Will DC Rivals Hypercoaster further erode Dreamworld's attendance?

[SHOOKETH]

The news that Dreamworld's YOY attendance has shrunk by as much as 40% even in the recent months, is disastrous itself but will the single biggest investment into a theme park in Australias theme park history just down the road at it's main competitor further erode Dreamworld's attendance?

To put it in perspective, who is going to buy a $100 annual pass at a theme park which already suffers from a critical lack of major rollercoasters when they can pay $100 for a theme park which is putting in Australia's first Hypercoaster? I mean, apart from families with small kids...? This is going to be another brutal blow to Dreamworld which has badly needed a major full circuit coaster for years now and which is at a point in their lifespan now that if they DON'T make the investment needed, the worst case scenario creeps ever more slightly into the picture (permanent closure).

Keen to hear your thoughts. 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Slick
No need for centre aligning. :)

[Reanimated35]

I guess you could bring up the same argument against Sea World. They lack rides, they've got a bunch of complete idiots protesting against them, and yet they're still surviving. 

The worst (best) case scenario for Dreamworld is that it gets sold to someone who cares and turns the place around. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

My first thoughts is you should avoid using centre alignment on your posts. It has negative connotations around here.. and definitely don't use animated GIFs.

For my thoughts, The dip in DW's statistics is to be expected. I don't believe the recovery from this is a 'few month' thing. It will take a few years for the park to bounce back, if it does at all, and only if management take the right path.

Sure, they could open the southern hemispheres best XXXX, but most big thrill blockbusters have an element of fear to it - most thrills come from an appearance of danger - be that through speed, height, etc. Most of the big tickets that would have people flood back to the park would be deemed insensitive.

The park is in desperate need of capital injection to secure it's future - and more than just improved facilities, exhibits and experiences. Few people rush out to buy an annual pass because stage 2 of the Corroboree is open, or the next part of Tiger Island is finished.

The kind of excitement that we have witnessed on social media in the past 24 hours for the MW hyper is the kind of excitement DW need - people tagging their friends saying "we HAVE to go back" or "we HAVE to ride this". I also saw many people saying things like 'we usually alternate between DW and VRTP passes, but we will be keeping our VRTP passes this year for this!"

The only folks who know whether that will happen are in the management of the park, and of Ardent \ Main Event.

As has been said many times before, Only Time Will Tell.

[jack.c]

Probably! dreamworld truly shows no initiative with attractions these days! It's partly the reason I don't go there anymore - last time I went was when I won the buzz saw comp to be the first to ride/sleep in dreamworld the night and I've had no interest to go back purely because everything is so old and dated. There is nothing worth going back over and over for me.

 Judging by the response from the general public with DC Rivals, it's pretty clear Australia wants more high end roller coasters, and I doubt DW will build one for many years, which answers your question.. yes it will further destroy dreamworlds legacy. 

[SHOOKETH]

4 minutes ago, Reanimated35 said:

I guess you could bring up the same argument against Sea World. They lack rides, they've got a bunch of complete idiots protesting against them, and yet they're still surviving. 

The worst (best) case scenario for Dreamworld is that it gets sold to someone who cares and turns the place around. 

I'm sorry but Sea World is in the heart of the touristy strip of the Gold Coast. It attracts far more international and interstate visitors based on it's proximity to tens of thousands of tourists every day. When I was last at Sea World i just remember the throngs of asian tourists travelling in packs. You don't see that as much in Dreamworld. Sea World's appeal also largely lies in it's animal experiences whereas Dreamworld's relies on it's rides to bring in visitors. You can't compare the two really, they're in different leagues and attract different demographics. Dreamworld's main competitor is Movie World. That is fact.

[New display name]

9 minutes ago, Reanimated35 said:

I guess you could bring up the same argument against Sea World. They lack rides, they've got a bunch of complete idiots protesting against them, and yet they're still surviving. 

The worst (best) case scenario for Dreamworld is that it gets sold to someone who cares and turns the place around. 

The animals swimming in their huge natural habitats is what brings the people to SW.   If they add more new animals to SW they will be ok, don’t you think @SHOOKETH

[Santa07]

I think Dreamworld are going down a different path now, with the whole "better not bigger" thing. I think MW will become the big "thrill" park on the GC, and Dreamworld will push more towards high-quality family-friendly experiences (think Disney-style) Because of this, it's hard to say, I think Dreamworld are trying to appeal to a different demographic to the audience that the hypercoaster is aimed at, so it's very possible that the hyper doesn't have much of an effect at all.

[SHOOKETH]

2 minutes ago, Santa07 said:

I think Dreamworld are going down a different path now, with the whole "better not bigger" thing. I think MW will become the big "thrill" park on the GC, and Dreamworld will push more towards high-quality family-friendly experiences (think Disney-style) Because of this, it's hard to say, I think Dreamworld are trying to appeal to a different demographic to the audience that the hypercoaster is aimed at, so it's very possible that the hyper doesn't have much of an effect at all.

Well that idea was fine...BEFORE 'the incident' but families aren't going back to Dreamworld like they used to, hence the large decline. They NEED a big, fast, twisty, full circuit, potentially record breaking coaster to bring the demographic back that WILL support them despite the bad reputation. That demographic is teenagers and young adults. Parents of young children have a lot more trepidation about re-visiting a theme park that is currently home to a SBNO ride that took the lives of four of it's patrons. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

22 minutes ago, jack.c said:

 Judging by the response from the general public with DC Rivals, it's pretty clear Australia wants more high end roller coasters,

Off topic for a minute - but this is precisely the answer to people who sit there and whinge about why we're getting another coaster instead of a dark ride, or walk through, or monorail.

Coasters are what people get excited about.

20 minutes ago, SHOOKETH said:

I'm sorry but Sea World is in the heart of the touristy strip of the Gold Coast. It attracts far more international and interstate visitors based on it's proximity to tens of thousands of tourists every day. When I was last at Sea World i just remember the throngs of asian tourists travelling in packs. You don't see that as much in Dreamworld. Sea World's appeal also largely lies in it's animal experiences whereas Dreamworld's relies on it's rides to bring in visitors. You can't compare the two really, they're in different leagues and attract different demographics. Dreamworld's main competitor is Movie World. That is fact.

You asked for people's thoughts \ opinions - and i'm sorry but I have to agree with @Reanimated35 - I've seen more asian tourists in DW than in SW on a regular basis - Corroboree, wildlife experience \ tigers bring just as many tourists to Dreamworld - and proximity to the strip doesn't impact on the Asian tourbus market - because they're on a tour bus. The itinerary many of these groups have - its far more enticing to pull off the highway for an hour's experience than to travel into a dead end spit. Plus - many of these tourists have the same marine life - dolphins, seals and sharks - in marine parks in their own backyard. Kangaroos, Koalas etc are unique to Australia, and the experiences offered at Dreamworld trump that particular demographic every time (although, Paradise Country offers similar).

Dreamworld's main competitor is VILLAGE ROADSHOW. It has been said many times - what Village offer across their properties is what dreamworld offers in one place. Wildlife? Paradise Country or Dreamworld. Exotic animals and animal experiences? Sea World or Dreamworld. Waterpark? Wet N Wild or Dreamworld (WWW), big thrill rides? Movie world or Dreamworld. See the pattern here?

Note - i'm firmly in the VRTP camp. Other than free \ event after hours admissions to Dreamworld, I haven't been in a few years. Meanwhile i'm a passholder to village, and have almost continuously held one since 2008. I prefer VRTP's offerings. Nothing i've said above is to suggest that DW's offering is better - only that the comparisons between both corporations can be drawn easily enough - and not discounted as quickly as you have.

[Santa07]

1 minute ago, SHOOKETH said:

Well that idea was fine...BEFORE 'the incident' but families aren't going back to Dreamworld like they used to, hence the large decline. They NEED a big, fast, twisty, full circuit, potentially record breaking coaster to bring the demographic back that WILL support them despite the bad reputation. That demographic is teenagers and young adults. Parents of young children have a lot more trepidation about re-visiting a theme park that is currently home to a SBNO ride that took the lives of four of it's patrons. 

I disagree. Dreamworld need something to bring those families back, if they just keep on ignoring that demographic, then yes they will stop coming. While most people here would love a massive coaster (myself included), Dreamworld just as equally needs a family attraction to replace the massive gap in their lineup that was created when TRRR closed. There's not really any major gap in their thrill-ride lineup at the moment, so I would completely understand if DW adds a family attraction or two in the next few years. Movie World and Sea World have some great family attractions, but I've personally always seen Dreamworld as the park that caters to families the best and I think they should continue that.

39 minutes ago, AlexB said:

My first thoughts is you should avoid using centre alignment on your posts. It has negative connotations around here.. and definitely don't use animated GIFs.

Glad I'm not the only one getting POP vibes from this dude. Centred text, somewhat anti-Dreamworld, hmm 🤔🤔🤔

[Slick]

I'm writing something in this very vein (which you'll see up tomorrow) and my thesis is essentially that being a successful park requires major capex on big, thrilling attractions. Nothing garners more hits, more viewers, more eyeballs and ultimately more tickets purchased than something like a big ride. I know from my own stats on YouTube and on the site (and i'm sure @Richard will agree too) that in particular, roller-coasters garner a nearly ten-fold increase in hits versus any other attraction.

Now, i'm not saying go crazy and build nothing but roller-coasters, because at the core of what makes Dreamworld so unique is the foundation of experiences that wrap around the property - so much so that the ability to have a little slice of everything in the space of a day over say going to many parks over many days is what will continue to keep Dreamworld open. But, also, if I had to be blunt, Ardent need to stop counting the pennies (something they've done since it was still MLT) and give Dreamworld's CEO the kind of money the place needs to fight a HyperCoaster. And that's not to say you need to fight dollar for dollar, you can be crafty and innovative and steal a huge chunk of the HyperCoaster thunder without spending the same amount, but for it to be effective they need to move, and move quick.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

You mean like building Wedgie to fight Aqualoop?

 

'LOL'

[Gold Coast Amusement Force]

I think you should note that it's good that the theme parks on the Gold Coast are currently getting good publicity for a change. Hopefully this helps people forget and forgive what happened at Dreamworld.

In response to the topic, this I think will just bring Dreamworld closer to its death. I mean Movie World now has the spotlight of interest on them, and Dreamworld are not likely to be able to pull a massive announcement out in response to Dreamworld. They are going to announce soon that Coroborre stage whatever is finished and no one is going to really care. Dreamworld is going to loose appeal and loose customers. They already are having much less customers because of the incident and now people that are still interested and don't care about the incident, will probably care more about Movie Worlds new attraction and want to experience whats happening their and what all the hype is about. Dreamworld is eventually going to die in my opinion, unless maybe it's sold to a company that has money that can put into it to revive the park. 

[SHOOKETH]

9 minutes ago, Gold Coast Amusement Force said:

I think you should note that it's good that the theme parks on the Gold Coast are currently getting good publicity for a change. Hopefully this helps people forget and forgive what happened at Dreamworld.

I think it also highlights just how poor Dreamworld's thrill offerings are in comparison though. I don't think this announcement which is specific to Movie World will positively impact Dreamworld in any way. If it's going to have an impact on Dreamworld, it will be negatively. D/W's thrill seeker crowd will be decimated as the thrill seekers will be throwing their money at Village for a VIP pass so they get to ride DC Rivals. The majority of the population don't spend their money on Ardent's theme park pass AND Village's VIP pass in one year so if the choice is going to be made, D/W will lose out big time. FACT.

[Slick]

32 minutes ago, SHOOKETH said:

I think it also highlights just how poor Dreamworld's thrill offerings are in comparison....

In terms of thrill ride offerings, until Rivals opens, Dreamworld has Movie World totally licked. There's just so many different flat rides, some of them iconic legends (Wipeout) that to say Movie World's lineup of thrill ride attractions comes close is hyperbole. It's not a poor offering by any stretch of the imagination, and even when Rivals opens, it won't be poor, it'll be at best out of date.

Talking specifically about roller-coasters though, Movie World's had Dreamworld licked for years. Sidewinder is a second hand, out of date 90's coaster with the smallest inversions on any major coaster in the world, Buzzsaw is a one trick pony, Tower of Terror, one trick pony, and the rest are either universally panned as awful, they're closed or a kid's coaster. Movie World has a world class launch coaster, world class wild mouse coaster (until they stripped it and said nothing since about it), an interesting albeit gimmicky El Loco coaster, a stock standard inverted coaster but with a unique helix and world class VR setup and a kids coaster.

TLDR, almost every major coaster Movie World has brings something world class or unique to the table. Dreamworld's coasters are just not up to the national standard anymore, let alone the international standard.

[New display name]

9 minutes ago, Slick said:

In terms of thrill ride offerings, until Rivals opens, Dreamworld has Movie World totally licked.

Rivals is no good to you if your not tall enough to ride it.

[Slick]

11 minutes ago, Skeeta said:

Rivals is no good to you if your not tall enough to ride it.

I'm okay with that.

[Sarm]

I wouldn't be surprised that the hypercoaster would put DW in an even worse position although, it could actually do the opposite. Sure, locals would probably opt to buy VRTP season passes instead of DW but the hypercoaster is going to bring people to the Gold Coast, it's an added reason for overseas tourists and even Australians not living on the GC to come to the Gold Coast. Many holiday go-ers may decide to spend a day at DreamWorld whilst they are on holiday, especially those overseas and may not ever come back to the Gold Coast, they're want to make the most out of their trip. It's optimistic, but it's possible

[pushbutton]

I think it's good that each park focuses on different types of attractions. I wouldn't want Dreamworld to be basically a copy of Movie World.

I think the recent statement by Dreamworld that they intend to focus on offering "experiences that stay with you" rather than thrills, is potentially on the right path. Just depends on them making sure those new experiences are of high enough quality to impress their target customers enough that they'll go to Dreamworld in preference to Movie World.

 

In other words, not everyone thinks a rollercoaster is the best type of theme park attraction, and if Dreamworld creates new rides and other attractions that appeal to those people who don't, then they should be able to secure those people as long-term customers.

I keep saying this, but Dreamworld should focus their investments on creating Dream-like experiences (which can include rides, but also other attractions too).

Edited June 6, 2017 by pushbutton

[Santa07]

14 minutes ago, Sarm said:

I wouldn't be surprised that the hypercoaster would put DW in an even worse position although, it could actually do the opposite. Sure, locals would probably opt to buy VRTP season passes instead of DW but the hypercoaster is going to bring people to the Gold Coast, it's an added reason for overseas tourists and even Australians not living on the GC to come to the Gold Coast. Many holiday go-ers may decide to spend a day at DreamWorld whilst they are on holiday, especially those overseas and may not ever come back to the Gold Coast, they're want to make the most out of their trip. It's optimistic, but it's possible

Well said, I think a lot of international and interstate tourists that come to Australia go to both MW and DW, if you're on the GC you might as well do both while you're there.

[SHOOKETH]

4 minutes ago, Santa07 said:

Well said, I think a lot of international and interstate tourists that come to Australia go to both MW and DW, if you're on the GC you might as well do both while you're there.

The parks heavily rely on locals though. Their business is 70% locals. Locals aint going back in a hurry to ride the Cyclone, sorry the "Sidewinder". 

[pushbutton]

In regard to the number of comments and "hits" on social media as a measure of how much appeal forthcoming attractions hold, I believe a lot of it comes down to how things are marketed.

I am certain that if Dreamworld (or any park) were to launch a really great new ride / walk-through experience and market it in a way that makes it sound exciting then that would get just as much interest on social media as the Hypercoaster is.

[SHOOKETH]

2 minutes ago, pushbutton said:

In regard to the number of comments and "hits" on social media as a measure of how much appeal forthcoming attractions hold, I believe a lot of it comes down to how things are marketed.

I am certain that if Dreamworld (or any park) were to launch a really great new ride / walk-through experience and market it in a way that makes it sound exciting then that would get just as much interest on social media as the Hypercoaster is.

No one is denying that Dreamworld could have a marketing winner if they launched a new ride. The problem is, they don't look likely to launch a new ride anytime soon judging by Ardent's tightening of the purse strings and the fact that the park will take a loss at this financial year in the tens of millions.

[pushbutton]

Just now, SHOOKETH said:

No one is denying that Dreamworld could have a marketing winner if they launched a new ride. The problem is, they don't look likely to launch a new ride anytime soon judging by Ardent's tightening of the purse strings and the fact that the park will take a loss at this financial year in the tens of millions.

Agreed. I understand the financial position they must be in, but without a doubt they must make a firm decision that either they are committed to the future of Dreamworld long term, or they're not.

If they are, they absolutely must invest fairly heavily, and soon, to remove all traces of Thunder River Rapids, and replace it with something really exciting and fresh.

If they're not, they should be actively seeking a buyer for the park. If at all possible that should be a major theme park operator who is likely to make the above investments.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

2 minutes ago, SHOOKETH said:

The parks heavily rely on locals though. Their business is 70% locals. Locals aint going back in a hurry to ride the Cyclone, sorry the "Sidewinder". 

To the contrary. there are many reasons to go back and ride 'old favourites' again and again.

I proposed to my wife on Cyclone, and immediately after our wedding, we rode Sea Viper. Naturally one of those isn't an option any longer, but clearly - some people hold special memories with certain places \ rides \ attractions in theme parks, and this can bring them back, even if you don't see the ride as being that special.

Hell - all one has to do is to look at the run of the Disney Electrical Parade (and the uproar every time they announce it's closure) to know that locals will keep coming back to ride old favourites.

1 minute ago, pushbutton said:

In regard to the number of comments and "hits" on social media as a measure of how much appeal forthcoming attractions hold, I believe a lot of it comes down to how things are marketed.

I am certain that if Dreamworld (or any park) were to launch a really great new ride / walk-through experience and market it in a way that makes it sound exciting then that would get just as much interest on social media as the Hypercoaster is.

But everything is relative. If you spend $30million on a ride, it's easy to justify say - 2% of the ride cost on marketing - and spend $600k on advertising.

But then you go and spend $2million (generous) on a walk-through experience. Can you really justify spending $600k, or 30% of the attraction cost on advertising? (When 2% would be $40k)?

No - everything is relative.