DaptoFunlandGuy

"Showing people how we can make a big cat drink milk from a carton held above our heads" isn't necessary to continue the conservation efforts and education. "Because that's the way we've always done it" isn't a good enough reason to keep doing something.

As an employer, Dreamworld \ Coast \ whatever have a legal obligation to ensure a safe working environment. If they can't ensure a safe working environment, they can't have the tigers at all. Society is pretty good at prioritising human life over that of animals regardless of the circumstances. Welfare is a different story, so ensure you don't conflate the two. There were attacks on handlers while the long term tiger experts were working there too, so i'm not sure what your point is? I feel for the tigers that have had human interactions and now are finding their handlers interacting less, I do. But change has to start somewhere. You can't simply keep putting handlers into their enclosures - especially if incidents keep occurring. Human life has to be the priority. TI has been one of the most successful facilities from a breeding program perspective. Shipping the animals off to other parks/zoos where they would lose both their handlers and their familiar environment (that is all these tigers have known their whole life and for multiple generations) is a worse idea than simply transitioning to a non-contact model. I absolutely despite organisations such as JFC, but we've seen Sea World transition from "tricks" - humans riding on dolphins and being launched into the air, etc - into more 'natural' behaviours and interactions. The US SW parks transitioned from in-water interaction with Orca to completely out of water interaction - essentially non-contact interactions, due to the risk to the life of the handlers. I support the steps taken by both SW park chains for the sake of animal and handler welfare and I see the non-contact steps by Dreamworld in the same lens. I don't see any links between this and any 'vocal minority' action.

Given their history with SX360, i'll give it an outside chance at opening before the brisbane olympics.

INB4 someone starts saying this happened because they were reducing contact with the animals - as there have been several incidents over the years well before the no-contact aims were first touted. I agree, these are inevitable so long as humans share the same spaces as tigers and full no-contact is the necessary end-game. They do have to transition though - the tigers will apparently suffer depression if the handlers simply stop interacting with them. I don't know what they do now, but the welfare of the handlers should be the first priority.

...which is even more to the point.

They didn't call the character Joan because they potentially would get sued for using the name and likeness without permission. You can't say there is 'no doubt' when the name didn't derive its origins from the story. Tarzan doesn't have exclusive rights to the name and while it is most likely and almost certainly connected it is simply absurd to say without a doubt. I mean, Jungle Rush and Vintage cars are no more adult than Oz in terms of attraction 'thrill' levels.

He may not always articulate his points well enough to be understood the first time around, but in this case it was obvious he meant alliteration rather than rhyming. No doubt you say? Google would like to disagree with you. And before anyone suggests that any 'jungle' links to the word jane have to be sourced from Tarzan, the Simpsons had a Jungle Jane character also, but this was based on Joan Embery It's very rich of you to continue to assert that you're allowed to share your opinion, but when others do so, you refer to it as 'pointless arguing'.

You got it.

Well, you jinxed that!

Yes. I know. they've been talking about reopening it recently. but its still been closed for years. Not at all. Just wondering if it would change your view of the name.

You're still attaching the word "jungle" to the name. it appears it was used back in February with early concepts, but all of the current material does not use it. Not casually, not accidentally left out. Even the concept signage on the front of the building doesn't use it. I'd suggest to you they've dropped the name. All your other examples are real world people (like Buffet, who is synonymous with the restaurant and could be dropped regardless - but his name would still be on every sign and billboard) or pre-existing IP characters who are attached to an outlet in order to relate it back to the theme and\or link it to the pre-existing IP. This. Is. Neither. What if I told you the name Jungle Jane was coined by AI? Would you shut up then?

Honestly i'm just surprised they haven't slapped Kenny and his mates all over it. I'm all for them embracing their heritage but there's already too much in the park attached to the mascot.

They seem to have dropped the 'Jungle' aspect of her name in all the recent marketing around it though - are you sure they're still sticking with Jungle Jane?

Going with just "Jane's Rivertown Restaurant" doesn't have quite the same ring to it. (Also, is it "Jane's Rivertown Restaurant" ? or is it Jane Rivertown's restaurant? I've seen both used, and if they're giving Jane the last name 'Rivertown'... even more cringe.

I'm hoping they've given it more than a naming twist - the prominent 'boat bar' and the wording here: When I read this, my first thought was Trader Sam's Enchanted Tiki bar. If they can incorporate some A\V elements and \ or some specialty themed cocktails, it won't just be a place to eat, it will truly be a repeatable experience you'd keep coming back to. I do hope this place pays off and succeeds. It'd be a delicious demonstration to Village that you can operate a full sit-down restaurant in a gold coast theme park. (I'm looking at you Rick's Cafe, Stars Cafe and various long-closed Sea World options, and yes I know they've been talking about reopening Stars cafe recently but it's been getting on in years...)

"WHOOSH"

No Running what?... No running waterslides?

Honestly I think a cableway and a wheel would be the perfect fit for the park. Surely the technology we have today handles wind better than the old system we used to have? I wouldn't have thought the wind on the GC was much different to say - Ngong Ping (Lantau, Hong Kong) or Mount Faber (Sentosa, Singapore) and they're massive.

Just for clarity's sake, the report said it was to be funded in FY25 - which is the FY we are currently in.

technically the train, depending on how much of a purist you are. Model T's technically still exist. I'm not sure if Carousel and Bumper Cars are the same hardware, though naturally they're in a different location. And of course Thunderbolt's station still stands, though not really an answer to your question.

Judging by this comment above, i'd say the removal of the train is not indicative that they had made a decision to close the attraction at the time.

Well you know what they say about fools and incomplete jobs. I'd like to think that i've got a little more cred, but you can take it how you like it. yeah i'm not convinced but the proof will be in the pudding.

short answer is.... it's still coming.

I say the same thing about most of what you post, but that in itself is an opinion, isn't it? If I had experienced any of the mazes in previous years, sure - but I haven't been in any of them, nor do I have plans to go this year, so my opinion is not based on having already done the mazes or not. And i'm still entitled to the opinion whether I attend the event or not or whether you think so or not. And what I said was - I had heard they're putting the funds into other elements of the event. So costs have not been cut, they've been reallocated. It's also bold of you to claim that they've got everything in the shed when you haven't seen the full event lineup yet. Despite all of this, and at the risk of sounding like a broken record - I honestly hope this bites them. I hope that no new mazes sees lower interest in the event and it hurts them in the hip pocket so that they learn a lesson. I'd love for that lesson to be felt more broadly across the company rather than being limited to this specific event only - it's a lesson that's long been overdue in coming. But as I said - I'd heard they were investing in other parts of the event - and if that is the case then I give them a pass on the mazes - they obviously have confidence that the same mazes will be popular - or they're going to learn an expensive lesson. If there is no marked improvement in the other parts of the event and the same mazes then the pass doesn't apply.

I think Bikash may have suggested that they've got options they're considering in the comments on one of the social posts. not sure how much substance that has, but at least someone in the company is saying something is being considered.