Regular minor versus occasional major attractions

[AlexB 3,694]

If Eureka were to go, the footprint of the ride would make for a nice stationhouse for something that reaches more broadly around the goldrush area. An over-the-water coaster comes to mind. It would be a real loss to the area for Eureka to become anything other than a coaster though.

[Skeeta 2,355]

If Eureka were to go, the footprint of the ride would make for a nice stationhouse for something that reaches more broadly around the goldrush area. An over-the-water coaster comes to mind. It would be a real loss to the area for Eureka to become anything other than a coaster though.

I have always thought it was a missed opportunity not to utilise that area. I think it would have been great to have an indoor section then for it to come out over the water storage area.

[Richard 879]

We'd be talking a $20+ million custom designed coaster to do that area justice. And in my view it could be done just as effectively with or without Eureka Mountain remaining in place -- removing the chairlift platform and/or the abandoned Big Brother cafe would free up the whole area much more viable land than Eureka Mountain.

The biggest problem I see with a coaster over the reservoir is that the water level fluctuates when Thunder River Rapids isn't operating, so the ride couldn't get very close to the water (defeating the purpose of it being a coaster built over the water), and you'd end up with a lake dotted with concrete columns standing high out of the water.

If Eureka Mountain ends up not reopening then yes, knock it down swiftly and move on. But to me if it's viable to keep it then it's not really in the way of anything and certainly doesn't change the potential to do other more exciting things in the area.

[Skeeta 2,355]

What's wrong with DW spending 20 + Million ride. DW needs to spend 20 + Million on a ride.

This is what pisses me off about DW. All previous owners would spend money to get these rides here.

How much would Thunderbolt coast to build today? I would say the Thunderbolt would be a 20 + Million ride if you built today.

How can MW who have shareholders just like DW build Superman but DW can’t spend more than 10 million on a ride?

Why could Dreamworld afford 16 Million 17 years ago for TOT but can’t find 20 Million today?

Ardent Leisure do not care about its customers at all it’s 100% about the shareholder and making money.

I know businesses are here to make money but how can SW spend 20 Million while still making money?

Edited February 17, 2015 by skeetafly

[Jakev8 150]

What's wrong with DW spending 20 + Million ride. DW needs to spend 20 + Million on a ride.

This is what pisses me off about DW. All previous owners would spend money to get these rides here.

How much would Thunderbolt coast to build today? I would say the Thunderbolt would be a 20 + Million ride if you built today.

How can MW who have shareholders just like DW build Superman but DW cant spend more than 10 million on a ride?

Why could Dreamworld afford 16 Million 17 years ago for TOT but cant find 20 Million today?

Ardent Leisure do not care about its customers at all its 100% about the shareholder and making money.

I know businesses are here to make money but how can SW spend 20 Million while still making money?

I hear ya mate its f***en bullshit how dream world spend there money these days, there just a bunch of tight ass's!!! Lol

imagine if old jonny boy still owned and operated the park there would be 10+ roller coasters there today and we would still have our bloody steam trains going around the park too

Edited February 17, 2015 by Jakev8

[JeffreyMoore 45]

thing is if dreamworld were to build a 20 million doller atraction im sure alot of people here whould still be unhappy with what ever thay buy be it a coaster or not ?

for 20 million i whould love to see dreamworld build a family dark ride something the park has never had other then the big red car but i dont think thats a true family atraction

but im sure that could recommission the eureka mountain mine ride for far less then 20 million for now and work on a new big atraction in the future

[Brad2912 2,551]

Because in most cases, multiple smaller capital investments will have the same if not more impact on revenue than one large project.

You may be happy with a one off $20m ride and then nothing new for 3-4 years, but the average consumer (and annual pass holder) wants something every year. Back when ToT was built the market and visitor profile was very different to what it is today

[Richard 879]

What's wrong with DW spending 20 + Million ride. DW needs to spend 20 + Million on a ride.

This is what pisses me off about DW. All previous owners would spend money to get these rides here.

I absolutely agree with everything you're saying. The only thing wrong with them spending that much is that it just isn't likely to happen. That's why I dismissed that option; if Eureka Mountain were to be replaced it would be off-the-shelf and there would be no discussion of how creatively they can use the space.

Because in most cases, multiple smaller capital investments will have the same if not more impact on revenue than one large project.

You may be happy with a one off $20m ride and then nothing new for 3-4 years, but the average consumer (and annual pass holder) wants something every year. Back when ToT was built the market and visitor profile was very different to what it is today

This doesn't explain why Dreamworld stopped installing major attractions long before the advent of competitively priced annual passes, or why their direct competition in the same market with the same pricing strategy are still able to install major attractions on a regular basis. While also running regular night events that would certainly have total production costs that at least equal – if not exceed – the investment in mid-sized rides like Tail Spin.

[BigKev 41]

Wildly off topic and apologies if it is old ground but if the number of visitors per park annually known?

I'd love to see the comparison between DW's and MW's.

[Brad2912 2,551]

Movie world have installed one major attraction in the 9 years since SE opened (GL). They've opened 3 minor attraction (JL, mini cars & BWSS)and re-themed LW/AA. So that's 1 major & let's say 4 minor attractions.

I'd hardly call that regular basis for major rides.

In the same time period, DW has opened buzzsaw, Shockwave, MDMC, tailspin, Pandamonium, Refreshed TOT & wipeout, and opened the Dreamworks area.

Whilst none of DW's rides may be considered major, you'd say that's probably 8 minor attractions in as many years.

The enthusiast may say quality over quantity, the general public see quantity as the winner. (And I'm not too sure the DW doesn't win out on quality either on overall scale)

Wildly off topic and apologies if it is old ground but if the number of visitors per park annually known?

I'd love to see the comparison between DW's and MW's.

Don't quote me on it but the last figures I recall seeing a while back had them fairly level pegging with DW marginally ahead at around the 1.3-1.4 million per year

Edited February 17, 2015 by Brad2912

[dbo121 20]

Capital is not infinite and needs to be allocated efficiently to maximise shareholder value. If the expected returns do not stack up (cost of project having negative internal rate of return) or lower potential positive irr to other projects in pipeline than it will not get done. Ardent could lever up. That is acceptable to a theoretical point but by doing too much ardent may be more likely to go bust. At this point in time corporates are more likely to take on less new projects and spend less capex. Confidence generally is low. Over time dreamworld has entered recievership a few times so a park running is better than a closed park with a 20m rollercoaster for sale!

Edited February 17, 2015 by dbo121

[Slick 1,999]

Movie world have installed one major attraction in the 9 years since SE opened (GL). They've opened 3 minor attraction (JL, mini cars & BWSS)and re-themed LW/AA. So that's 1 major & let's say 4 minor attractions.

I'd hardly call that regular basis for major rides.

In the same time period, DW has opened buzzsaw, Shockwave, MDMC, tailspin, Pandamonium, Refreshed TOT & wipeout, and opened the Dreamworks area.

Whilst none of DW's rides may be considered major, you'd say that's probably 8 minor attractions in as many years.

The enthusiast may say quality over quantity, the general public see quantity as the winner. (And I'm not too sure the DW doesn't win out on quality either on overall scale)

Don't quote me on it but the last figures I recall seeing a while back had them fairly level pegging with DW marginally ahead at around the 1.3-1.4 million per year

Not to nitpick per-say but your perspective on additions is awfully subjective and leaves out some massive new experiences that Movie World has like Fright Nights, White Christmas and Carnivale, which, in their own right, are incredible seasonal additions to the park.

To spin a similar bias, one might say from a thrillseeker perspective that both parks really have been quite equal in major NEW additions in recent times, with both parks adding both a coaster and a flat-ride to their line-ups (TailSpin and Buzzsaw & Green Lantern and Batwing.) That's just a thrillseeker's perspective though, and totally disregarding all the additional experiences that parks add that actually make a day great (and don't forget, everyone here always complains when the parks don't have actors out interacting with guests).

[Skeeta 2,355]

Dreamworld went into recievership once. The reason it went into recievership had nothing to do with new installations. The person who put DW into recievership could not pay the interest on the loan that he took out to buy DW. From my memory which could be a bit loose on the amount but he purchased DW close to 150 million dollars. He only put in 10 million of his own money so he had a loan for around 140. There was an investigation after he went belly up as to why anyone would loan him that much. I believe around that time interest rates where at 18%.

[Slick 1,999]

That and there was recession during that time. Longhurst got out at the absolute perfect time.

[Skeeta 2,355]

And don't forget while in recievership the company overseeing it spent 40 Million on Dreamworld investing money in new attractions.

[AlexB 3,694]

I definitely wouldn't be happy if they demolished Eureka Mountain, unless they replaced it with a new dark ride. To me personally dark rides give the opportunity to do vastly superior theming and to create immersive environments where you can escape into a fantasy world (which is what theme parks are all about).

Bermuda Triangle at Sea World was in my opinion the best ride on the Gold Coast, and it was replaced by Storm which is essentially just a roller coaster where you get wet!

I totally agree with you - however I don't see Dreamworld doing anything close to the quality of dark ride that would please you. Their attempt would likely have you bemoaning their inability to carry a cohesive theme (something they've been very guilty of doing in the past).

Movie world have installed one major attraction in the 9 years since SE opened (GL). They've opened 3 minor attraction (JL, mini cars & BWSS)and re-themed LW/AA. So that's 1 major & let's say 4 minor attractions.

I'd hardly call that regular basis for major rides.

In the same time period, DW has opened buzzsaw, Shockwave, MDMC, tailspin, Pandamonium, Refreshed TOT & wipeout, and opened the Dreamworks area.

Whilst none of DW's rides may be considered major, you'd say that's probably 8 minor attractions in as many years.

The enthusiast may say quality over quantity, the general public see quantity as the winner. (And I'm not too sure the DW doesn't win out on quality either on overall scale)

I would class JL as a major attraction. Sure a coaster it isn't - but it doesn't have to be a coaster to be a major attraction. For that matter - neither does JDS - That is a major attraction whether or not you think it is. You also left out Stunt Driver - in itself a major attraction - and i'm with those who commented already - Fright Nights, White Christmas and Carnivale absolutely count towards investment into the park on an ongoing basis.

And I wouldn't say a re-theme of Dreamworks, an overhaul of Wipeout and a reversal of ToT would class as 'additions'. The only addition in all of that are Pandamonium (which you counted separately) and a small kiddie flat (dronkey). Everything else was just rethemed and recycled... as was Arkham.

So let's do a recount:

MW -

3 Major Attractions: GL, JL, JDS

1 Minor Attraction: Batwing

1 Major ongoing show: Stunt Driver

1 Major Refurbished Attraction: Arkham

2 Minor Refurbished Attraction: WWF, Scooby (Minor Refreshes to existing attractions don't really count though)

0 SBNO attractions

3 Seasonal out of hours themed events: FN, WC and Carnivale

Total (green) count: 9

DW -

2 Major Attractions (if you can call them that): Buzzsaw, MDMC

3 Minor Attractions: Shockwave, Pandamonium, Tailspin

1 Minor ongoing show: Madagascar Live

2 Major Refurbished Attractions: TOTII and Wipeout

4 Minor Refurbished Attractions: Dreamworks area attractions (Minor Refreshes to existing attractions don't really count though)

3 SBNO Attractions (Skylink, Eureka, Sturt)

1 Seasonal out of hours unthemed event: Screamworld.

Total (green) count: 9

SO really - the count is the same - but in the "Major" attraction category - MW is winning.

[pushbutton 835]

thing is if dreamworld were to build a 20 million doller atraction im sure alot of people here whould still be unhappy with what ever thay buy be it a coaster or not ?

for 20 million i whould love to see dreamworld build a family dark ride something the park has never had other then the big red car but i dont think thats a true family atraction

but im sure that could recommission the eureka mountain mine ride for far less then 20 million for now and work on a new big atraction in the future

I couldn't agree more!

I wish they'd play more on the name of the park. It should be about DREAMS! In other words, awesome adventures that take you into dream-like experiences.

There's ample inspiration available from other theme parks around the world for the sorts of things they could have.

Capital is not infinite and needs to be allocated efficiently to maximise shareholder value. If the expected returns do not stack up (cost of project having negative internal rate of return) or lower potential positive irr to other projects in pipeline than it will not get done. Ardent could lever up. That is acceptable to a theoretical point but by doing too much ardent may be more likely to go bust. At this point in time corporates are more likely to take on less new projects and spend less capex. Confidence generally is low. Over time dreamworld has entered recievership a few times so a park running is better than a closed park with a 20m rollercoaster for sale!

That's beyond dispute. However I do think most people would be happy to pay more for entry, and especially for annual passes if there were more awesome experiences to enjoy once you're in.

Whilst I'm on that topic, I was looking today as the list of prices on Dreamworlds website. They're not alone in this respect as Village do the same, but there is no consistency between the prices. You can pay more to go in for the day than you do for a whole YEAR of unlimited entry to Dreamworld, Whitewater World, and Skypoint!

Why not make the prices a bit more fair. Just a little, and charge say $300 for annual passes.

That would still represent incredible value, and give them significant extra capital to invest in new rides.

[BigKev 41]

I think it all comes down to perspective.

To the Theme Park enthusiast MW is the 'purer' park.

To the average punter DW offers far better value for money.

I think the parks know that and cater for it, MW goes the extra mile to theme and create the total experience, DW bang on and on about how many rides they have.

What we need as punters is for the two parks to close the gap on each other by responding to the strengths of the other.

DW has started to do that by lifting its game on park presentation and by putting pressure on MW by adding attractions.

MW has Seaworld to keep dragging punters in via the multi-park tickets but will no doubt start to respond to the constant knocks that it lacks attractions by adding some mid-range options, as always beautifully presented which will in turn pressure DW right back.

I think the parks are both excellent in their own way but hope they stay at each other because ultimately the punters will benefit.

[Jakev8 150]

If dreamworld had a few more coasters and stuff I would quite happy pay $300+ for a yearly pass anytime.

How much is it to vist a park like six flags magic mountain for a year/season with all the rides that they have on offer?

Edited February 17, 2015 by Jakev8

[pushbutton 835]

BigKev. It's for all the reasons you mentioned above that I believe I am about to move to the best place on earth (well, if you like theme parks, that is)!

The Gold Coasts parks are admittedly not the best parks in the world, but I know of nowhere else where those who live nearby can spend just a couple of hundred dollars and get so much unlimited fun all year. That is awesome!

[Brad2912 2,551]

Agree Alex & Slick I did leave the 'night' events out, Which granted are massive positives with no real competitive offering from DW. In out of hours events, it's a no brainier.

I guess the point I'm getting across is to a general member of the public, not an active theme park enthusiast, DW APPEARS to be adding more attractions than MW, even though as you pointed out well Alex, it really isn't the case when looked at realistically. Now given that the public hold that opinion, why would DW not continue with what is working for it, and adding 1-2 minor attractions each year that generate a heap of press & attention from locals. DW is already viewed as the only FULL day park on the coast, and when they are already talking about 2 new attractions to open this year and not a peep from MW, they will continue to strengthen that thought in the publics eyes.

[dbo121 20]

Yes increasing visitor numbers and ticket prices would be in their project analysis. On receivership my point is still valid. Borrowing too much with little capital in bad times caused issues. If they did that to fund new rides the same could result. The next owner after receivership came in with a purpose. Inject capital, drive efficiency and sell to make a quick profit hoping someone would buy the park recovery story after some initial cashflow injection. Was never planning to be a long term owner.

Edited February 17, 2015 by dbo121

[Richard 879]

I guess the point I'm getting across is to a general member of the public, not an active theme park enthusiast, DW APPEARS to be adding more attractions than MW, even though as you pointed out well Alex, it really isn't the case when looked at realistically. Now given that the public hold that opinion, why would DW not continue with what is working for it, and adding 1-2 minor attractions each year that generate a heap of press & attention from locals.

I think it's absolutely true that Dreamworld is often seen as the fuller or more complete theme park offering. But my point was more that Movie World aren't adding minor attractions every year but are spending the equivalent on their night events. You can be sure that the combined budgets for Halloween, Christmas and Carnivale would be in the millions and rival a ride like Tail Spin. These events are quite deliberately a selling point for annual pass renewals; in the same way that Dreamworld are using investment in smaller additions to drive annual pass sales, Village Roadshow are using the popularity of night events.

The question then is, why does Village Roadshow then find room in the balance sheet for a major $10-20 million attraction at Movie World every 2-4 years on top of annual (event) attraction expenses in the millions, but Dreamworld doesn't? This on top of the fact that Village Roadshow are also investing in major attractions at Sea World every few years as well to drive pass sales.

[Skeeta 2,355]

Because in most cases, multiple smaller capital investments will have the same if not more impact on revenue than one large project.

You may be happy with a one off $20m ride and then nothing new for 3-4 years, but the average consumer (and annual pass holder) wants something every year. Back when ToT was built the market and visitor profile was very different to what it is today

I don't agree with you here sure tailspin gives you a quick buck where something like the TOT gives you sustained return and a quick buck. I have never had any of my mates say to me lets go to Dreamworld to ride the Tailspin again.

Rides like the Rapids are the the type of rides that keep people coming back. I ride the Rapids as a kid and would shut my eyes in the dark sections. I rode the Rapids as a teenager and would do teenage things on it like splash each other and now I now ride the Rapids with my kids and it brings joy to me still. Yes when I go to DW I try the new rides but I always have to ride my favourites. Where DW has not added any rides to my favourites list MW has. If that makes any sense. Lol god I'm going to bed.

Edited February 17, 2015 by skeetafly

[westical 468]

So let's do a recount:

MW -

3 Major Attractions: GL, JL, JDS

1 Minor Attraction: Batwing

1 Major ongoing show: Stunt Driver

1 Major Refurbished Attraction: Arkham

2 Minor Refurbished Attraction: WWF, Scooby (Minor Refreshes to existing attractions don't really count though)

0 SBNO attractions

3 Seasonal out of hours themed events: FN, WC and Carnivale

Total (green) count: 9

You can't ignore LTRR closing though.

Edited February 18, 2015 by westical