Wet N Wild Future

[mickey_079]

Yeah I had the correct body position, and so did that little girl. It's not my middle back that hurts, its my shoulder blades. Im not saying I didnt enjoy the ride, because I did, and I did it many times. I just had welts on shoulder blades at the end of the day.

[Swanny]

I guess that's the sacrifice you have to pay for good ride. Kinda like having to have your ears knocked off on LW .

Edited October 16, 2006 by Swanny

[mickey_079]

I guess that's the sacrifice you have to pay for good ride. Kinda like having to have your ears knocked off on LW .

Lol yeah I guess so. I wasn't saying I didn't enjoy it, because I did, I love when you get launched into the air, its so cool

[stardust]

At wet N wild the lines were too long and this was in term time! You wait in the line for so long we went on only 3 or 4 rides the whole day! We got bored after a while and left.

[qldtaw]

Dreamworld's Car park is larger then before they built WWW, they have created a vast number of new spaces to the left hand side, whilst barely taking any away from the construction of WWW. There was just overgrown grass in these areas previously. Dreamworld may not yet own the land to the right hand side of WWW, but i wouldn't be surprised if this is where we see them expand. The road currently in the way could easily be redirected around the other side of the service station and besides if you where the owner of the land you would be insane not to sell it to DW. The comment that WWW was not built to take over the market, just to crack it, is quite naive. When your in the heat of battle playing against someone in sport do you go... i wont try my hardest to win; its just good enough playing - hell no - i play to win and everyone knows that Dreamworld of all the parks in Australia are in it to win it, their heart is purely business. Why do you think they let there themeing get so run down.

[Gold Coaster]

Exactly. I loved Stephen Gregg's comment about looking forward to sharing the market. Very diplomatic. Better press than saying 'We will crush the hell outta Wet'n'Wild. You're going down, Menzies!'

[aidan]

Just saw an add for wet'n'wild and they say they are three times bigger than any other waterpark around and saying their 19 slides are awesome, they are really fighting back.

[T-bone]

They can say what they want to regarding their size, and about everyone who see's/ hears the commercial will agree with it. But when they start saying their slides are awsome and the best in Australia, well you know how everyone is basically entitled to their own opinion. Working in the commercial media industry myself, it is a rule which our creative writers employ that the words they script for the commercial must try and switch the listeners opinion and change from their norm to a new option. It's very hard to switch everyone's opinions with wording such as "Were Awsome, Everyone else sucks". Because as I said before, people will basically hear that commercial and go "Yeah Right, they ain't getting my business". A better wording a commercial like that would be "Give us a Try, we are just as good as the others". And to me, thats a much better approach to getting new people into their park, as it lets their visitors make up their own mind, and at the end of the day, you'll either have a new customer, or a very pissed off customer. Do you guys get what I am saying here? If not, i'll re-phrase it for you, I just felt that this was the best way of wording my thoughts.

[GoGoBoy]

I personally think it's a bit pathetic the way Wet 'n' Wild have so desperately tried to hold onto every single one of their customers. As T-bone said, they should have allowed some room for the punters to decide for themselves instead of shoving it down their throats. However, I think WhiteWater World has missed the mark with some of their own commericals. Here they have a chance to show people exactly WHY they should go there instead of WnW. Their ads should have focused much more closely on the actual individual attractions at the park, which is whithout a doubt the parks strong point. Instead they waste time with the stupid dog story and other crap

[Gazza]

personally think it's a bit pathetic the way Wet 'n' Wild have so desperately tried to hold onto every single one of their customers.

I Disagree, WnW is still a minority advertiser on TV. Really, when any new buisness opens the competition is going to fight tooth and nail to keep their customers. For example when a Bunnings opened here, would you expect all the other hardware stores to go "Oh no, Bunnings is bigger and has more product lines, they are the newest too, well we're beaten"? I doubt it, instead the existing stores, renovated, advertised, had special offers etc in order to keep their market share. Why is a waterpark any different? IMO there is nothing pathetic about that. When you think about it, if the money WWW will make is a viable business option for Maquarie, then that same money represents an appreciable loss for WVTP. Also, it would cost WVTP much more to attract new customers than to keep current ones, hence the current marketing efforts.

[Richard]

The key to advertising of this nature revolves around opportunity cost. These ads are not trying to sway new customers as you suggested T-Bone. The "Give us a Try, we are just as good as the others" approach would work for a new restaurant or even WWW because it's new. Wet'n'Wild is an established brand. When you're in that position, you're not trying to sell yourself and encourage new consumers. Advertising isn't about direct sales (I'd argue that the "give us a try" method is not going to lead anywhere terribly noteworthy for a business), it is about building up and maintaining brand awareness. In this context, advertising is about reinforcement to keep the knowledge of the product on the mind. It'll actually end up working very well for WnW. If they reinforce that they are the "biggest and best" (n.b. "best" is a term that could easily be proven with some market research in a local shopping centre), it's at the front of the consumer's mind. The interesting thing is when a WWW ad comes on TV, it'll often trigger a WnW response because the viewer is trained to think of WnW as the key water park and without first-hand experience of WWW it's difficult to justify the expense compared with the familiar and consistent WnW. WWW's advertising definitely isn't doing enough to highlight their few advantages. If you look at WnW's ads, you'll see they are actually on the offence, not defence. They emphasise their major strengths - that they are bigger, and they are better (in the consumer's mind - and again this could easily be proven with market research). They're taking the new park on proactively; meanwhile WWW has developed an advertising strategy that evidently didn't take this possible competitive response into account, so their ads really pale in comparison.

[Ian]

Exactly. I loved Stephen Gregg's comment about looking forward to sharing the market. Very diplomatic. Better press than saying 'We will crush the hell outta Wet'n'Wild. You're going down, Menzies!'

Wet N WIld will always be the Better Park to the General public (1) Size of Park as of late WNW has been hitting 10,000 each weekend WWW can only hold 4000 people you do the math. (2) The name Wet N Wild is worldwide like Disneyland is for Disney and a name alone can make a big difference when groups or family are deciding. (3) The 3 park Superpass not every tourist can afford to go to every park so they buy the 3 park superpass which gives you a day at MW, SW and WNW plus a extra bonus day at any park of there choice. Now in my opinon my next waterpark visit will be WWW but im a theme park freak the general public are not.

[www worker]

maybe they should remove one of the mammoths and put a dark mammoth in now i know they just removed a mammoth plunge but just put it in seaworld to here the page if u wanna check it out http://www.proslide.com/sub.php?mainRideID=3&rideID=9 and yes WnW in my opion will always be beter then www

Edited September 23, 2007 by www worker

[zane]

I agree Wet 'n' Wild will always be bettter I know i would go to WnW over WWW anyday Zane.

[GoGoBoy]

Um how can you say WnW will always be better? How can you know what exists in the future? You have no idea what plans WWW has for future expansion. It's a pretty silly comment really

[aidan]

Its a silly comment you saying how a few expansions of WWW could make it better than wet'n'wild, we have seen from their expansion this year that they arent thinking out of the box for ideas.

Edited September 24, 2007 by aidan

[MickeyD]

WnW has been around for decades and has had plenty of time to blossum into what is today recognised in the top 5 water parks in the world. It's a stand alone park. WWW was built to compliment DW and largely as a way to boost Macquarie's $$ per guest. No matter how much Capital is injected into WWW's future, WnW will always be one step ahead because it is already so established. I think it is important for both owners to recognise this so the two Park's can flaunt their differences and continue to maximise their own success.