Massive Dreamworld Expansion

[kennykoala]

im not saying dreamworld is like disneyland,im saying other ppl are saying dreamworld is trying to be like disneyland. they are nothing like..disneyland has no high thrill rides like wipeout or the claw. Disneyland rides are awsome, but they are not high thrill teen rides. then ur point with the rocket coaster, i cannot see dreamworld gettin one, ive said this b4, it is to similar to tot, so what a waste of there original 16mil to build a rocket coaster which would be way faster in acceleration and if not higher as well. The tot would then be a waste of space for dreaamworld, offering similar launch at a slower speed.

[Slick]

Gee mate, there's no need to take the post so seriously. And yes, the Intamin Rocket coaster thing was a joke, obviously. Anyone who is reading this, TAKE A JOKE GUYS! It's like talking to a bunch of prententious brick walls.

[Obstructure]

Unfortunately I read yet another thread and all I hear is complaining, its worse then a bunch of pensioners getting their hair done. I thought people would be pleased that Dreamworld is really going places in such a short amount of time. To in fact develop these things and double the park's size in 5 years is enormous. 1. To say look out Disneyland: Is that such a bad thing? They didn't exactly say they think they are going to outdo Disney, it comes across more that they are aspiring to reach a level like Disney. Something which has them recognised around the world, rather than just being a favourite theme park in Australia. It sounds more like they've used a few ideas such as introducing accomodation, expanding the park size etc. Someone said they thought it would take away from adding attractions further down the track: Look at how many rides there are currently, and look at the small space they are crammed into. Sure, putting in additional roller coasters would take up huge amounts of room, but what is to say they couldn't fit more in? 2. Turnover of guests/capacity issues. Don't forget TOT, GD, Rapids etc are quite old rides now. Back when they were built and introduced, Dreamworld DIDN'T have the large numbers of guests going through the gates. The park could handle things better back then, however now it is becoming more and more popular, and the rides can't handle the demand. I don't think saying putting a band-aid on a broken arm is a very fair statement. In fact, I think it is quite ignorant. The rides are how they are now, nothing can be changed about them, however making life a bit more bareable for those lining up for an hour is one of the better, realistic solutions available. I think the only other option they have, is to set up additional rooms for the larger rides, and have some kind of stories with entertainment staff using scripts, similar to what Batman 2 does at Movie World (even though I think it is really lame, it does make you feel like you are waiting less). 3. The article says on top of adding in accomodation, that there will be RIDES and ATTRACTIONS, which indicates shows. That would definitely help ease the capacity issues which so many of you rave on about. I don't think any theme park on the Gold Coast has the capabilities to cope with 10 000 people. 4. I'd like to see Dreamworld aim to incorporate ONE (yes just 1) excellent show, which is advertised and is highly rated, which is shown in a decent sized arena of some sort. Also I'd like them to add ONE high capacity water ride - one for all the family, which turns over large amounts of guests with minimal stoppages. Something like Wild West at Movie World but better - one which just keeps going, doesn't require belts or loose articles to be taken out. Finally, ONE world class roller coaster, which has 2, possibly 3 trains, a good queue design, air conditioned Stop complaining about every single little detail.

[joz]

Actions speak louder then words. If they expand, adding good rides, good attractions, and fixing up what they should, then you won't hear any (well, knowing what some people are like; as much) complaining. I don't think its so much about what Dreamworld said as it is what the newspaper said. Comparing Dreamworld to Disneyland is probably not the best idea, and of course it will generate some talk. The other quite obvious point is that the guy isn't talking about expanding the park, but rather is talking about all the town centre stuff. He can't be talking about only the park, as 38ha + 45ha = 83ha. Dreamworld only own 85ha, so that's all the excess land they've been talking about for so long. Obviously the new town centre is going to be more then 2ha. Really, this article doesn't give any new information, other then to talk up what they are doing. Now, I'm happy to see Dreamworld putting new screens in the queues, and putting shade at Tiger Island (excellent idea BTW), but this article implies something which is false.

[T-bone]

Well Said Joz. I'm clapping my hands as i speak!

[Richard]

As far as I can remember the land for the town centre is only partly owned by Macquarie Leisure. There are other parties involved.

i cannot see dreamworld gettin one, ive said this b4, it is to similar to tot, so what a waste of there original 16mil to build a rocket coaster which would be way faster in acceleration and if not higher as well. The tot would then be a waste of space for dreaamworld, offering similar launch at a slower speed

A waste? What about the millions upon millions of guests this ride has brought in over the years? Wouldn't that also mean also we can't get a looper either, because no doubt it'd be bigger and better than Cyclone. No chance of any water rides bigger than the Log Ride either. Seriously, Tower of Terror is a ride that's getting on eight years old. It's done its job as an investment. I don't doubt that it still has a long life to go at Dreamworld, but there's no way you could argue that they can't outdo it (be that in terms of speed, height or reliability) with excuses of redundancy.

[kennykoala]

thats true richard, TOT was a great investment for dreamworld, and has brought in many guests to the park. The part about they cant get another looper or water ride because it would be bigger and better, is differnt to the TOT. The cyclone was not a world class record holder costing 16million, it was just something cheap for them to throw into the park. So they could definatley outdo them selfs with cyclone because it wasnt something awsome and major to start with. All i was saying is a ride like dragster is to simlar to TOT, so i cant see dreamworld getting one, would you not agree with that statement? but i do think it is to do with the fact that it would outdo tot with a simlar ride. I was reading ACN and they were talking about the next coaster to beat kingda ka, they were saying maybe a new verkoma thrill lift, so maybe if dreamworld wants to beat TOT and bring something to the park that is big and tall and another record holder maybe that could be the go. I would love them to get a rocket coaster, i just dont think they would.thats all. And if the movieworld rumour is true that i heard, it dosent matter if dreamworld dosent get one anyhow. Apart from the fact if movieworld were to get a rocket coaster, especially something of dragster height..im afraid that dreamworld couldt fight back with a coaster to beat dragster, not for speed height and just the general buzz it would crerate. So in away i dont want movieworld to get one..lol because dreamworld has been my special place to go for nearly 10years straight!

[T-bone]

Even if Movieworld did get something new and exciting, i still wouldn't visit it. Dreamworld's my place.

[MARK28]

I think it was cool hearing them say that Dreamworld wanted to make itself world class; although I hope they keep it a theme park rather than make it a little township! Exciting though.

[nobbys nuts]

As a resident from across the road from DW there has been lots of noise about the town centre and the university and a couple of public meetings. The town centre will be immediately beside the highway on the left of Foxwell road and part of the new shopping centre carpark will be on DW land. The University is to go in next to the Railway Station on the opposite side of the road to DW between the shopping Centre and the train station. I ran into the same ride attendant I spoke to in the park about the TB area when he was in the servo today and he said that he wasn't joking and that they were supposedly wanting to move all the admin buildings down onto that area so they could spice up the area around the cyclone but he said that there was some hassle over another access gate off the road by the school with the Gold Coast City Council as they are claiming some of DWs land for a new improved road down to the Marine precinct. I remember reading that in the local paper too.

[scott]

Even if Movieworld did get something new and exciting, i still wouldn't visit it. Dreamworld's my place.

I don't know how you can go to the coast and not even go to Movieworld.DW is also my fave park,but Movieworld actually has theming and high capacity,which is something DW is pretty poor with.

[Rocky]

I've attached the article.

From this picture I see that if they cut down some forrests around and buy this land, they could expand the park, but not sure.

[willsy]

I don't know how you can go to the coast and not even go to Movieworld.DW is also my fave park,but Movieworld actually has theming and high capacity,which is something DW is pretty poor with.

Scott most people that go to the Theme Parks dont know what the capacity is like, And its easy not togo to The parks, Just because there on the GC doesnt mean anything, people go there for the beaches and night life to.

[joz]

Here we go for a few fun facts: The Gold Coast Tourism bureau through its own surveys, threw up the following: 70% of visitors visited a theme or wildlife park during their visit. That would suggest that indeed, most people do go to the theme parks. Breaking that down further, 62% of those guests went to Movieworld and Seaworld, and 42% visited Dreamworld. So statistically, if someone is on holiday on the Gold Coast, you would bet that they are A. going to a theme park, and B. the park is probably Movieworld. Now, I suspect this an old survey (1998/9 from what I can tell) and the sample size isn't given, but the point remains the same, most people do visit the parks when they are on holidays.

[Rocky]

There's enough space for x.

[scott]

!?!?!? Australia in a SMALL country !?!?!? I't true that it's small continent but Australia is Giant and rich country with lots of tourists. There's enough room and money to build amusement park even bigger than SFMM.

Yes,Australia is a giant country,with plenty of tourists,but it will only be able to support a Disney park in ten years or so IMO.When Australia has a popullation of about 25 million then I will listen to rumours about a Disney Park,because only then will it be feasible; Disneyland Florida=Has a country of 375 million people to support it. Disney Calafornia Adventure=Has millions of tourists who visit Calafornia. Euro Disney=Is the Disneyland of the whole of Europe. Disneyland China=Has a country of 1.3 billion to support it. Tokyo Disneyland=Has plenty of wealthy Jappaneese people with plenty of tourists. All of these Disney parks have a large amount of people around to support them.Just assume the park was in Sydney,which has no competition,and a large amount of tourists,it would still only have around 5 million there,and that really isn't enough.What I really don't understand though is why.Why is a Disney park so much more expensive.Mind you they employ about 10 thousand people in every park so it isn't all that surprising.Also,when I said Dreamworld will never be as good as a Disney park I was refering to theming and quality of attractions.In terms of atmosphere I think they could reach tha level,in terms of thrills they're already better,in terms of capacity they'll have to work hard to get it up to that level,and in terms of theming it won't be happening,although it could get alot better. Dreanworld is a great park,and if I had the choice between DW and Disneyland then I would choose DW.(Mainly because I lean more to thrils,and there are still a few rides at DW I haven't been on).In some areas DW is better,in some Disneyleand is better.It just depends what you prefer.

[MARK28]

I'm with scott, we loved the giant drop so much we went on it twice! The Disney worlds look like they mostly have indoor boat rides with dancing manikins singing at you! Not to many intense thrills there!

[Nebuchanezzar]

Yeah but I imagine there would be plenty more things to do than just that. Nice picture by the way Rocky.

[scott]

I'm with scott, we loved the giant drop so much we went on it twice! The Disney worlds look like they mostly have indoor boat rides with dancing manikins singing at you! Not to many intense thrills there!

Disneyland is not about a few dancing manikins.Disneyland is an excellent park,and those dancing manikins are part of unparralled theming and a great atmosphere.I didn't mean to say Disneyland isn't thrilling,(and even if it isn't then Disney Studios along with that is enough thrills for the day)I mean it isn't as thrilling as Dreamworld.Disney parks just aren't really about rides.They are there,and they are thrilling(some),but they aren't the main focus.

[Rocky]

I think than DW needs at least 2 more rollercoasters (stand up, suspended looping, 4D, launched, flying, boomerang,...) and few REAL thrill rides (like The claw).

[scott]

I would hate to see a 4d coaster at Dreamworld.They're such an eysesore.They already have a launched coaster,and an Inverted coaster would be too similar to Reptar.What Dreamworld could really do well with would be a floorless,standup,or flying IMO.

[kennykoala]

i think X at magic mountain looks awsome when u come up the main drive, it stretches along the front of the park and looks great on the way in. Its colours are great to yellow and magenta.

[rappa]

X, an eyesore?? I think X is one of the most visually impressive coasters I have ever seen. That's just the track and then when you put that massive winged train on it gliding around it just looks brilliant. I would love to see one at Dreamworld but I doubt they will take the plunge. IMO What DW should be getting is a massive B&M standup, ala Riddlers. I won't go into too much detail as I have said it before but this would be the most unique and marketable to the GP than anything else.

[Slick]

PKI has the exact same model of reptar and they also have an inverted boomerang coaster. Just because they have a kiddies inverted, doesn't mean they can't build a "real" inverted, provided it's a B&M.' I think a fourth dimensional coaster would go nicely where Big Brother shouldn't be. Just as long as the S&S design is alot better than the slow, rough arrow version X was. Ben "thinks it should have a hydraulic launch, mmm...." Roach.

[Gazza]

Why is it people complain about DW having too frequent breakdowns and low capacity, then they want DW to get a 4D, your'e all contradicting yoursleves. Personally, i would like to see an B&M inverted coaster, who cares if reptar has the same track position, Eureka and Cyclone have the same track position and nobody complains then. The reason i like the inverted coaster is because its a good workhorse, and many parks have an invert, which means more reliability, they just seem to be a good all around ride that is popular no matter where it is.