DaptoFunlandGuy

Fuck me - even the Ekka requires all rides to run for at least 2 minutes.

Glad this thread is still open, although i'm sure it'll get locked shortly. I'm a little confused about which thread to post in as this covers backwards riding, soft open etc, and there are so many threads about Rivals now i'm just not sure. Hopefully a mod can move it if necessary. So I managed to get down there yesterday, around 10:30ish, and it was closed while media and suits were riding \ filming \ testing. Waited about an hour for it to finally open up around 11:30. Managed to score the first backwards wristband of the day so I took my first ride on Rivals backwards. Over the next hour and a bit, I managed to get 8 cycles on it. Single rider queue had 2-3 people max at all times, and wait time once you reached the end of the SRQ queue was about 1 cycle. Backwards row was pretty much a walk on, while general queue had all switchbacks open and was out to the path split \ queue time display for much of the hour-and-a-bit i was there. Managed to get all different spots on the train. Charles and Moss(?) managed to get me into Row 10 once, and I finished off the 8 with a second backwards trip. Queue presentation is great (although I didn't pay much attention to it running back to the front), but I will say where the path splits, there's a small section of garden that juts out (on the right side as you enter) near the test seat. I'm sorry to say the plants in this little section have absolutely no hope of survival, and they probably should have just concreted that bit too. The staff spieling prior to open were great, however once open, staff enthusiasm levels dropped. I didn't have my phone with me, but my concept of time between cycles (running two trains) seemed atrocious, with the second train stacking in the brake run for probably 4 minutes or more each time. There seems to be no urgency to the job, and no enthusiasm for the opening crew of the best attraction in the country. Might be a bit corny, but i'd love to see the crew get into it with the clapping \ energy you see overseas on coasters that have been open for years. With the amount of space they have on the station, i'd also like to see them group a second load at the 'back' of the station, similar to how they do it with Arkham at the moment. Paint a few spots on the ground for them to stand on and you can have two loads grouped at the same time. The loose item boxes weren't rotating, and I could easily have walked out with half a dozen mobile phones without anyone noticing - as I understand it they'll start working properly soon (although I did notice that a lot of people were stuffing much larger items into the small item boxes (like a full handbag) which hung out over the side, and would have either prevented rotation or crushed the bag - something will need to be done about this as if the ops have to check those ones too, its going to slow cycle time even more)). The back wall was nice. I read earlier someone whinging about the white roof, and yes it would have been nice if they'd done more with it, but I honestly don't think it needs it. As for the ride? just WOW. I don't get the love for Row 10 that others do, but it was still a great ride no matter where you were. Backwards for me would have to be the best, so i'm probably going to go broke. Definitely worth the money. Favourite element? tough call, as each delivers in a different way. The helix and the bottom of the Stengel had some massive forces to it - and probably the closest i've ever gotten to a grey out (face went a bit droopy). The lateral whip on the NIL, the ejector on the final hills - when people spoke earlier this week about the stengel being a chance to catch your breath, they weren't wrong. The ride is definitely something special. Probably the most thrilling attraction we've ever seen in Aus. It doesn't need VR (maybe in 15 years to revive it), and anyone who thinks Arkham is better should probably just shut up. And this isn't just about squashing an opinion different to my own, there is literally no way on earth anyone could argue that point - any whining that they're being bullied... is probably because they should be. I've booked my 'early access' and will be heading down for the missus to have her first rivals experience soon. I can't really critique anything else just yet, its just a bit sad that the operations side was lacking.

if its what i'm thinking of, it was an upcharge attraction - buy a bucket of water balloons, and use a slingshot to fire them at the opposing side. good clean fun for everyone on a hot day and a great way to make buckets of money.

Perfectly written, and unfortunately likely to be completely ignored by most clickbait readers.

The leaseback options secure the land for the next 90 years. If the company continues with it's successes, at some future time they'll buy it back. The investor earns $6m a year on a $100m investment (with 3% annual increases). the top superannuation funds in Australia are earning 11-12% (but these are typically higher risk investments), whereas a 'capital stable' investment strategy is typically returning 5-6% - so the VRTP offer is right in the sweetspot for that type of investment. Even if the parks go bust, the land value alone would allow the investor to recover much if not all of its money. This also doesn't mean VRTP won't have the option to 'buyback' in the sale\lease agreements as well - Most likely the agreements will permit it either if the investor chooses to sell (first option) or when VRTP has the capital to do so. Bottom line is there is no bad news here. The parks are guaranteed to be around for 90 years (on the basis that they continue to successfully operate that long), the investor makes money, 6-7 million in rent a year is not a huge chunk out of their income (especially when they'll have reduced current debt levels to minimise interest repayments), and in addition the sale of the golden village chain will also inject cash and reduce debt. Sounds like a pretty good strategy.

They were still promoting it on their facebook page this morning - Sylvia was apparently swimming with sharks.

Considering the 4th of october is a wednesday, I think that was a given...

^It's always possible. the front row looks like a go-pro to me, and we know they've had on-ride POV footage recorded because we've seen it already (haven't we?) So i think chances are there is one or more go pro attached. Fast Video could still be a possibility though - and perhaps these are the fast video cameras, and thats where the POV came from? I don't know.

Just quoting this for future reference - for when the next coaster is announced and all the cry-babies whinge about 'why are they putting in another coaster'

I think the fact that prior to Memberships, the VIP passes included entry to the night events, and people just assume that continues to apply.

I was drawing the parallels. When I read the article, it seemed to match the Abbott government's succession to the Gillard/Rudd era of "we will do this" followed after the win by "the budget is worse than we thought, age of entitlement is over". Naturally in a corporate world things are different, but I still think the "sell the land, build the rides" headline was just a way of getting the support they needed to gain a seat at the table. The immediate "now that we're here, our plan might change" statement would piss me off as a shareholder if that was the reason I'd Supported them in the first place.

I think that's the case. youd be required to provide your pass number for validation.

Mickey has summed it up quite nicely, but if there is still doubt - check out the results from google

...if only the Bruce Highway southbound wasn't something to be treated as the plague, it'd be viable. For now its less than appealing.

Just like any good politician - spout whatever you think people want to hear to get in, and then immediately cast doubt on that plan going forward, and tell everyone you've got more work to do to work out the best way, before announcing something completely different (or sticking to the status quo)

Chinatown Alley makes a comeback!

I'm pretty sure the carriage is standard, and they've just turned the seats around. This is why it only has one row because of the head clearance needed in the valleys. If they'd custom designed the rear carriage for rear facing, I reckon they would have extended it to have two rows, so no seats were lost capacity wise. I reckon they could turn the seats around quite easily - its a matter of whether they have another row of seats to put on...

But you just did it again. Their margin might be lower, but that doesn't mean they have less to spend on rides. A corner store, with a 50% profit after expenses still has less money after expenses than a fast food store with a 20% profit after expenses.

Not everyone can afford a UTT w/ fastpass.

Sure Tim - I wholeheartedly agree with you on that point. This was the focus of my reply, however, and I simply cannot agree with it.

While TG as an attraction really doesn't fit with the enthusiast nature, i think there's a reasonable amount of crossover. Growing up in Penrith, a trip to Panthers was a rite of passage. It was also a destination for many Wonderland cast after a long day \ week (and many cast parties \ after parties \ christmas parties were had there). Inevitably, at some stage through the night, a trip to AquaGolf would be in order. AG was outside the licensed area though, but people still belted the shit out of a few buckets before they sobered up enough to head back to the bar. (Or in some cases, used that time to sober up before driving home). In this regard, I can see TG appealing in the same way. That said, outside the 'small group of blokes' i think it has some appeal - many theme parks \ amusement parks have mini golf, or similar. I don't think its as niche \ outside the box as you think.

Oh come on Tim, seriously. Look - I really want to be objective here, and I acknowledge everyone is entitled to have an opinion, but you are the biggest defender of AW, whether it is deserved or not - sometimes you gotta let it go and acknowledge that AW isn't the perfect park you sometimes make it out to be. Now I certainly agree with you that the GC parks should be charging more, but to argue that 'this is why AW keeps building rides' - i call bullshit. Its simply the current investment strategy. Firstly a few facts: Adventure World's capacity is 5,500 guests (Source). AW (2017 season) is open for 181 days (AW Website) Dreamworld's Annual attendance in 2016FY was 2,413,937 (ASX release)* DW is open for 364 days Even if AW hit park capacity on every operating day (and we all know how unrealistic that is), they'd see a maximum of 995,500 guests through the gate. If we work out Dreamworld's figures on an even spread, they still get 6631.69 people through the gate every day. Now, working on Dreamworld's average $99 annual passes (which vary throughout the year), and Adventure world's 'earlybird' adult pass at $150 (which we also know varies throughout the season), and taking Goliath's $7.5 million dollar pricetag - what percentage of their annual attendance is spent on the new ride? AW: 5.02% based off the theoretical maximum park capacity ($7.5M / $150 / 995,500 * 100) DW: 3.13% based off the actual 2016 attendance figures. ($7.5M / $99 / 2,413,937 * 100 So even at the current pass pricing, Dreamworld could more easily afford the same ride AW just built. (This of course doesn't allow for the fact that Ardent won't build shit right now) Remember - the AW figure is a highly unrealistic attendance base, and is the lowest possible percentage, although highly improbable. Sure there's a lot of other things to consider - like operating costs, and so on, but just based on raw pass pricing and attraction cost, You're looking at something like Goliath being TWICE the hit to the bottom line at AW as it would be at DW. I do understand there's a lot more economics at play here - i'm not trying to suggest that it IS this simple, just giving a simplistic example to put things into perspective. I've used DW because I could find their attendance figures. I couldn't find VRTP's figures and it seems like they don't publish attendance in their annual reports anymore. *figure includes Skypoint

CGAF, like i said...

To be honest, I think they should be charging more than that.

No.