The developer is certainly not short of a quid! I doubt they'd object too strongly to spending a bit on infrastructure.

I can't see it being bad for the existing parks. If they capture a large Chinese market there will be a river of tourists running right into the area the parks are in. 

No-one goes on holiday and only visits one place. 

Bit more believable than the re-opening of Wonderland in Sydney.

I imagine this park will be themed, but to what? 

Seems legit.

so if a cashed up Chinese company comes in and puts in a multi million dollar theme park in right next door, don't you think that will affect Dreamworld and movie worlds profit? Alot of people will want to go the new theme park right? So will that pull people away from Dreamworld and movie world?? I just think that the gold coast has enough theme parks. We've got two rollercoaster/ rides parks, two water parks and a Marine park. I'm just saying that maybe this could be bad for our theme parks.

I don't see it as being bad:

• New park opens - people flock to it
• old parks see drop in visitation, drop in revenue
• old parks make decision to compete - build new amazing ride
• people flock to old parks again
• old parks drop the ball and don't compete - old parks close down.

Also:

Cluster of many parks in one spot = worth visiting the area for a couple of days... take LA - Knotts, Disney, Universal, and further - SFMM and SeaWorld. A person on a park trip to LA will normally hit up all of them, won't they?

BUT - how many people trek miles just to visit ONE park (shut up Gazza! ) Not many people will detour very far for the sake of visiting a standalone park - unless it is absolutely worth the trip. A new park building on the GC doesn't need to have the WOW factor to stand on it's own - it only has to be of similar quality and content as the others to be worthy of a visit.

Even competing brands can team up - on my last LA trip, we got a SoCal pass which gave us admission to Universal, Disney and Sea World on the one ticket.

Healthy competition is always good... and if VRTP can branch into asian markets, surely Asian park developers can branch out here.

Cool idea, but I dont want to see a park in Australia overrun with Chinese knock-off rides such as the terrible SLC knockoffs. I've been on them, they are horrible rides.

 

Even competing brands can team up - on my last LA trip, we got a SoCal pass which gave us admission to Universal, Disney and Sea World on the one ticket.

I think that'd be something great to have. It'd certainly help with the problem of having to choose between parks.

Cool idea, but I dont want to see a park in Australia overrun with Chinese knock-off rides such as the terrible SLC knockoffs. I've been on them, they are horrible rides.

I believe the park that they just opened installed a b&m coaster.

Cool idea, but I dont want to see a park in Australia overrun with Chinese knock-off rides such as the terrible SLC knockoffs. I've been on them, they are horrible rides.

I'm sure the government would stop them from doing anything stupid.

My biggest fear, if this project goes ahead, is that our parks wouldn't be able to compete. By the sounds of things, this development has the possibility to tear our local parks apart like a category 5. It's always new to have something nice, but what happens if this ends up being worse for enthusiasts like us? If this ends up being a $2.5 Billion project, like their Yunnan park, then I really can't see how VRTP and Ardent could compete on a similar level. 

My biggest fear, if this project goes ahead, is that our parks wouldn't be able to compete. By the sounds of things, this development has the possibility to tear our local parks apart like a category 5. It's always new to have something nice, but what happens if this ends up being worse for enthusiasts like us? If this ends up being a $2.5 Billion project, like their Yunnan park, then I really can't see how VRTP and Ardent could compete on a similar level. 

I think that the only way that would happen is if they built a big, secluded theme park resort/complex, like Disney in Florida, where people have enough on site to keep them occupied for a week and never have to leave. Other than that, I think that the existing parks should up their game to compete, but a new park would bring in an influx of visitors.

My money is this being a power play.. we might find one of the existing parks ends up with a new owner. No better way to bring them to the table than threaten to open up a bigger and better competitor next door.

Well I can't see VRTP or Ardent selling their flagship investments just because of a little competition. I'll believe it when i see it.

My biggest fear, if this project goes ahead, is that our parks wouldn't be able to compete. 

I feel bad then for the likes of Sea World and Busch Gardens being so close to the world's most visited tourist destination, Walt Disney World. 

Wet'n'Wild basically doubled in size as a result of WhiteWater World joining the party. While our parks are currently in a race to the bottom to see who can offer the most bare-bones experience for the lowest price, I have no doubts that any serious competition would be met with a fairly serious attempt to maintain market share.

For one thing, I wouldn't expect a $2.5 billion investment anytime soon. Assume 10% return, that's $250 million a year. At 40% operating margin that's $625 million revenue. At $100 per capita spend (about twice what our parks currently get) that's 6 million visitors a year. A budget of half that would be a gamble.

Invariably these big ambitious "theme park" plans turn out to be mostly hotels, casinos, conference facilities, shops and golf courses. And typically don't happen...

No offense Richard, but that sounds like an "Adelaide" type of statement, and it was true there which is why I left!

 

In Queensland, big ambitious plans (including theme parks) very obviously DO happen. You only need to take a look / drive around to see that. It's AWESOME here!!!

 

For these reasons, I am cautiously optimistic about this, although I agree it's unlikely to happen soon. It would take several years of planning and approvals first.

Those parks started as something a lot less than they are today... On opening, Movie World had no coasters. Sea World got by with one coaster for years. Dreamworld had two, one of which still stands. They've grown from a time where it was a lot cheaper to put something together.

Movie World, on opening, cost $120 million. In todays dollars, thats only roughly $160 million. Add on the costs of their biggest expansions - such as WWF at 18 million, and you still don't hit 300 million all told... so $2.5 billion is unlikely. More likely the park will start small, obtain market share, and then expand if necessary - but if nobody competes, expansion will not be necessary and it will stay small.

You compare the Gold Coast to Adelaide. On the world stage, Gold Coast IS Adelaide.

Gold Coast IS Adelaide.

What a plot twist. M. Night Shyamalan would be proud. 

Those parks started as something a lot less than they are today... On opening, Movie World had no coasters. Sea World got by with one coaster for years. Dreamworld had two, one of which still stands. They've grown from a time where it was a lot cheaper to put something together.

Movie World, on opening, cost $120 million. In todays dollars, thats only roughly $160 million. Add on the costs of their biggest expansions - such as WWF at 18 million, and you still don't hit 300 million all told... so $2.5 billion is unlikely. More likely the park will start small, obtain market share, and then expand if necessary - but if nobody competes, expansion will not be necessary and it will stay small.

You compare the Gold Coast to Adelaide. On the world stage, Gold Coast IS Adelaide.

I think you need to revisit your costings.   the same year mw opened my mother built a 4  bedroom house for 40000. 40000 now would only get you a double garage.   Construction cost have gone up at least 5 times since mw opened but yes still a long way off the 2.5 billion.  

Edited November 14, 201510 yr by skeetafly

On inflation alone it's more like $215m.

The Gold Coast (and its theme parks) may not compare very well to some other major tourist destinations globally. However I doubt you could get annual passes for those other parks at the low prices we enjoy here, or that you could visit so many parks so easily and cheaply elsewhere.

There's pros and cons certainly, but I have visited a lot of places in the world, and overall the Gold Coast is (to me at least) the best place in the world to live if you love theme parks!

That said, there are better places if you're just going to have a holiday and you want theme parks to be a part of that holiday. But it's the best place to live.

Edited November 14, 201510 yr by pushbutton

I think you need to revisit your costings.   the same year mw opened my mother built a 4  bedroom house for 40000. 40000 now would only get you a double garage.   Construction cost have gone up at least 5 times since mw opened but yes still a long way off the 2.5 billion.  

Housing prices are affected by a lot more than just inflation, however I did google the calculations, and that was what i got. I cannot find the link for it now (it was top result this morning) but you are correct, and in checking with RBA.gov (far more reliable than google) it is somewhere around $215m, but yes, as you say - the point still stands on the price difference.

However I doubt you could get annual passes for those other parks at the low prices we enjoy here, or that you could visit so many parks so easily and cheaply elsewhere.

#Fail.

• Six Flags Magic Mountain AND Hurricane Harbor - on sale now for $76.99ea
• Knotts Berry Farm - $81 - in 6 easy payments
• Universal studios Hollywood - $119

...and I disagree with you re: Gold Coast being the best place to live. My Opinion.

To be fair the US dollar is worth a lot right now so your figure goes up AlexB. And whilst they are offering $80 annual passes right now at Six Flaggs it does still cost you $80 to get in for a day so no matter what your tourist is paying $80 for the likely one day they will visit. 

On the GC you will get 3 parks for that price. 

Yes Rappa, you're right - it does - however if we look a little further...

Google's going rate on the USD at 12pm today means USD$76.99 = AUD$108.02

Oddly enough - VRTP's $9/month = AUD$108 - so we're talking an identical price. (Although I recognise if you pay upfront it is $9 cheaper).

With VRTP - Yes, you get 3 parks, with a total of 9 coasters, although many would argue that for MW at least, you can't spend a full day there, and SW is similar if you don't do every show.

With SFMM & HH - you get 2 parks, with a total of 19 coasters. Guarantee you're spending a full day there (which operates hours longer than VRTP do), perhaps even 2 days depending on the season and still not fitting everything in, even if you skip every 'non-ride' experience...

The argument put forth was that he doubted you could get annual passes for the low prices we enjoy here - the facts above prove you can.