Marriotts must have like our park better. We received many more attractions than they did. To learn more about the history of these two parks go here: http://www.greatamericaparks.com.
well when the parks were first built... they were supposed to be identical. Given the market (of Chicago) I think SFGAm lucked out and was more popular
The Gurnee park was rich in land. It also had a much higher height limit. American Eagle was put in because of land, the Santa Clara park didn't have it, so no AE. Also, Chicago didn't have competitors such as SFMM that PGA had, so more new attractions were added because the park was busier. Also, I believe a third identical park was planned in Washington, D.C.
Yes, there was suppose to be a park in Wahington, but that never happened. They did have a third Sky Whirl built for that park, but it was never used, so there is another Sky Whirl out there just waiting to be bought, unless they scrapped it by now.
Universal Orlando Mechanical Engineer Marathon down, Goofy to go.
How can you say they wasted their money on the water park?! From what I've seen, the water park has given them tons of new business that was much needed.
The water park is also a very enjoyable addition. It is definitely not a waste of money. And before it was a parking lot... not a waste of space. We really needed a water park in the Chicagoland area.
Last edited by clrntsqueak on August 6th, 2005, 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Drkstarboard wrote:SFGAm could have more land (and more coasters could have been built) if they didn't waste their money on Hurricane Harbor.
Wow. That's all I have to say.
From the stories I've read, and from the posts I've seen others make on this topic in the past, the Santa Clara park was not hitting the attendance expectations at the time. From what I've been told, thats why California got Tidal Wave a year earlier than we did... in hopes to boost attendance to Marriotts expectations.
In the years following, our park recieved tons of rides that Cali never saw... such as American Eagle, Big Top(Ricochet) Hay Baler, Southern Cross, and Davies Dinghies. Not to mention that PGA never had a Cajun Cliffhanger, or a Traffique Jam either. I think Whitewater Rampage(Roaring Rapids) was planned and installed by Marriott, but I am not sure on that at all.
They have tons of business because it's brand new. SFGAm got tons of business back in 2003 when Superman was brand new (or when any of the coasters were brand new).
It's green. It's blue. It's all over you! Enjoy your ride on Déjà Vu
Drkstarboard wrote:SFGAm could have more land (and more coasters could have been built) if they didn't waste their money on Hurricane Harbor.
wow that was ignorant. The park builds additions that they think will make them money, not what they think you will like the most. Sfgam had their greatest June attendance EVER this year, and this season as a whole has been going great. They are adding the Tornado next year, and assuming they market that well HH will keep guests flowing through the gates for quite some time. I have yet to spend any considerable time in HH as I am more focused on coasters, but I can tell you one thing the decision to build it was VERY far from a waste of money.
1. Voyage
2. X
3. Millenium Force
4. Top Thrill Dragster
5. Raging Bull
I also forgot to mention... it causes people to spend an extra day in the park! Before guests could easily get away with riding all the attractions in one day. Now with the water park, it causes people to buy MVP's so they can come the next day to visit HH.
The water park also reduces the crowd (very noticeable in the beginning of the season) in the theme park.
For example, last Friday I went to Six Flags.. It was PACKED. For one, it was pretty chilly out. On Raging Bull I noticed the water park was pretty empty. That explained the heavy crowds in the theme park. If it wasn't so chilly out the water park would have most likely reached capacity and the crowds in the theme park would have been much lower. This IMPROVES customer satisfaction.
Drkstarboard wrote:SFGAm could have more land (and more coasters could have been built) if they didn't waste their money on Hurricane Harbor.
wow that was ignorant. The park builds additions that they think will make them money, not what they think you will like the most. Sfgam had their greatest June attendance EVER this year, and this season as a whole has been going great. They are adding the Tornado next year, and assuming they market that well HH will keep guests flowing through the gates for quite some time. I have yet to spend any considerable time in HH as I am more focused on coasters, but I can tell you one thing the decision to build it was VERY far from a waste of money.
Hurricane Harbor was a waste of money.[/u][/i][/b]
It's green. It's blue. It's all over you! Enjoy your ride on Déjà Vu
"The park builds additions that they think will make them money, not what they think you will like the most. Sfgam had their greatest June attendance EVER this year, and this season as a whole has been going great. They are adding the Tornado next year, and assuming they market that well HH will keep guests flowing through the gates for quite some time. I have yet to spend any considerable time in HH as I am more focused on coasters, but I can tell you one thing the decision to build it was VERY far from a waste of money."
Just because I hate Hurricane Harbor and I think it sucks (along with many other people), You guys act likes it's some sort of crime. Honestly, you all have to lighten up (You know who you are). Nothing's gunna change my opinion of Hurricane Harbor, so deal with it.
It's green. It's blue. It's all over you! Enjoy your ride on Déjà Vu
I dont like hurricane harbor much either, but it does make alot of money for sixflags. It wasnt awaste of money from a finacial point of view but from a opinionated point of view it could be.
I'm running to Bull on opening day, anyone gets in my way and they'll get trampled.
HH brought more money into the park, and it will continue to do that as long as they don't let it get run down.
On the other hand, SFGAM is an amusement park. I think they should only have coasters and thrill rides, and sticking in a bunch of waterslides and a pool is not appealing to people who love coasters. I have only been to HH twice. Once for the tour and once to see how the slides were, so I had some knowledge of what I am talking about. Hopefully the park will not invest too much into HH, because all I really see it as is a way to save the park from going under.
sixflagsguy5 wrote:I think they should only have coasters and thrill rides, and sticking in a bunch of waterslides and a pool is not appealing to people who love coasters.
Um... Six Flags doesn't give a crap about coaster enthusiasts. They care more about appealing FAMILIES. A water park is a great family destination. Families bring in loads more money.