DaptoFunlandGuy

Yeah I think there's been a bit of creative book keeping to shift the park CEO onto the parent company payroll... nevertheless, the answer to this question is impossible to provide - as it depends on what the buyer wants to do, and if they want to keep him, it also depends on if Greg is agreeable to it. Consider these two possible outcomes (not exhaustive) 1 - An investment company that has always been interested in taking on the ownership and operation of a theme park buys into the game. They keep a lot of the existing management in place (at least for now) because they recognise that there's a lot for them to learn. 2 - An established theme park company decides to purchase - they have their 'own way' of doing things, and so an experienced manager from within their chain is appointed to oversee the operation. I think, when Village were bought out by BGH Capital, there was a condition that Clark Kirby remain on, though i don't know from which side of the transaction that condition came from.

^pffft. You can clearly see the roof, so therefore it sucks. - Some guy.

Jesus, never show @New display name an incomplete job. If it opens like that, complain away but they're testing. Some of these may have individual connections. they might not be plugged in correctly - or they might be DOA. Let's wait and see how it opens before we start shitting on it?

^that's also a real possibility - head in the same place but the body arch over the launch would also be pretty cool.

You're probably right - it could be done extraordinarily well with just the right touches where needed. This is Ardent, not Disney. So that won't happen. So i'm happy with how it looks now.

My guess is first drop after launch - the head being in the turn, with the body a headchopper as you dive down towards the first tunnel.

If its anything like they had previously for small items like phones and glasses, there is a bin with the same number as the boat. Operators store the bins to the side and bring out the bin for the relevant boat number as it arrives at the station.

Come on man - is it really that hard to type "i know" ? Didn't we used to have a thing about chat-speak?

'LOL'

Oh i'm well aware of what the intention was. I was being deliberately obtuse because nothing put out by the park has implied anything but the colour scheme we're seeing. Personally I think gold filigree surrounding the blue sky would 'break' the blend you get between real sky \ clouds (which is the intent I believe they're going with as the basis of the theme). I like how well the blue and white works with surrounding sky during the day, and - at night - the lighting will take over. Gold paint would (in my opinion) make it look like shit.

I think it's probably more down to your shitty explanation: First it was: Then it was THEN it was #MoveTheGoalposts! I can honestly say, whilst riding overboard - i've been watching the scenes and animatronics, not looking for the roof. Certainly the wide angle lens used in the shot you've provided is exaggerating the effect, and it's much brighter than it is in actuality. Putting all that aside, the original question you asked was if we could do a good dark ride in Australia - I and others have offered up Overboard - obviously in the opinion that it meets the criteria, and if not, it could be considered 'the best' we've got? You've clearly set a higher standard for your personal expectations, and as it seems we in Australia can't meet that - perhaps you could go elsewhere...

You can clearly see the roof in the mid-course stop with Imhotep, so according to Skeet, it doesn't count. Also can a rollercoaster be classified as a dark ride in its own right? Honestly - definitely more than one. One is an anomaly, two is a coincidence, three is a pattern. I think, in setting the bar at "you can see the showbuilding from inside the showbuilding" you've eliminated what many would consider top quality dark rides. Even PotC, Haunted Mansion and Splash Mountain would get knocked out by such a restrictive rule.

Missing? is there some golden concept art out there that showed it would be gold?

Pray, please share with us an apparent 'good dark ride' that you cannot see the inside of the shed on.

Since when did a dark ride have to have an immersively themed OUTSIDE to qualify?

It's not a shed? you walk into a giant ocean liner? I think you're splitting hairs at this point. Small World isn't much different in terms of the outward facades appearance - it has a theme applied, and is immersive indoors. I think Overboard qualifies.

I originally had the same concerns about just how white it was, and how hard it was going to be to keep it clean. I still think keeping it clean will be a struggle, but the more it has come together the more i'm warming to the colour scheme. This is going to look incredible lit up at night. I just hope that these buildings don't completely destroy all the sight lines to get this thing in motion because it's going to be incredibly photogenic.

Vintage Cars was there in 2006, no? Before Gingy's, it was Spongebob Flypants, in roughly the position Seabed Splash is now, IIRC. Not sure which year it arrived though? A well put together list - even if not entirely accurate. I think although the attraction count might not differ that much, the quality of each may be the difference. This is the same story for Movie World however - the loss of attractions like gremlins (although scooby is a fair replacement), studio tour, special effects show, maverick \ stunt show, LTRR, PASS... while the numbers don't make things look bad - the actual experience from then to now is vastly different, and arguably not for the better (at either park).

Yeah the building is fitted with the aluminium framing to hold the wrap. While a genuine 'soundstage' look would be better than the wrap, at the end of the day the wrap makes it very quick and easy to change the look of the building to suit the latest offering. I don't like the look, but I do like that they're set up to be able to change it regularly to suit.

Shit. It's school holidays again isn't it?

The park is already too big. There is plenty of space for them to continue to develop and expand including the Thunderbolt plot, Rocky Hollow area and Troll's Village. There's over a decade of development space available to the park, by which time other attractions may start reaching end of life and start vacating their envelopes too. As a comparison - Movie World - including the entire Rivals footprint, WOZ land, FN Maze buildings, Wild West, Stunt Driver, LTRR showstage (entirely), green lantern and everything in between, comes in at around 130,000SQM - and some of those areas aren't generally guest accessible - such as FN sheds, half of the LTRR stage, AOS Kitchens etc (not to mention WOZ isn't open yet, and Scoob is down long term). Dreamworld, EXCLUDING WWW, BB Studios, Vintage cars and the part of Cyclone that goes into WWW, as well as the maintenance sheds at the back and the admin offices near the front, and it's STILL about 176,000SQM - all of which is pretty generally guest accessible. Dreamworld doesn't need as much land as Dreamworld has.

The entitlement here is a little souring. Nobody has given an update - someone finally does, and your only comment is that they didn't provide enough of an update? If someone genuinely wants to see it, they'd be across most of the theme park socials or channels that post weekly updates in the parks. Those channels are regularly mentioned here. If you don't use socials or channels then you're not really that motivated for updates then, hey? Taken from Jagg's Journeys dated 23/September. Jaggs Journeys on Facebook

If it's got a number on it, we can pretend it's themed! Like honestly - did Disney not teach everyone about studio parks in Paris?

I don't think nights will sell out (unless artificially limited to encourage panic buying) but I think we already discussed that strategy ad nauseum. We didn't think they would sell out this year but the increased price point was meant to substitute that - the park still makes similar money, but the overall park attendance numbers are lower, making it a more enjoyable event for those willing to pay for it. A lot of people are still spending "in this economy". While tales of woe are out there, and money is getting tighter, we are not in recession and the financial stresses spruiked in the media are not universal. They're real, they're out there, and they're affecting everyday people... just not everyone at all times.

Lot three lends itself well to a land sale by Ardent to the CTC developer that already owns the BB plot. Changing the boundaries makes it easier for them to sell Lot 3 as previously the sale was hindered by the Oakey Creek easement.