Breaking News: Dreamworld to build world class water park

[Richard]

Roller-Coaster.com.au is the first source in the world to officially announce Dreamworld's newest addition - a $56 million water park expected to be completed by December next year. News article: http://www.roller-coaster.com.au/article.php?aid=78

[Gazza]

This sounds really good and will be a great addition. I like the sound of "The water park will offer a range of new generation attractions never before seen in the Australian market, together with an expansive wave pool in a themed environment" Hopefully this could include master blasters going around the park. 12 months also sounds like a very short construction time. My only gripe is the name Dreamworlds "Water Park" Sounds a bit boring, maybe something like "Dreamworlds Aqua City" or "Dreamworlds Paradise Island" would be a bit more emotive.

Edited December 4, 2005 by Gazza

[dreamworld_rulz]

I wonder how much it'll cost to enter? Richard do you think that'll DW make any money from this?

[Gazza]

Presouming that the admission fee collected from each guest was higher than the costs incurred in accomidating the guest, then yes it would make money.

[LunaParkFanatic]

It's a nice idea. I like that layout Gazza! I also agree with you on the name. It's pretty boring, But It'd help if we had a theme to grab a name from!

[Richard]

I really hope that every effort is put into the layout of the park. They can really benefit from a structured approach to designing the park, especially against Wet'n'Wild where 20 years of additions has seen the park become somewhat tangled in itself. I'd certainly hope that we see effective use of the lazy river concept - this can be so much more than just a gentle attraction, but also a huge capacity transport ride - keeping guests off the paths and also to some extent, the other rides. The Sunshine Coast Wet'n'Wild is expected to cost in the area of $50 million. Given the lack of existing infrastructure that will exist at the site there, it becomes clear that $56 million will go a long way, spent on a water park at a location where the land is ideal for construction and the infrastructure exitsts. Back at the Gold Coast Wet'n'Wild, $20 million has seen two towers (in an entirely new expansion of the park's boundaries), a huge childrens area and replacement of half of Mammoth Falls. Make no mistake - this new water park will rival Wet'n'Wild in attraction quality and quantity. In the past water parks have not been an area of competition on the Gold Coast, so Wet'n'Wild has been free to spend minimally on new attractions. It's no coincidence that Wet'n'Wild decided to spend $20 million at this point in time. Water park attractions are significantly cheaper than a large scale theme park ride, so hopefully it will add fluidity to the competition.

[matty_o_911]

I really think this is a waste on Dreamworld's part. It's far too close to Wet'n'Wild to be a feasible investment for Dreamworld. I really don't think that visitor numbers can support that many amusement parks in the one area. This will not in my opinion attract larger numbers to the parks, but merely take visitors away from the existing parks which I don't see as a good idea - maybe for shorter queues but not for continued expansion. However if this water park is to join directly to Dreamworld, and Dreamworld can market both parks together and perhaps offer a special ticket for direct entry between both parks on a one/two day basis then I think this may work out to be very good marketing wise for Dreamworld. It would definately attract the family market if they know they can get Dreamworld entry and entry to the water park for a discounted price.

[taronga]

I also agree the name sounds too generic! They will probably charge about $30 for admissions, but it's good to see some new development & competition for the industry.

Edited November 28, 2005 by taronga

[GoGoBoy]

That's what I love about this site (and the industry in general) - you never know when you're going to log on and get some really exciting news. We should give ourselves a pat on the back - a number of us predicted this would be Dreamworld's next move. See, we're very in touch with the industry! I am really glad to hear this is happening. A bit of water park competition in Australia is a good thing as we have never had it before, with such few water parks previously. I'm surprised they are spending so much money on it though and charging separate admission. I certainly hope this means they are getting rid of Blue Lagoon... I assume they would otherwise it wouldn't make very good business sense. I'm certainly feeling sorry for Wet 'n' Wild at this point, they must be feeling quite nervous. Thanks for bringing us the announcement Rich. Any idea where the park is going to end up? On the old TB site?

[kennykoala]

SO, r they moving the bottom car park towards the highway and using the carpark area for the water park, seeing as its all pretty much leveld out as of today....as i noticed markings on the carpark floor today. Or is the waterpark getting built on the grass areabetween the car park and higway? or will they use the whole bottom carpark and grass area. the space just dosent seem big enough, unles they use the bottom carpark and grass towards the higway. they have cleard all the way towards the side street were the thunbolt used to boarder onto. they have also clered and started leveling the area alnog dreamworlds ampithearte as u come into dreammworld, i seen this last week. Also the ticket booth on the left has now been torn down, leaving the one remaing ticket booth at the top of the stairs. that being said, guest services is all gutted insidetoo. What ever happens, I do NOT! want the front entrance of dreamworld to come down, but why have the demolished 1 of the 2 ticket booths.

[Mousenator]

$56 million! Imagine the rollercoaster they could have built with that. But I suppose the water park would bring in more money.

[Gazza]

Well, to tell you the truth I would rather a whole new park than just one new ride. It also makes more sense to open a new park, for a new park they can charge a good $40 for admission, and on top of that food and merchandise sales. Whereas with a single ride being added they would be very lucky to jack up admission by that much, and you would get prehapds just one new gift shop to bring in money. I think it will encourage people to stay longer. If i were travelling up it would mean an extra day. Also, being close to WnW wont really effect it. Once upon a time DW was the only Dry park in the area, but WBMW opened up, and both have since thrived. The same would happen with WnW and DWWP side by side. I dont feel any sympathy for WnW. QLD is one of the sunniest parts of the world, you cant expect WnW to have a monopoly on the waterpark market forever. Have you noticed they have only started investing good amounts of money when they had competiton. Without it all we have had in recent years was a whirlpool. Things are really picking up now an this can only mean the GC growing to become one giant theme park conglomerate.

Edited November 28, 2005 by Gazza

[matty_o_911]

Under the current drought and water crisis that's seeing the demolition of the water fountains in King George Square in Brisbane and everything like that being turned off, its actually quite surprising that Dreamworld would get permission to build something that involves so much water - as environmentally friendly as it may make out to be.

Edited November 28, 2005 by matty_o_911

[joz]

Hinze Dam (The Gold Coast's main water supply) is at 75%, so its not as dire down here. Add to that the extra money that the council will make, as well as flow on effects to the wider community, and its really not a surprise in the slightest to see them getting permission to build. I think the more attractions on the Coast there are the better, and WnW is going to be in a pretty good position to combat the new park. I say bring it on!

[kennykoala]

i can see it hurting wenwild, when it first opens,summer 06. Because if i had the choice I would want to go to the new park to check it out..being totaly brand spanking new. Especialy if the attractions they get r of top quality. And im sure interstate travelers, will also decide to check out the new water park, as apposed to the one theve been to time after time. The only thing wetnwild will have going for it next year is the fact ppl will still buy the 3 park superpass.

[coasterlover]

id say village parks known about this for a while that s why they expanded WNW, I think its wikkid tho Water based attractions really suits Australias Climate, How much money has been invested into WNW over the years? does it outweigh 56mil by much?

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Ok so first off - guys check the guidelines again - some of you are slipping.... Second off, i think its great wet n wild has some direct competition - it will encourage both parks to keep upgrading and expanding, which means we will see newer attractions more often in both parks to compete - just like what has been happening with movie world and dreamworld of late. Thirdly - those complaining about the positioning of dreamworld's new park - consider this - the only way left for dreamworld to expand the fun park was either out towards the highway which would demolish the existing entrance, or close down blue lagoon and expand that way - with the talks about big brother ending soon, this means they have TONNES of room for new rides, attractions and themed lands. Blue lagoon currently locks dreamworld in to its existing design... it would be ludicrous for dreamworld to axe blue lagoon without replacing the water attractions elsewhere - because they would lose those who visit to attend the water park to sea world or wet n wild... I was waiting for someone to mention the water crisis. Now, while the dam is at 75%, the whole country is experiencing some shortage of water. BUT a water park is better, because: a) it will attract thousands of people - and thats less people wasting water at home to keep cool. Public pools have always been better for water usage than home pools. a managed pool system like DWWP means a lot less water is wasted, and they would have many safeties in place to prevent excess water waste. All in all - no matter what side of the fence you stand on, this new park will benefit all - it will also benefit WVTP too because it will encourage competition, keeping WnW fresh and new, rather unlike what it HAS been up until recently.

[Gazza]

The only thing wetnwild will have going for it next year is the fact ppl will still buy the 3 park superpass.

What about the Tornado Slide? Anyway, with water restrictions you are required to offset the filling of poolw with water savings elsewhere. This could include more efficient water use around the park, capturing water from the roof of the ampitheatre etc etc so it mightm't be too much of an issue.

[MARK28]

56 million! They could have built two coasters with that money!!!!

[Gazza]

Yeah, but somehow I think a whole new park could make more than 2 individual rides.

[GoGoBoy]

Exactly. DW is still in desperate need of a real roller coaster or 2. No one is denying that. But in the meantime this water park is going to be a great addition. It's going to be considered as a separate entity to the DW theme park itself, so there is still a chance of a coaster in the next year or 2

[Richard]

The papers caught on this morning, playing up the rivalry between this and Wet'n'Wild. http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/dre...3026404986.html It's interesting to hear the competition's thoughts on the matter. John Menzies (WVTP CEO) has taken the "do what's best for the Gold Coast" approach. The way I see it it's a business decision, made with the intentions of bringing in cash. Given the tremendous growth WnW has experienced in the past without really any new attractions, it doesn't seem too hard to see that it's also a smart one (smart enough to get $20 million out of WnW). I'd imagine similar business decisions to those that drove WBMW to install and market Superman in the way that they did (a very "Dreamworldy" way), but that's just me.

Edited November 29, 2005 by Richard

[Gazza]

What are they, afraid of a little competion, his argument would be a little more credible if he could actually give suggestions of what DW could do that doesnt canibalise his buisness. I think its a bit rich to complain about someone planning to develop rides never before seen here when they have never been paticulary creative down at WnW. Even the new bucaneer bay has already been seen in QLD at townsville. This would be a bit like Subway complaining about McDonalds selling Deli Rolls. Welcome to the world of buisness rob, looks like you might have to gasp COMPETE. And whats he complaining about DW "partially duplicating WnW", isnt that what he would be planning to do when he opens up on the sunshine coast?

Edited November 29, 2005 by Gazza

[GoldCoast_ROG]

one would think two big water parks would thin out the crowds somewhat, sure when DW's water park opens the novelty value of the new attraction will initially eat into WnWild's, but looking at the bigger picture, the overall tourism industry of the Gold Coast region will benefit - increased visitation from interstate as well as more brisbanites making the trip to our GC attracted by the new features and facilities of the fun parks...

[GoGoBoy]

I'm very surprised with his comments. What makes him think Wet 'n' Wild should have a monopoly on the marketplace? Water parks are so common in America and there's no reason why there shouldn't be more in Australia. In addition, one of the major problems with WnW has been its capacity. There's nothing worse than standing in line half naked for a water slide for half an hour. In my opinion, another water park is needed, even if just for capacity issues alone