DaptoFunlandGuy

cue reply from someone else who went today, and rode in the morning, with a completely different experience. I think it's really hard for scooby to be 'bang on' with the fog all day long. Sure the machines should be capable of maintaining it - but with the constant movement of ride vehicles through it, it is constantly dispersed. I think those who experience 'heaps' of fog are usually entering the Disco room not long after the foggers have kicked in for a while and are at the 'high end' of the cycle... Others who complain it was poor are probably at the end of the cycle with the foggers only seconds away from kicking in again... I'm sure the techs behind this can explain why this is - or maybe even look into upping the frequency of fog bursts on the machines... but that may have the effect of drying the machines out quicker - meaning less fog at the end of the day. (I have no idea how big the tanks are on each of these - but maybe there is a fine balance between bursts and endurance?) On the flip side - maybe the machines deliberately switch off later in the day to save wasting fog juice at 4:30 in the afternoon-ish, and those who complain of not enough fog are those who dash in "after school" and only ever experience it that way? *patiently waits for someone in the know to correct me*

See - there's no excuse for a surly ride operator. There are plenty of causes - bad situation at home, other things on their mind, poor management and support... but there's no reason any cast member should bring that 'on stage'. I used to keep a 'memory bank' of 'happy thoughts' to think about right before I went on stage - they never failed to put a smile on my face before I entered the park, and kept me in a good mood for my shift, regardless of what else was going on. I think all the parks on the GC have let standards in this area slip, and I think responsibility for it lies squarely on the shoulders of management - either for creating or fostering a poor environment which makes the cast members surly, or for allowing surly cast members on stage without dealing with the issues. I have had some great cast members - both on the GC and elsewhere - so this isn't meant to be a 'park bash'... and it's very sad to hear of this experience Santa.

How good would it be if you could make just one post with everything you wanted to say in it?

I don't know - it worked for Sea World didn't it? Besides - public transport is frequently wrapped in advertising material - just take a look at Translink \ Brisbane buses - covered in advertising in every way possible - so wouldn't 'wrapping' the MRT make sense?

Did this really need a new thread? oh - and your image is broken...

Thanks for the pics Dodge. I find it interesting that Dockside appears to be open for business. I'd have thought that they would have taken the opportunity to refurbish that at the same time, as well as to avoid guests dining on the upper balcony who would have a wonderful view of... rubble...

Yeah - don't mind Yoshi. He never has a clue what he's talking about. I knew what you meant. Whether by choice or not, my point is the venue brings people back. Your employer clearly liked the location. Others do too - one way or another that's increasing attendance for the park. I never said you had to like it - and I totally appreciate you don't like the idea of the venue being there. I understand your position, and appreciate your views and understanding also. Perhaps they COULD investigate how they could build over the top of BigTop without altering the current structure - kind of bridging over the top of it? They'll never have enough land to build enough rides to keep it afloat on it's own - the several closures previous have proven that solely as an amusement park doesn't work.... (Nasty residents don't help either) and if we want at least a chance to see any of the ideas formulated above come to fruition - BigTop is sorely needed as a venue to keep bringing in the bucks.

My second response was mainly to explain why they couldn't just shoot the support poles through the venue, as it didn't seem like you understood it's purpose, as you restated that suggestion in your reply to my first response. And I really don't feel like you understand my point - because you're still arguing for BigTop's removal, or to dramatically impede it's abilities by shooting support poles through it. Also - You say BigTop wouldn't bring you back to the park, despite it (in your own words) bringing you back to the park "on many occasions over the past 11 years". I get your complaint about real estate - but the simple fact is that it is an income producing asset that is worth far more to the park than a coaster... and here's why... The venue can accommodate from 1680 up to 2950 patrons, charging anywhere from $13 up to $500 a ticket (based on current schedule). So gross take from the venue is potentially $21,000 to $1,475,000. It is more reasonably going to be somewhere in the middle of that. Naturally the promoter is going to take a fair whack of that, but clearly it can make money for it to have events there. Looking at the calendar, on average major events have a two day downtime in between - so one day bump out, and one day bump in is all they need between most events. With quick turnaround - they can have at least 3 events a week. I can only speculate as to the actual venue hire fee, and it likely differs depending on the kind of event (For example - Hi-5 probably doesn't need extra security... but MMA night fighting probably does), but even if we say it's an average of $10,000 per event - thats still $30,000 each week, or $1.5m per year. (Multi day events would of course increase the revenue). Considering the park sells unlimited ride passes for around $45 per day or $99 for an annual pass - they would need to sell almost 16,000 annual passes to make similar revenue... Now sure - they'd probably do that in the first year after launching such a great blockbuster rollercoaster that will remain the park's most popular attraction for many years to come... but for how many years can they continue to rely on the roller coaster to bring in 16000 extra passes? Nowhere near as long as BigTop can continue to bring in that sort of revenue. When you consider that Big Top's 3-per-week events would easily bring in over 350,000 people annually of varied and wide demographics... i know where my efforts are going... s a business decision... as a financial decision - Big Top makes far more sense than demolishing it in place of a coaster...and (most importantly) - they NEED to make good business decisions and good financial decisions in order for them to be able to continue to bring new rides to the park - the very thing you are advocating for. LPS will get one chance to build a big, quality coaster. Once it's there, there is no more room to build another one. So for them to get the same value out of a new ride, they'll have to remove the old one. LPS also DOES have a coaster... but beyond and above all of that - Jobe's suggestions at the start of this thread suggested realistic options. I put it to you that for the reasons stated above, removing, or altering Big Top to accommodate a coaster is not realistic.

Thanks Reanimated... saved me the trouble.

^Not possible. It isn't a turbine.

I'm wondering how far FoF members are bound by the confidentiality explained or expressed during the online and face to face focus groups, now that it no longer exists? There's a lot of detail that was discussed or revealed in those (especially face to face groups) that has not yet been discussed... especially in relation to Wild.

Sorry - let me explain in a bit more detail... Big Top is a performance venue. This means that what it offers changes regularly. So you might visit one weekend to see a rock band perform, and two weeks later, a sporting event, a month after that, a film festival... this is what i mean by 'bring people back' - there is always something different. For instance: This weekend - Parents of toddlers and preschoolers will flock into the park to see Hi-5 perform. Then we've got an MMA fighter event. stars of Dance Moms after that, and then the Sydney Roller Derby league. The Russian ballet is in October and UB40 is playing there in November. These are just some examples of what the venue is used for. In terms of venue layout - having a large open unobstructed space is useful for many different purposes. I won't detail them all, but instead if you're keen to see how it can be used differently - here's a link: http://www.bigtopsydney.com/hire-the-venue Now - imagine these floorplans, with giant support poles shot through the roof, obscuring the view of the concert venue, or potentially smack bang in the middle of the 'stage'... depending on the layout: How many times do you visit a park, and decide not to do a particular ride, because "we've done that one heaps of times before" ? Unless the coaster is ZOMFG! it can be skipped by repeat guests... particularly if the line is too long. It's not a reason for you to return to the park TIME after TIME. As for saying Crystal Ballroom is reason enough not to have Big Top - CB is nowhere near the venue that BT is. BT is soundproof, complete blackout, and has the height and rigging to stage massive scale events. CB is heritage listed, and is more for the harbour view than the event you're attending. It's a great wedding venue... but it can't do what Big Top can do. Having been a staging manager working for previously mentioned in-house staging company, I return to my original statement that Big Top will remain so long as it is financially viable to do so, and they will not compromise the flexibility of the venue just so they can build a coaster over the top of it.

Much as I dislike it - the Big Top is a very popular venue for LPS to operate, and having such a large open space means it can be used any way they want to use it. It also brings punters into the park to spend money on the park attractions whilst waiting for the show to start \ and \ or after the show has ended. You can sell 2 unlimited wristbands to a guy on a date with a girl just so they can take a ride on the ferris wheel before the show starts... I don't know what the current arrangements are, but I know they used to have an 'in-house' staging company working out of the venue which were well known not to be cheap. Not sure if they still do but either way - I can't see them axing big top whilst it's still a money spinner. (Plus - it gives 'something new' to bring people back into the park far more than a coaster which will get on in years)

Razza - you asked why they keep building Waterparks. Gazza has given a very obvious and simple answer. You've stated a personal dislike for them because of your own experiences. Gazza asked a follow up question - you've defended your view, and accepted that others like them, but you don't. Gazza quite legitimately questions why you would ask why they keep building them, and you accuse him of being rude and sarcastic. I think he's been quite reasonable. You're complaining about the construction of something you disagree with personally, whilst also stating you're entitled to your opinion, yet the vast majority of people here would be in favour of the construction - but they aren't entitled to theirs? Waterparks are built because people like them. Water parks are built because they are cheap to build. Water parks are built because they are cheap to run.

Just received the following email: Considering the subject line was 'important news about future of fun' and the first line is 'make you aware of some changes' i think it's pretty shitty to then say they're closing it down. They could have just said that from the beginning... Also, this was the closest thing we had to having a park representative on these forums. It was a chance to hear the ideas the park had, and give them our views. Presumably they've decided it's not worth continuing, or because too many people divulge the secret proposals they put out to FoF members. Either way, I think this is a poor decision, although considering they hadn't used it much recently, it was probably for the best... It's a shame that they've put so much effort into building such a community, only to throw it away a year or two later...

I got dumped by a massive wave at the beach once. Knocked my head into the sand and did minor damage to my cervical spine. At another time i got caught in a rip and swept out. took me about 30 minutes to get back to shore. I still go to the beach... i'm just more careful. Waterparks these days won't let the next person onto a slide until the last person has cleared the splashdown zone... I guess Gazza's point is you shouldn't let one isolated visit ruin things for you - especially with all the advances in technology and safety these days...

I believe this is something Richard is actively considering at this stage - but of course, that depends on if the park reps actually want to be identified... chances are there's already a few others that we don't even know about!

*pauses to wait for all the facebook groups to claim 'exclusive' news on the ride type... Honestly - if RCDB, and PARKZ are saying it, then I don't care if we haven't heard a 'whisper' from anyone else - those two independent sources are good enough for me!

I wasn't suggesting that it was police investigating - just using that description to describe the kind of coveralls I was referring to.

I'd like to see minimal, and very restricted use of 'out over the harbour' elements, to get around the heritage elements that cannot be touched. Maloneys should be used, but it should be used in such a way so as to ensure travelling attractions (like Extreme Speed Machine and other large temporary rides) can still fit through - under a top hat element for example. The ride should also SKIRT the boundary as much as possible, so that other rides can still operate inside of it - like Scenic Railway at LPM that runs the park boundary. Make it modern, but THEME it old school... like California Screamin fits the seaside pier woodie theme despite being steel...

Parkz' latest article reads: So I guess "at least it isn't a wacky worm" is the best thing to say here! Looking at Zamperla's offering - http://www.zamperla.com/products/family-gravity-coaster/ matches these specs perfectly - which is an identical model to Adventure World (as indicated in the article). I guess the only thing I can really say to that is... (http://www.bannister.org/coasters/trips/2015/0209.htm#adventure_world_australia thanks Richard!)

Since it's their plan, once again:

I should also mention (as Bussy indicated) - The Beast\Beastie trains are not at O'neills, and haven't been for some years. They were purchased by the Wonderland History group in part through donations from fans. The trains were stored at the Junkyard near Windsor for a time (where the park signs are) on agreement with the owner. This was also planned to be the site of the 'museum'. Subsequently, plans changed, and the trains were moved from the junkyard site recently. And a good thing they did too, given the recent weather in that particular region:

Your best bet is https://www.facebook.com/groups/Wonderland.History/ or http://www.wonderlandhistory.net - collectively these guys have put together more than 20 years of the park's life (including construction and demolition) for around 10 years since the park closed. As best as I can remember: Bush Beast and Beastie were demolished - bulldozers used. The timber contained toxic chemicals and was buried offsite.Snowy was demolished. Rafts were sold off after closure to random individuals and collectors.Antique Autos was rumored to have been purchased, but it has never been seen againSkyRider was getting on in years - it's cable was used to try and pull down the bush beast - it didn't workTaz - although the ride was pulled early from the park, it was containerised and shipped. I'm not 100% on this but i think someone tried to trailerise it and didn't complete it.Endeavour was sent to Sunway to the best of my knowledgeBounty's and Dragons Flight both went to Sunway and are operatingProbe was rumoured to have been sent to Sunway, but was never built, apparently due to the cost of constructing the footings. Although it was rumoured to be rotting out in a paddock somewhere, several people I know have scoured google maps, near maps and sunway-fan websites without turning up any info as to the current location. Presumably junked.Demon's current location is a little difficult. We know it went to Alabama Adventure as Zoomerang. However the information about it going to Wonderla in India is dubious. There has been little evidence to support this claim. RCDB does not identify the park in the ride's history, and the two Wonderla parks in India listed do not show a vekoma boomerang. The parks have a website and I can't find a Boomerang featured on it anywhere. Considering they have a kiddie coaster in their lineup featured prominently on the site - I doubt the Demon is anywhere near there right now.Wizards Fury was scrapped well before closureZodiac was scrapped after closureI'm not sure on the kiddie rides but believe some of them went to Sunway also.

I'm not just talking about how the building would fit into the park - i'm also talking about the skyline of the spit - something that is continually an issue for Sea World's development. I'm positive any large warehouse like building, regardless of whether it is themed or not would meet with large opposition from the many residents occupying broadwater fronting property. No, because I don't really care about the specifics of it. More Rides should be Sea World's current mantra, and for the size of the park, Coasters aren't really needed right now... They need some flats that offer high capacity and are re-rideable to: round out the park's offering, alleviate congestion on existing rides, make the park more attractive to the non-family market. I'll point to Ocean parade as an example - whilst not specifically saying Claw, Wipeout, Shockwave, Reef Diver, StingRay etc - this is the kind of setup they should be going for. As for not caring about SW's geological problems - or whatever it was you said - Whilst we can dream - we have to be realistic. Digging down into what would be mostly sand, with the water table where it sits is nightmarish - they encountered enough problems working with Storm. TO suggest they build STOREYS below sea level is fanciful, and would cost the park more than they'd ever make back on the ride itself. There would be an inherent risk of flooding and collapse that is just not viable just so you can put a coaster indoors. Likewise, on the subject of being realistic - Dr Who is never coming to Sea World.