'success' is that the revenue (and profit) could be coming from the same visitors/sources all the time (like annual passholders who spend on food and beverage or upcharges). Whilst you're talking about 2015/2016 finances, I discussed this problem back in August in relation to the 2017/2018 attendance figures of DW: Based on the current attendance figures, if only passholders visit DW + Skypoint, they would visit on average 6 or 7 times per year. So, do passholders actually visit 6 or 7 times per year? And if they do and the attendance figure does take into account repeat visits from passholders, then that means only 250,000 people visit DW + Skypoint per year and they likely only visit from the Gold Coast-Tweed Heads region. If all passholders are from the Gold Coast-Tweed Heads region, then that means 40% of the Gold Coast-Tweed Heads population has a DW + SkyPoint pass. The park's capacity is 10,000 and based on the attendance figures in FY16, they get around 6600 people per day on average. Now they get around 4540 people per day on average. Is that reflected with the amount of people actually seen in the park? Because if it is really 250,000 people per year currently, that is equal to 685 people per day on average (likely to be 1020 people per day on average prior to the incident). There needs to be an additional criteria than just 'making a profit' to determine a 'successful' park. For me, that additional criteria is bringing in constantly new visitors whilst keeping all previous visitors loyal. For example, visitors that leave the park happy wanting to return at the next available opportunity (loyal visitors) and visitors who haven't visited before or didn't find previous offerings interesting finding a new offering worthy of visiting now (new visitors). Consequently, if this is achieved, you're more likely to reach capacity each day and you know the park is 'successful' because profit is made, attendance is increasing, there's always something new & people are always leaving happy. The only negative I could think of for this is having to close the park's entry gates due to reaching capacity. A good case study on why profit alone isn't a determination of a theme park's success is Wet 'n' Wild Sydney. Sold last year after making it's 1st ever loss. It made a profit every year prior to then (albeit a lower profit than the previous year each year) but was the park a 'successful' park during those years of profit? No. When it opened, the park had so many problems that it made a lot of it's original visitors leave as 'not loyal'. Every year, this problem occurred even though they fixed some of the problems over the years. And no major new attraction has opened since it opened in 2013 (unless you count dinosaur statues & Nickelodeon theming as 'major new attractions') so there was no reason to bring the non-loyal visitors back to show them that the park has improved (if it has improved). Consequently, attendance continued to decline causing profit to lower which resulted in the inevitable loss and selling of the park to another theme park operator. A theme park's success is based on quality not profit.

As pointed out earlier, they are at Dreamworld. From the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Click the link for a 27 second video of the Dreamworld protest, which was part of the article below):