DaptoFunlandGuy

I don't disagree with you, however the metrics I was working on was in terms of 'choice'. It's clear just looking at the carparks where people are choosing to spend their time (and money). The tide is definitely turning though, for the reasons you mention. Can confirm - Current review scores on trip advisor and google (note the scale is compressed, total review score out of 5) Trip Advisor Google Average WWW 4 4.4 4.2 Dreamworld 4 4.3 4.15 Sea World 4 4.2 4.1 WnW 3.5 4.2 3.85 Movie World 3.5 4.1 3.8 Paradise Country 3.5 3.9 3.7

the tide will turn, unless they change their course.

A quiet monday morning in the gold coast bureau, or somebody is mates with Clark or another senior person. Their socials have been a bit 'phoned in' over the weekend, so I reckon their team probably all went to sydney.

Can confirm its been vertical for about a week.

temporary closure typically implies it wasn't a planned maintenance period. Something impacting that many kids attractions isn't a good thing though.

Police Academy was fun but a bit cringe towards the end. You had people playing characters from a show they clearly hadn't seen. Like having Lethal Weapon on the sound effects stage, updates for relevance are important. I got to be in the PASS show when I was younger, so it was special to me, but by the end, I tended to play "spot the Rodney" and I was done.

It's ok - if you love the gokarts, I heard they're headed west, so you'll still be able to ride them if you travel back in time 2 hours and 20 years by visiting Perth.

Just a point to note here - they don't own the land at Oxenford. (And last I heard they were trying to sell the studios.) I've been saying it for a few years now - Village have been coasting on their reputation. For at least two years, they've been slammed by crowds and bad press with lots of things not working, long queues, and almost no care for the guest experience. Dreamworld isn't there yet, but they're showing signs of overtaking Village, and they're doing all the right things to get there, while Village is in a race to the bottom. Unfortunately, while people continue to buy passes and fork out for village centric holidays visiting all 4 properties plus AOS and TopGolf - while the money pours in, they won't change what they're doing because it's still profitable. If you're truly fed up with the experience at Village - don't renew your pass. don't plan your family gold coast holiday around the VR properties. Go to Dreamworld. Currumbin. The beach. Heck - go to Singapore or Hong Kong if you're interstate as it will likely cost you similar amounts for a far superior holiday. STOP GIVING THE BASTARDS MONEY IF YOU WANT THEM TO CHANGE. MONEY IS ALL THEY UNDERSTAND.

Yeah what is with that? Like she visited the park once? but isn't even touring Queensland? So what relevance does Village have with it? #bandwagon

Between the number of people pointing out it isn't the first ride in a ride, and then all the people pointing out it was just a relocation from WnW, and then the people ridiculing how often it was closed for maintenance their continued promotion of this attraction is just making them an absolute laughing stock. What the hell are they doing in their marketing \ socials team anyway?

The original HWSD wasn't that bad. there was enough "non burnout" stunts that the show was well rounded, and the finale made sense. but those lancer evos cost a lot to maintain, especially when the arena was so small there was no margin for error. Plenty of kisses to the wall, plus the flip\rollovers from the two-wheel stunts gone wrong, and it all stacks up. it was a high-cost show to run, which is why the neutered HWSD2 came along, starring showtime. The rest as they say, is history. Mad Max at least would have had oversight from WB. I know they've been pretty tight on how things look for things like Oz, so an IP attachment at least would have presented a roadblock on the road to the castration we got.

Yep, can confirm MW considered Mad Max as the theme at one point. no idea why they didn't go with it - it certainly would have been an improvement in literally every way over the lacklustre HSD we eventually got.

I think you're pretty close to being right. Missing from the artist's render is the giant blue roller coaster columns looming in front of the entrance too. It looks like they're trailing the yellow brick road out beyond your red line too. I wonder how far they plan to go with that? The cornfield in this drawing is essentially lining the final brake run - are they going to shield superman brake run? otherwise W - T - F.

they're normally pretty quick to act when something is posted that shouldn't be. Judging by the amount of places i've seen this stuff posted so far, and for how long it's been up, either they've asked the guy to post it, or they can't prevent him from doing so.

It's just another Yeti.

I see no reason to think they wouldn't theme it, TBH - but absent park confirmation we just have to wait and see. It's what you're facing as you enter the land, AND they saw fit to theme the superman sidewall according to the concepts, so I think it's probably likely we'll see something over scooby.

Remember it's only concept art. What they designed: What we got: Take a look at the original leviathan art and what we got too. As for Scooby, while I would assume they intend to wrap scooby somehow, remember - it's still a "movie studio \ movie set" themed park, which is why white sheds are "themed" if you give them a stage number, so Oz could leave Scooby as is and just call it a set.

Oh man reading this shows how much they learned when they took it to Hong Kong. I visited HKDL at Christmas (and I might eventually get around to writing something up) but the queue was far more immersive, moved quickly, and the attraction wasn't horribly discoloured due to blacklight - the Sven scene you included above was lit in natural colours and looked really good.

good.

It's intrinsically linked. You can't separate one from the other, and your veiled references to "organisations that share these values" is, IMO trying to dance around the topic without actually saying the words. It isn't a religious debate but it's denigrating a group of people for the actions of a few while making specific references to the organisation that they all had in common. There is no need to refer to the organisation - the individuals concerned behaved poorly and should be held accountable. You can't say "so be it" in one breath and then immediately go on to say anyone who gives the guy an opportunity to prove his reformation should be immolated for their mere association. No, you're not backpedalling away from this one. Trying to insert "with those individuals" was not your intent - you wanted the entire organisation punished for the actions of the few. You very clearly said: And don't forget this gem Now let's address this next backpedal: Your comment was certainly not made well before their statement as the initiating post of this entire thread made it clear that the park management had one complaint from a staff member. That is the only confirmation we have. I have allowed, in my replies, for the possibility that there were others who as yet had not come forward based on the following (which was also included in the initial post: And finally Your original reply suggested that they should get a payout. a monetary penalty. Hefty means large and heavy. Not "at least" and not "adequate", though i'll make allowances for the fact you seem to struggle with words and meanings. It is against the rules to alter someone's quote, but if I might paraphrase - it might have been preferable to state the workers affected should be compensated for their emotional injuries and distress. Which as you've now been educated, is a requirement by the employer under Australian law. So they will get that, because it is a workplace right - and is therefore nothing you need to advocate for in an internet forum. Like - did you even read the article - the points where it said: Like - pretty much all the things you're screaming for (now) - were already in the original article.

Yeah IMO they're trying to match the aesthetic of the other shelter to Superman, which I believe had to be what it is as it has to provide an additional layer of protection being under the high speed hydraulic cable launch. As long as they stick a 2d comic ride bridge for the flash over the front of it, nobody will notice. Even better if they take the opportunity to dress up both walkways with some comic art for Flash and Superman.

From memory, I believe the original company that they brought in to do the mapping disappeared \ flaked with the cash and they were left holding the empty bag and had to do something to fill the gap on the cheap. Do we have any confirmation that those walls are screens and not static?

it definitely isn't. the original was a very old school fibreglass structure, not the metal pipe splashpad style.

Thanks for the mansplanation. The use of the words "we can finally see" and "hopefully we don't have to wait" kind of implied it was for us as a group - the 'we' that you also refer: Also, incase you missed it, it was also said in jest. I can't make the emoji bigger for you, so here's a large print version for the vision impaired.

I've already quite pointedly stated (but I will expand to be clear) that Jamberoo is liable as the employer to provide a safe workplace, and would be on the hook for any mental or physical illness suffered, be that temporary or permanent. Workers Compensation is designed to ensure the worker is not worse off - that they suffer no loss of income or capacity as a result of the injury - but it is not a payday and a way to cash in on an unfortunate situation to make bank. Your "At least" has been covered, as required by law. Just quoting this to be clear that your words implied a hefty settlement, which is why I made clear this is not an excuse to 'make bank'. The women involved were subjected to poor verbal behaviour, that I would wager wouldn't be too dissimilar to that experienced by bar staff on a busy friday night. There is nothing to excuse that behaviour, especially in a family fun park, but let's not overinflate the quantum of what occurred beyond reasonable proportions. So you're suggesting that because a group of people with something in common attended an event, and because by all accounts approximately half of a percent of the attendees exhibited some minor but nevertheless unacceptable poor behaviour on a single day, the entire group should not even be given the chance to attempt to run the event again, despite several years of successful operation, thereby ruining the opportunity for the 99.5% of people who did the right thing to enjoy this obviously very successful event in the future? By that logic, I don't think thoosies will ever be allowed in any park worldwide ever again... /s I don't believe anyone was making excuses for the behaviour. Just contextualising it and trying to call out exaggerated and over the top reactions. Ooooh boy, don't go there. Drawing a circle around "have promoted in the past" is going to open up a giant can of worms. Catholics weren't always preaching peace. Many religions across the world started wars on the basis of religion or because their 'god' told them it was a good idea. But society has changed, and many religions have changed with it - no doubt though, they all still have their extremists and fundamentalists - every group does. You've taken umbrage to the article mentioning the words of Sheikh Feiz Muhammad, spoken almost 20 years ago. You are essentially tarring the entire organisation with this brush on the basis of what the article quoted. But did you look beyond the article and discover that he was not a member of the organisation referred to in the article at the time of those statements or at the time of the other controversial stories about the man? Although the article mentions the Sheikh also spoke to the group in January this year, no mention of his words from more recently than 2005 could be quoted? Why is that? His Wiki Entry - Feiz Mohammad - Wikipedia - shows that he generated a lot of negative media leading up to around 2007 and fled the country for a number of years. In March 2011, the most senior Islamic leader in Australia denounced him and insisted he be banned from preaching to young muslims. In April 2013, The Australian Attorney General spoke of Feiz Muhammad, stating he had "condemned the use of violence" and "changed his attitude" and that he was "supporting a community program to prevent the radicalisation of Australian Youth". The guy was investigated by the AFP, among others. The fact that he has involvement in the islamic community (and you can bet both the islamic community and authorities are watching closely) means some confidence can be placed in his reformation. I doubt his speaking in January would be comparable to his words of two decades prior - we've all matured a lot since then... well... most of us.