Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


wikiverse last won the day on April 16

wikiverse had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender

Park & Ride Stats

  • Park Count
  • Ride Count

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

wikiverse's Achievements


Explorer (3/9)

  • Collaborator
  • First Post
  • Reacting Well
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Conversation Starter

Recent Badges



  1. Finally! It's been a long, tense 13 and a half years, but we've now got the definitive answer we've been waiting for. Jokes aside, if Huss still made the Rainbow, it would have been a perfect addition to Sea World instead of Vortex, or even a Wipeout replacement. Hopefully they, or another company can bring it back. Something with similar height, speed and airtime, or even a super-sized version of it that is more suited to a permanent park install.
  2. This does not look like a well engineered ride. From the video, there are a number of spots where the 'single rail' track is mis-aligned, and you can see a lot of welding and grinding has happened to get the actual rails aligned and smooth. There's nothing really wrong with welding track pieces together, but most modern coasters are so well machined that they just bolt together. There is also a lot of rattle happening in this video. It's always hard to notice initially since both cameras and editing software can add stabilization/smoothing, but look at the track as it moves past the bottom of the screen, probably not enough to be painful or even uncomfortable (for now), but definitely enough that you'll notice it. It will be interesting to see how well these rides age.
  3. To be fair, the Channel 7 news story was just reporting on the delusional Victorian MP that thinks Disney should build a park in Frankston. Their choice of soundbites from the locals set the tone from them. They can't have opinions in news reporting, so the best they can do is report on the MP and get the locals to say it's dumb.
  4. I don't want to be 'that guy' but why would you change a mountain-themed ride to the New Orleans Bayou? Clearly no one from Disney has ever been to New Orleans because, famously, the highest point of elevation is only 27ft (8.2m) above sea level.
  5. The trend for Disney and Universal is to go bigger not smaller. They don't want to just build parks, they want to build resorts. They want to make 100% of the revenue you spend on your holiday from hotels, food, drinks, parking, airport transfers... etc. They want to build destination parks that keep you on company property for the entire duration of your stay. When they build parks, they're usually joint ventures that are majority owned by local governments. No Australian govt (state or federal) want one of these companies consuming 100% of an international/interstate tourist's spending. They want them to spread it around the local communities, so they will never support a large scale park in Australia. The local population is too small to sustain a park of that scale anywhere in Australia, if it could, Dreamworld would have expanded to fill their available land and done a licensing deal with one of the major studios (like Universal). As for international tourists, Australia is really, really far away and expensive to get to. Our nearest neighbours are generally poor/developing countries, and the ones that aren't already have Disney and/or Universal parks (Singapore, HK, China, Japan). A Korean or Vietnamese person wanting a Disney or Universal experience isn't going to come to Australia, they're going to to an Asian park or make a one-in-a-lifetime trip to the US. I personally like that we can have parks like Dreamworld and Gumbaya (even Aussie World) that are smaller and have their own unique vibe. I'd like to encourage them to to better themed experiences and tap into unique Australian stories and experiences that you can't get in the rest of the world, rather than just cloned experiences from a park 6-10 hours flight away.
  6. I'm not particularly concerned about the recency of the photos for an update, but it does raise the question of why Village waited to post these photos if they had them in late March. The rides are still a long way from being finished, with no official opening date, so this isn't to build hype and promote the ride to families booking holidays (although it may have that effect, but the social accounts are also filled with negative reviews, so who knows). This and the recent video are reactions to the ongoing closures. Village let the bad reviews and negative sentiment set in, not just with enthusiasts but with the general public. One can only assume that visitor numbers are down and people aren't renewing passes, so they've started some crisis PR to try to save the park's reputation because they've finally realised that reputational damage = real financial damage. So the complaint about recency for the sake of recency definitely is 'fucking dog shit' as you put it, but in the context of all the problems the park is facing and the lack of communication, why did they sit on these photos for so long? If they're part of the solution now, then they were part of the solution 1-2 months ago when NSW was still in school holidays and all of the roller costers, WWF and JL were closed for several days. Yes, people can say 'they've posted it now, so they're doing better', but the real measure will be whether they can keep rides open for guests, whether the communication continues, and most importantly if there is a change in staff attitudes toward guests which has been pretty terrible for 12 months. I'm hoping that this is meaningful, sustained change, but the same management and social media team was telling people 'F*** off, no refunds, you should have checked the website', just 3 weeks ago. I guess the point is that it's not just about communication anymore. They've done real damage to the trust that guests have in the park to provide them with a great experience. A PR campaign and some social media posts just aren't going to fix the underlying problems with the management of the park. That's what they need to fix to rebuild the trust.
  7. The only viable area with enough land close to the city would be Hamilton, and you could build it as a destination alongside the athletes village for the Olympics. It could tie-in with Eat Street. It would only ever be small because it is landlocked, and directly under the flight path. But honestly, Brisbane is saturated for shopping centres. That area is an easy drive to DFO, Chermside and Carindale across the gateway, and there just isn't much of an appetite for 'small' parks in Brisbane when the major theme parks are so close. The Gold Coast can barely even get smaller attractions like mini-golf and a slingshot to survive with it's booming population. Australia just doesn't have the population to sustain a Universal or Disney park. Our current parks are dead on most weekdays outside of school holidays. The US has much larger international tourist numbers, and a local population of over 300 Million. China has 1.5 Billion, Japan has 125 Million with another 50M in Korea a short flight away, Singapore is central to Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Phillippines, with a combined population of over 400 Million, Europe has over 400 Million. A tiny country with barely 26 Million people is just not going to sustain a Disney/Universal park. They're bigger and better themed, but with much higher operating and maintenance costs - which would be made worse by Australia's high minimum wage/super costs and highly volatile currency exchange rates. They'd be bankrupt within a few years. Plus, Australians love traveling overseas and have proven that they will go to Singapore/Japan/US/China to visit a Disney/Universal park. Disney also don't own their international parks outright. They're co-owned with local governments, usually with Disney holding a minority stake (which is why Disney can't tear down Splash Mountain in Tokyo like they did in America). If the Australian Govt decided to pay the construction costs, Disney would look at an Australian park, but there is exactly 0% chance of that happening. Even the joint-venture Universal Studios Dubai couldn't get off the ground and they have more money than God. The best you could hope for is a Disney-themed cruise terminal if they choose to significantly expand their cruise operations here.
  8. Are they slowly trying to change the name to Uncle Rush, one letter at a time?
  9. The lockers might end up staying and just be paid lockers for general use.
  10. This comment seems to have slipped under the radar, but it answers the question about staff operating seat belts. So thanks @mba2012 for getting it right. If the seat belt is fastened and the strap tightened, it interferes with the push/pull procedure, where the 'pull' is just testing the tension of the seat belt, not the primary restraint. If there is a hydraulic/ratchet restraint failure in such a scenario it wouldn't be detected, and the seat belt would be the only restraint with no redundancy. The safety standards and codes that govern Amusement rides aren't just for parks. They're also for traveling rides that experience wear/tear/damage in setup/pack down and transport. It's one set of rules for every operator and every ride. So while it's highly unlikely a ride like Rivals or ST would need a seat belt, people can and have been ejected from traveling rides, and severely injured or killed. Even a ride as mild as TRRR was able to fail in a deadly way, GL also failed in a way that could have been deadly - different rides, different parks, different reasons for failure. Every safety standard is written is someone else's blood. Unlikely things happen. Operations are never slower because of safety, they are the correct speed to safely operate the ride. At Village parks, operations are slower because of corporate culture, under-staffing and, in some cases, poor station design. Removing the current locker system at SE won't speed up operations. It will just move all of the pocket checks to the front of the queue. SE pulls strong forces where riders are seated with their knees above their hips, which means anything in your pockets will fall out - potentially onto people in the paths below. So while you could have a better loose article system at the station, guests cannot be trusted to actually empty their pockets or understand the potential consequences of not doing so. For that reason, the park is not likely to change the current station or procedures.
  11. I honestly think that this should be reported to the ACCC. Advertising a major ride against a 3-day pass price during a period when that ride is scheduled to be closed is misleading and deceptive. I would say the same for all the digital billboards with that photo. The reasonable expectation is that purchasing a 3-day pass would allow you to ride Rivals. The ACL doesn't require anyone to have actually been misled, just that it is likely to mislead or deceive.
  12. It doesn't fit the theme of the ride at all. It was supposed to look like an airport terminal, and instead it looks like it belongs in an industrial park. I've detailed extensively why at the time of its construction AND given some of the history of aviation in Queensland which could have been used to build a story around the ride and the building, in this post: And I provided examples of what could have been done here - based on actual airports from around the world: The facade of the building is just aluminium cladding hanging on a steel frame. It would be incredibly easy to replace it with moulded fibreglass (Scooby/JL/Jungle Rush) or traditional cladding like the other buildings. The shade structure over the exterior queue would need to be torn down and replaced with something more traditional, which is easily achievable. The glass towers around the stairs would ideally be removed. There is plenty of space inside the building's original footprint to redesign the stairs so the glass protrusions are not needed, alternatively, they could get the same facade treatment as the rest of the building. Is this costly? Yes. But fixing the terrible decisions of the previous management have been and will continue to be extremely costly. But the long term viability and profitability of the park are going to depend on it. Aesthetics matter. Especially at a 'theme' park. It is why ToT was removed and the tower redesigned. It could have stayed as it was, but the new management saw value in the aesthetic improvement. Imagine if Disney put the SV building on Main St. or if Universal put it in Wizarding World. People wouldn't say 'but it matches the theme of the ride', they would call it what it is - a lumpy, bulbous hemorrhoid of a building that doesn't belong in any theme park, anywhere.
  13. It doesn't make a difference. Honestly, the demand for up-charge seating is so low even on busy days that they may as well scrap a booking system entirely and just have a wireless Eftpos terminal at the head of the queue line. If it's going to be in an app, then they should use it a little smarter - offer off-peak, mid-week discounted rides ($10-15) to annual pass holders to entice them into the park, even let them buy multiple rides for a lower price. If the ride is running with empty seats, better to get some money than no money. That would be the only reason to need a booking system - to get people into the park on quiet days and get guaranteed revenue out of them. F&B discounts (if you offer decent F&B) would also do the same thing.
  14. Operating costs aren't that important if you're attracting enough guests, which you won't do if you keep rides closed.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.