Lunatic wants DreamWorks to buy Dreamworld plus random government paranoia

[colliric_855]

Can Dreamworks just buy it? They're already licensing their properties to it... Why not just buy it? Sink some cash into redeveloping it and maybe become a partner with Ardent, if that would help DW be interested in getting into it... But I'd rather Ardent just sold it all to them. Dreamworld the name can obviously stay(perfect for a fully DreamWorks themed park anyway) as can most of the rides/areas(with upgrades, some new rides and re-themeing of cause)... But they can rework it as Dream(works)world. And give it a DreamWorks-style logo. Have Shrek and Po become the mascots. Would very much be in line with the founders original vision of a smaller Aussie Disneyland.

Edited May 16, 2013 by colliric_855

[westical]

Considering they are cutting down on staff, trading hours and all sorts of things as of late... it wouldn't surprise me to be frank. When you think about it all the attractions they have built would have been quite cheap. A Zamperla Air Race would be 2mill at the most, most of the Dreamworks precinct would have been pretty cheap due to the fact it was mostly just a repaint with a few minor additions. I'd put a price tag of maybe 5mill for the whole area including Pandamonium. Shockwave would have been around the 2mill mark as well. Compared to the money that Village is investing on their rides it is entirely possible.

You seem to have forgotten licensing costs. It's a public company, go analyse the financials and prove to us why it makes economic sense to shut it.

[colliric_855]

You seem to have forgotten licensing costs. It's a public company, go analyse the financials and prove to us why it makes economic sense to shut it.

Yes that's true, in light of that, would it be a good purchase for DreamWorks? Hostile takeover/buyout? Partnership? Does DreamWorks have a pre-existing Theme Park division? Edit: Yep, appears so... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576251/DreamWorks-to-build-theme-park-in-Dubai.html Why don't they offer Dreamworld a lifeline and get fully involved? Good idea to me. Perhaps it could rebranded to be in small print "DreamWorks presents" and in large print "DreamWorld".... Edited May 16, 2013 by colliric_855

[westical]

Why does Dreamworld need a lifeline?

[bladex]

wouldn't be surprised if it's true the last visit was more than unsatisfactory with half the thrill rides being closed and the outrageous ticket price.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I would sign it 10 times if it was pertition to partner, fully license(the whole park) or just plain sell it all to DreamWorks Animation....

the post you quoted spelled it correctly and you still couldn't get Petition...

Signing petitions multiple times usually invalidates it. The whole point of 'x number of signatures' is that each signature represents another person. Signing one ten times undermines the value and the purpose of it.

[colliric_855]

the post you quoted spelled it correctly and you still couldn't get Petition... Signing petitions multiple times usually invalidates it. The whole point of 'x number of signatures' is that each signature represents another person. Signing one ten times undermines the value and the purpose of it.

Except for the fact that most people reading it will not, from my experience, read exactly who signed it and how many times, but instead will count how many signatures(and pages) there were! People are lazy! Ergo it's more likely to help the cause rather than devalue it. If it is discovered, it can still help anyway as if several people do it, it shows high level of individual passion. Physical petitions of cause. Web petitions are harder to sign more than once.

Funny thing is I'd sign a petition against that.

It's not for everyone I guess. Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Except for the fact that most people reading it will not, from my experience, read exactly who signed it and how many times, but instead will count how many signatures(and pages) there were! People are lazy! Ergo it's more likely to help the cause rather than devalue it. If it is discovered, it can still help anyway as if several people do it, it shows high level of individual passion. Physical petitions of cause. Web petitions are harder to sign more than once. It's not for everyone I guess.

*course

Well - aren't you an irresponsible and dishonest person (well i think we knew that already).

I personally don't see the merit in Dreamworks taking over Dreamworld. The diversity you see in the park today would be lost to an Itchy&scratchy world type park, where everything is themed around a very small, very limited repertoire of characters and themes.

Try this - re-theme EVERY ride and attraction in dreamworld to Dreamworks. Do it without any structural modifications, and without 'stretching' the link to be somewhat tenuous. Do it with minimal investment (otherwise it isn't worth it) similar to the changes made to Nick Central... if you can cover off EVERY ride and attraction with a feasible, reasonably cheap conversion, and then your idea is mildly plausible.

But then we run into another problem - why would a film company that has dabbled a little in experimental theme park involvement and investment want to take on a park that from all accounts is nonviable and going down the toilet?

If your answer is that it is still viable, then the point of selling the park to another investor is moot.

[jjuttp]

Just for shits and giggles.

TOT- How To Train Your Dragon

GD- Kung Fu Panda

Pandamonium-Bee Movie

Buzzsaw-Rise Of The Guardians

Cyclone-Antz

Wipeout-Shrek

Claw-Megamind

MCMD- The Croods

Shockwave-Chicken Run

RHLR-Madagascar

TRRR-Flushed Away

Reef Diver-Shark Tale

Vintage Cars-Spirit

Merry-go-round - All movies (like Wonderland)

Bumper Cars- Sinbad

DRTC- Wallace And Gromit

Big Red Boat Ride-Prince Of Egypt

Reptar- Monsters Vs Aliens

Puss In Boots-Puss In Boots

Gingys Glider-Road To El Dorado

Dronkey Flyers-Over The Hedge.

Excluding people movers, sequels, and the Big Red Car Ride, thats 1 ride per movie released to date.

Edited May 17, 2013 by jjuttp

[colliric_855]

Just for shits and giggles. TOT- How To Train Your Dragon GD- Kung Fu Panda Pandamonium-Bee Movie Buzzsaw-Rise Of The Guardians Cyclone-Antz Wipeout-Shrek Claw-Megamind MCMD- The Croods Shockwave-Chicken Run RHLR-Madagascar TRRR-Flushed Away Reef Diver-Shark Tale Vintage Cars-Spirit Merry-go-round - All movies (like Wonderland) Bumper Cars- Sinbad DRTC- Wallace And Gromit Big Red Boat Ride-Prince Of Egypt Reptar- Monsters Vs Aliens Puss In Boots-Puss In Boots Gingys Glider-Road To El Dorado Dronkey Flyers-Over The Hedge. Excluding people movers, sequels, and the Big Red Car Ride, thats 1 ride per movie released to date.

Lol, I enjoyed that post. Deserves full quoting!

Well - aren't you an irresponsible and dishonest person (well i think we knew that already).

What's dishonest about signing your own name over again? Usually I just do it again if I come across the petition again later on. I wouldn't "rig" it and sign under some bullshit name at all. Nothing dishonest about that, unless it's dishonest to exploit the assumed weakness of the person who the petition is addressed to, which it obviously isn't(it's called being ruthless... Different to dishonesty). You want to get shit done(especially with councils and governments) you have to push as hard as possible. Usually if discovered, they will have the commonsense to assume it was done out of passion for the cause in the petition. It would only be dishonest if you didn't sign your own name, which I have never done. Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

re-theme EVERY ride and attraction in dreamworld to Dreamworks. Do it without any structural modifications, and without 'stretching' the link to be somewhat tenuous. Do it with minimal investment (otherwise it isn't worth it) similar to the changes made to Nick Central... if you can cover off EVERY ride and attraction with a feasible, reasonably cheap conversion, and then your idea is mildly plausible.

Just for shits and giggles.

Excluding people movers, sequels, and the Big Red Car Ride, thats 1 ride per movie released to date.

That isn't re-theming. Thats a theme concept. The clue was where i said 'without structural modifications' and 'minimal investment'. You've come up with a new theme concept, but not explained how the re-theme would practically be implemented. You've even gone and re-themed attractions that already HAD a plausible theme. If we're talking about the survival of the park, spending money to retheme an attraction that already has a feasible and viable theme is a waste of money.

[colliric_855]

If we're talking about the survival of the park, spending money to retheme an attraction that already has a feasible and viable theme is a waste of money.

That sounds very much like an arguement FOR a change, when you consider Mick Doohan's Shittycoaster and Cyclone, neither of which have feasible and viable theming. Buzzsaw does, as does Tower Of Terror 2, but you've got at least 2 rides that are clearly sub-standard. Also I'd want redevelopment of Dreamworld, a major overhaul, possibly with assistance from the QLD government, not just the same old park rebranded and with exactly the same layout. I'm talking totally closing, redeveloping it and reopening it after a major facelift and redesign. Some rides and areas staying, but most of it redone compleatly. That has happened to many other tired-old-slowing parks(and also other entertainment based places, Melbournes' Showgrounds for instance) before in the past, both in our country and overseas, with varying results. Not exactly out of the question. Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[mba2012]

possibly with assistance from the QLD government,

Do you seriously expect the QLD government to fund a theme park facelift if they are refusing to fund public health?

[colliric_855]

Do you seriously expect the QLD government to fund a theme park facelift if they are refusing to fund public health?

The Victorian Government is doing the same to public health from recollection, in fact for a long time they refused to pay school teachers rates that were comparible to other states. They sunk more than $50 million bucks a year running a damn glorified car race(which they have now "secured" for several more years), did something similar to the Showgrounds(which is likewise privately owned by the RASV) and on a lesser scale to LPM(in 2000), spent many millions upgrading the Tennis Centre just to ensure the Aussie Open is going nowhere else, built a major Soccer/Rugby Stadium, Spent $2 billion bucks on a Ticketing System that still doesn't work properly, spent $100 million on the Southern Star(which will FINALLY open proper later this year, at least we are told!).... Governments are not nessecerily the most financially responsible people. May as well get some public cash into Dreamworld, court either Ardent or another company(Dreamworks in my opinion) to fully redevelop the existing park, and turn it around. Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[T-bone]

I don't know, the park may not be in the best shape, but I don't think it is in a state where the only way forward is a full redevelopment. Oh, and RCW, I'm sorry, but I think the Government has better things to do than pay for than a redevelopment of an existing theme park. You might as well get that idea out of your head now.

Edited May 17, 2013 by T-bone

[Gazza]

The southern star was funded by ING, not the government just saying.

[colliric_855]

I don't know, the park may not be in the best shape, but I don't think it is in a state where the only way forward is a full redevelopment.

I can agree with that, but it's still what I think they need to be thinking of soon if things get anyworse.

Oh, and RCW, I'm sorry, but I think the Government has better things to do and pay for than a redevelopment of an existing theme park. You might as well get that idea out of your head now.

I'm just sayin', I live in the state where the government spent $2 billion bucks on a public transport ticket system.... http://www.walkingmelbourne.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5093(list is outdated, doesn't even include the desalination plant that no one needs!) You should also for good measure inform the Victorian Govenment of this idea of "better stuff to spend it on". I'm sure the QLD government has stuffed around with it's own projects also.

The southern star was funded by ING, not the government just saying.

Still a major stuffup that the government caused. Makes it worse it's on/near the location where Paramount Studios was proposed and would have happened had Kennett won in 1999. Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[Gazza]

Still a major stuffup that the government caused.

Given a few major big wheels exist, I don't think the government could have foreseen structural issues. It's not their fault. It's the manufacturers/contractors fault.

I'ts like blaming the Belgian government/local approving authority that Vertigo at Wallabi Belgium ( http://rcdb.com/3457.htm ) managed to run for a total of a month before closing down forever.

[colliric_855]

Given a few major big wheels exist, I don't think the government could have foreseen structural issues. It's not their fault. It's the manufacturers/contractors fault. I'ts like blaming the Belgian government/local approving authority that Vertigo at Wallabi Belgium ( http://rcdb.com/3457.htm ) managed to run for a total of a month before closing down forever.

Yes but it was the same government who stuffed up the Paramount deal in the same location by giving the investors a bad message about how unimportant they thought it was getting a major themepark in the same location when they took government. Kennett would have delivered the film theme park had he won in '99.

[Gazza]

Yes but it was the same government who stuffed up the Paramount deal in the same location by giving the investors a bad message about how unimportant they thought it was getting a major themepark in the same location when they took government. Kennett would have delivered the film theme park had he won in '99.

Doesn't matter that we never got the theme park and the government made other mistakes,

Explain how it was the governments fault the wheel was delivered late? Were the people building and manufacturing it government employees?

Why did you say they "spent $100 million on the Southern Star" anyway? Why would the government be paying for a private compainies ferris wheel?

Research time!

The theme park in Melbourne didn't go ahead because the consortium couldn't get the financial backing to do so, not because the government refused permission for it to be built. If the group had gotten appropriate financial backing, then it'd be there today.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/04/06/1017206277784.html

The current studio proposal is the second for Docklands. The first - a $485 million theme park and film studios - was mooted four years ago by a five-member consortium but collapsed in 2000 after the group failed to secure financial backing.

Also http://books.google.com.au/books?id=3z1i3VcYyGQC&pg=PA224&lpg=PA224&dq=docklands+theme+park+melbourne+consortium&source=bl&ots=TkywY2PzuN&sig=L69E7l6rWs5GKT7rV2Hlrr93xJE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NTeWUeLfC-quiQe_oYDYDw&ved=0CFYQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=docklands%20theme%20park%20melbourne%20consortium&f=false

Edited May 17, 2013 by Gazza

[colliric_855]

They didn't refuse permission, they bloody well campaigned against it(as another one of Kennetts' pet projects) as the opposition, in the 1999 November election that THEY WON as a Minority Government. And then after they won, they realized Melbourne needed it and halfassed attempted to save it. No wonder the investors pulled out after the government changed! They didn't like the idea of dealing with a minority government combined with the fact they were seeing entirely new faces that had previously called the development "another Kennett excess" the likes of Crown(which they conveniently forgot was actually Kirner), the toll roads, Melbourne Museum(and IMAX), Jeffs' Shed, the Grand Prix and Fed Square(all of which have only added to Melbournes' stature, not taken away from it). You seem to forget Gazza, that November 1999 was one of Victorias' most infamous elections of modern times.

Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[colliric_855]

Lol at the title change.... Oh and it's not random, it's "Anti-labor paranoia by Anti-Labor bigot with a long memory". No doubt Jobe and AlexB will probably blow a fuse each when they see this thread...

Edited May 17, 2013 by colliric_855

[Jobe]

No fuse blown from this little black duck..... Seriously not interested. It's more of the same crap from you really. You are still the same arrogant little twerp who comes up with outlandish proposal after proposal and then refuses to back down even after it has been definitively proven that you are full of crap....I actually feel a little sorry for you...and I tire of every post you deliver because you ARE so divisive .... It's like your sole purpose it to stir up as much shit as you can. Anyway , moving on.

[Gazza]

Well can you link to a labor media release, news article or item of hansard speaking out against it?

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

That sounds very much like an arguement FOR a change, when you consider Mick Doohan's Shittycoaster and Cyclone, neither of which have feasible and viable theming. Buzzsaw does, as does Tower Of Terror 2, but you've got at least 2 rides that are clearly sub-standard. Also I'd want redevelopment of Dreamworld, a major overhaul, possibly with assistance from the QLD government, not just the same old park rebranded and with exactly the same layout. I'm talking totally closing, redeveloping it and reopening it after a major facelift and redesign. Some rides and areas staying, but most of it redone compleatly. That has happened to many other tired-old-slowing parks(and also other entertainment based places, Melbournes' Showgrounds for instance) before in the past, both in our country and overseas, with varying results. Not exactly out of the question.

My statement was in relation to Pandamonium, Escape from Madagascar etc (the rides in Dreamworks land) being given a different theme, just so those themes could be used elsewhere (making GD a KFP attraction would mean Pandamonium would need a new theme too). I didn't make any reference to MDMC or Cyclone. The suggestion was the retheme the entire park as Dreamworks. My challenge was to come up with viable themes for each attraction without wasting money. It was put forward to theme GD to KFP. I pointed out that doing so was a waste.

So no - nothing I said in any way backs your argument... it's all hypothetical and playing devils advocate.

Now - let's try a few other suggestions:

*argument

*completely

Since we've agreed he's a Lunatic... can we just flick this idiot?