Levram__

Its my understanding the essential infrastructure for the fire ball still remains.

Risk was not the main driver here. In a pandemic recovery period, every significant financial decision was being scrutinised. Unfortunately timing and cost played a key factor in the effects demise. That's also not to say it wouldn't or couldn't return in the future if its creatively considered essential to the new show. In that instance the reinstatement would become a capital cost to the project verse, general R&M.

There would have been equivalent indirect expenses in FY24 and lose of revenue associated with this payout however. Its not a silver bullet... There would also be risk associated with the claim regarding impacts on the premium. Which they also appear to have done a pretty reasonable job at reducing their premiums in the corporate spend space.

I did say "these days" being present tense. Important to note, particularly in QLD significant changes have occurred since 2015 with regards to the legislation and the introduction of the code of practice. There is a greater responsibility on all parties involved in the process, the engineer, the operator and the regulator. Love your optimism though...

Regardless of who the OEM is for a device, Intamin or a cheap Chinese device, these days the risk of such a serious design flaw in a device entering or being installed in Australia is mitigated by a very stringent design registration process. Which requires one of very few, Australian registered and qualified engineers to verify the design of a amusement device in order for the regulator to issue design registration, among many other things. That includes assessing the loads on critical components etc. Most states follow the same guidelines with some minor variation here or there. For example I believe Victoria allows devices pre 1995 to operate without design registration, but that's being proposed to change.

Workplace health and safety one year during their annual audit campaign went on a bit of a rampage around appropriate work areas illumination to manage the risk of fatigue.

This is correct and it should be seriously considered when you talk about growth, for either of the two properties on the site. A challenge Australian parks are always going to have to navigate is keeping their opex at bay and avoiding that from ballooning with the addition of new attractions. Take MW as the prime example right now, sure you can say that WOZ replaced what was Arkham. However the opex for Arkham has not existed for many fiscal years so a new "expectation" would have been set. Now all of a sudden you have essentially 3 brand new coasters that significantly grows the direct expenses of the attractions department and similarly for the direct and indirect expenses to the technical services department. Not surprisingly the boomerang racer stopped racing pretty quickly.... DW on the other hand you could say that a good portion of their opex for Rivertown has been balanced out over the past two to three fiscal years because you have the vintage cars as a relocation and then Jungle Rush is an absorption of labour from Wiggles World. Then you have the maintenance costs, any of these new Vekoma coasters is likely attracting 200K - 300K in annual R&M, rebuilds, labour associated with those works and annual engineering assessments etc. I think its very unlikely you are going to see either business rush to growth their attraction lineup in the short term or long term, without, significant growth in their markets/demand, which is not currently the trend that's being seen. Another rant for another day, but its a very likely reason why DW have struggled with getting the idea of a Lazy River off the ground for White Water World. The ongoing operating costs and direct expenses for an attraction like that is huge.

The new lighting is just another feather in the cap for me when it comes to the in tune decision making DW leadership are making for the park. Not something they needed to do, but they have. It might be a small thing, something that's likely to go unnoticed, but you take a dozen small things and its start to become ongoing meaningful improvement.

Does anyone know how long its been since the family boomerang racer stopped being a racer?

Body slides.

I don't complete disagree with this view, there certainly is going to be some benchmarking going on. However it doesn't change my statement. With or without Rivertown, WOZ would still be the same offering today based on the decisions made. Which in my view stems from the lack of operational planning, strategic planning, creative planning and most importantly collaboration. When an executive wanders the trade floor of an industry expo and commits to the purchase of a new attraction without first getting together all of the half a dozen key stakeholders from differing disciplines to collaborate on the project in a first instance then this is what you end up with, a fair comparison and a bar that will likely continue to be raised, within scale. No one may have said anything about themed garbage bins in The New Atlantis, I certainly didn't in my comment above. However what is fact is The New Atlantis was a far stretch from what was conceptually presented as an immersive experience/environment. Not to mention WOZ follows the same trend as The New Atlantis. Some things have been done right, however there is a lack of consistency and cohesion. The same can't be said about Rivertown.

I wouldn't be shocked if we saw this happen in the near future though... the amount of money being spent on staff wages for these attractions would be rather high... There are staff everywhere to both operate and to navigate the design/layout of these attractions.

I think this might have been said previously but kudo's to the Dreamworld leadership team on the execution of Rivertown. Rivertown excels as an experience because as Gavin said, you had the genuine interest of the DW leadership team to add in things like easter eggs, depth to the story, repeat discovery etc. All the things that make up an expectational international themed experience. We can't lose sight that the key players in the Australian market are executing projects on our shores in the millions, not the billions. So when you really look at what's been achieved with Rivertown, all three of the keys parts of this land have been underpinned by operational planning, strategic planning, creative planning and most importantly collaboration. This isn't just one persons view or opinion of the finalised product, I have no doubt this is board collaboration within the team at DW. The unfortunate part is I couldn't confidently say the same about the project down the road. Both Pico products. Budgets may have varied. Internal timelines from conception to completion similar. Both benefiting from the expertise of the same OEM. However one of the biggest influences between the two when it comes to what we have now is no doubt what I've said above. If Dreamworld can continue this recipe in varying scale, then I look forward to their continued success and growth!

I don't understand how they are having these ongoing staffing issues? This has been a problem for sometime now yet it doesn't seem to be an issue at say Sea World or Dreamworld?

I heard that literally right up until the lead up to Christmas that there was multiple final containers of theming arriving for install and placement.

I think you'll find its just been sheer luck verses a great idea...

I have to agree after watching that video they have done a remarkable job with this project. The detail, the difference in elevation on the vintage cars path of travel to give you the sense of realism, scale and wow factor. Not to mention, sound and lighting that will also only positively contribute to the immersion. I'm just as excited to ride Murrissippi Motors as I'm Jungle Rush. When I look at the footage/photos we have seen of both Rivertown and WOZ, I feel like Dreamworld have defiantly executed the themed land to a high level, covering the entire area in great detail. Where as the ride areas for the two WOZ coasters seems pretty sparce and undercooked? Maybe the stations and queue areas will make up for that but i feel like Rivertown is genuinely a much more well rounded execution.

Agree, this is a more accurate depiction of an insurers influence. You will often find that the "suggestion" or sometimes influence can come from the risk assessors for the particular underwriter. I've dealt with these particular roles within my role in the industry on a number of occasions.

They have nothing to do with it.

Gosh they haven't aged well!

This is correct accessibility played a part however the arcade was in the mix well before First Aid was even considered being moved. The arcade was originally an Intencity project that was being scoped post pandemic. However its my understanding Intencity dropped it, the site sat dormant longer than originally anticipated and the project was pick up by VRTP as a capex project. The scope then grew to encompass the relocation of First Aid with improved facilities/services, an indoor ambulance bay and new BOH space/offices for other shared services for the parks.

I think the other thing to consider here is that DW aren't trying to be something their not and also why should they. Its often talked about in their shareholder calls that the park scores rather favourably with their NPS and GRI scores, particularly when it comes to their seasonal event offering. This gives them a pretty healthy understanding of what their primary consumer (guest) wants. Personally I also don't think spending $250K plus with someone like an Oracle Liquid (not including the other labour/entertainment costs for the show) is going to improve their overall ROI for the event if a laser light show is primarily what your using as a basis for the difference in offering.

I believe you'll find a lot of their marketing is purely via social mediums and BVOD. Which likely works for them as a seasonal operator. Season passes would contribute to a significant amount of their ticketing revenue/visitation so the need to do broader interstate or intrastate advertising is likely not worth the cost.

The other factor at play here is that each of the businesses that form part of the Major Amusement Park Safety Case are required to outline their own commissioning standard in the safety case outline. Its likely not to state the specific number of cycles in the outline but I know first hand that supporting documents for one particular property does outline a minimum number of cycles as part of the commissioning process. 500 cycles for example may sound like a lot but that figure can be tracked from the initial commencement of commissioning while the OEM still holds ownership of the ride, the figure is also not an unlikely benchmark.

I don't believe you'll find the property shutting down anytime soon. There would also be some complications (not impossible to navigate however) about the lease use of the land to which the site sits on. You can't forget that Palace purchased the park for a bargain. Even better so than their original offer the year prior. Following the acquisition and change over period they drastically right sized their shared service side of the business and slimed down their P&L making it a profitable 'regional water park' in the eyes of its owners. With that being said its likely to continue that way, a regional/seasonal style water park that continues to plot along with occasional commercial capex that has guaranteed ROI. But id be shocked if we saw any sort of significant new investment anytime soon unfortunately.