webslave

I would have to wonder what sponsorship like what you're discussing would be worth - my tip is not very much. In most cases it's not really on-brand for most brands, and doesn't give them much of an opportunity to engage with the punters. I'd be more inclined to think there's contra rather than cash changing hands in a lot of these deals. Realistically - how many people would sponsorship like this reach in a given year? Take that figure and work out what that would cost you to reach via other channels (eg; social media paid advertising) and consider that many other channels give you at least some ability to target, not to mention properly spruik your wares. Given it's probably not a great deal of money, I would have to wonder why a park might bother pursuing it given the costs of commercials in tee'ing something like that up. You've also got maintenance, the effect of downtime, and - god forbid - the collateral cost to the brand should the attraction be involved in something like TRR.

This one?

I'd have much rathered Dreamworld summarize for each of the big nine what the audits revealed, and what was done. For now all I know is they were closed a long time (in many cases), and work was required (in some cases). If it was safe in the first place tell me nothing needed doing (it's a good news story), if it needed a few minor things then tell me that too (I can take comfort in hearing that the stuff you were fixing is thin end of the wedge) - just don't leave me to guess what was wrong that needed it closed all that time.

So, it was always going to happen that a ride at Dreamworld was going encounter a run-of-the-mill stoppage and have the media pick it up: http://www.theage.com.au/queensland/reports-buzzsaw-ride-at-dreamworld-stuck-with-passengers-onboard-20170306-gurndt.html But, for me the key difference here is I see no mention of TRR, or even Buzzsaw's identified safety issues from the audit. Oversight by the journo, do you think? I was all geared up for the shot-game for the inevitable "this comes just weeks after an incident on the Thunder River Rapids ride where..".

In my observation there's no subtlety in reporting, and as a result the distinction between reliability and safety does not exist in the media. It would be easy for us to say that some attractions have reliability problems, but we would stop well short of saying they have safety problems - whereas the media would show no distinction.

Yeah, you're probably right - although it depends on how much you're using. It's not exactly expensive stuff to make - wouldn't take much to get someone to come in and certify your manufacturing and testing procedure which will cover off the liability (and should also cover off the risk given it's easily repeatable). Given you'd also be going through it quickly your risk footprint is smaller because you don't need to store it for as long.

Haha, I knew that would get a reaction. But no, clearly you should never be knocking that stuff up in a backyard. On the other hand, if you're using significant amounts of it there would be nothing to stop your organisation from investing in the right equipment and ingredients to be able to make it safely. Smoke fluid is pretty well understood chemically, and provided it's prepared correctly (which is hard unless you've got a proper production set-up) it's safe enough. Kids, please don't make your own. You'll get away with it a few times before you find out why you shouldn't.

Yeah, it's lighter than most concentrations of mist so will move with a trivial amount of air. On the plus side you won't end up damp from it. It does leave a residue though, and tends to hang around a while in the air. As you've rightly pointed out maintenance is an issue. Fluid cost also factors in, but in an operation like that you'd probably be just as well off making it yourself.

Could there perhaps be a calling for a Star Tour-esque 'attraction' that does a bit of a high-level 'behind the scenes' on a few scary looking rides to pump up how great the maintenance staff are, how second-to-none their tools and procedures are, and the obsessive level of care they take? Could soak up a little bit of crowd capacity, promote transparency to guests, and actively counter some of the exploitative press. Another way of looking at it I suppose is that you've got people captive in queue lines with little to do - could that be a time where you could be pushing facts/figures/behind the scenes content at them via videos? It wouldn't be a huge break in theme given we frequently push safety videos to people standing in line - I'm sure there's a way that it could be done tastefully. Another way to go (although I'm not sold on it) would be if you had a resource internally (paging @Slick) that could whip you up something short and sharp that covers what topical ride stoppage there was today (eg; Giant Drop) and why it was not moments from disaster with the intent that it be shared via social. If there's one thing people love almost as much buying in to bullshit media hype it would have to be smugly debunking bullshit media hype - and what you ideally want is for the videos to appeal to people enough that when they see someone carrying on about it they will drop it in the comments as a "no ass-hat - everything is fine".

When we visited Sea World a couple of months ago we arrived at 9:45am and left a bit before 2pm. I don't feel like I particularly missed anything. The middle of the park is like a maze, the jet ski show a yawn, Affinity not noticeably different to Imagine, the dining options in the plaza are uninspiring, and like the other parks the refill stations for soft drink are under-sized and too few.

Moved to other thread.

I wouldn't do it, not because the experience doesn't appeal to me, but because the meals appeal to neither me nor my wife. Seafood? Yawn, pass. As for $175/head - I'd expect to pay around $100 for meals + beverages like that, so the $75 is the experience I'd guess.

I'm partial to Scooby-Doo-Over, myself.

If I had to guess I'd say he's criticising GL for the same reason that some have criticised DD - on the basis that both feel very 'controlled'.

We talked about this capitalising every word thing. You need to try a bit harder here - saying it's just habit doesn't cut it.

Top tip: did you know you don't need to start every word with a capital letter? There's a lot more to it, but I reckon if you start small by just putting a capital letter at the start of a sentence you'll be well on your way to internet glory.

I love it - a complete outcast in all facets of life, instantly reviled (twice) by people he need not know what he looks like, sounds like, has a sexual preference for, or hangs out with, but it's still everyone else that is at fault. That's what we call victim culture, folks.

I'd be thinking something like a videogame world because there's not really a lot of competition for that theme right now, but the hard part would be finding a license. Nintendo might be a nice idea, but is probably quite pricey. If you could land a Minecraft license you'd probably do pretty well - the appeal seems to be fairly broad, and the theme is also fairly open to interpretation. A bit of cross-over with Microsoft would probably do alright here, too.

I personally chalk it up to the rides not being open. I wouldn't buy a ticket to visit at the moment solely on that basis, and I have to imagine others are in the same boat.

I do recall that one, but figured there must be more of a pattern.

So now I'm curious - where does Huss's negative reputation come from? Are there any particular examples?

Actually, not as different as you may think. Structural integrity being a given for doing so it would not be entirely unexpected in such a circumstance to similarly put up temporary metal fencing and leave it as-is in the interim. Yes, if they hadn't opened people would be pissed about long lines due to two popular rides being down. No question. This is the other side of that. The solution? Don't get in that situation in the first place.

Looks to me like MW shit the bed on DD and ran over time on SDSC's work and were left with the choice to make safe and re-open or to keep it shut (particularly given it's unlikely it would have been getting worked on between Christmas and New Year, so you're not losing work days). I'm thinking if I were a regular punter I wouldn't be feeling too safe travelling through the ride given I'd imagine the quality of finish of the surrounds in areas I can see is one of the cues I'd take as to the overall quality of the park's work in areas I can't see. I understand the argument for running the ride on the basis that it's "technically functional" and you're in your busiest period of the year, but bugger me this is a new one. You wouldn't run a dark ride in a half-burned out building just because the track is clear. You wouldn't run a set of dodgem cars with their shell casings removed just because they still go. It's the wrong message to send your guests about what's important to you, and where you feel your quality standard is set.

The part that makes you consider that it could be permanent is that part you don't see in the photo - the attitude of park management (which at a guess is why Slick said what he did). You could easily take the view of "Well, everything there is pretty easily moved", but at the same time there's got to be a reason it was put there in the first place. Why bother putting something so shitty and easily moved in-place if you were planning on doing the job properly? I'd call it an each way bet.

Did the outdoor course at King Tutt's recently for the first time. I generally found it to be in poor repair. 2/5.