Daved Thomson

Love this stuff! Interesting that park management chose Magic Mountain's Jet Stream to represent the park's new Hydro Flume for the 1975 season.

With more attendance comes potential crowding issues. But shows in themselves tend to help with crowding, because you take a few thousand people out of the park and rides for up to a half hour.

 

I'm also amazed at how infrequently they use the main outdoor arena for concerts. I seem to remember in the early years they would have a concert nearly every weekend, but maybe I'm wrong. Didn't they also have horse/wild west shows in that arena?

Yes, they had western/horse shows in the arena during the park's early years before the Arena floor was paved as well as other seasons after it was paved by laying down a layer of dirt, if I'm not mistaken.

The current management (and even the previous management) I'm sure wishes the investment had never been made. I know Red Zone made plans to remove KK and send it to the planned park in Dubai and saddle them with the costs. It was a big mistake made by past management.

 

Had the old Premier management stayed and had the former park manager stayed and followed his plans, it might have been another story. The bold plans of investing in rides, shows and theme elements and completely refresh the park COULD have paid off and made it a smart investment. The $2 billion in debts that Premier had made that not work out with the stockholder revolt.

We're in agreement on the key issues here. It's just that the park is very much now locked in a vicious cycle where it really needs to increase its attendance with a broadened base of customers but the park doesn't have a wide enough variety of attractions to attract them. I'm really not suggesting that they pull any of the coasters that they already have and am hoping that JLBFM is the first of a new group of rides that is geared toward all of the family. Dark rides are a form of shows in and of themselves. I realize that the Aqua Spectacle had real maintenance issues, but it's draw when it had dolphin shows was significant. Maintenance, in general, has always been a big issue at GA largely because of the size and uniqueness of some of the structures. But, those same structures were really what was unique about the park and did drive the overall image of the park. I just find it a shame that so few remain and will never be replaced. The cost of having lost them, I believe, is far more expensive than it would have been to properly maintain them.

Neither of those parks has Kingda Ka. That requires $5 million in yearly maintenance. You want shows, you loose Ka. Unfortunately that's a decision that's not so easy to undue since it is a marquis attraction (people actually come to the park for it, like it or not).

 

The current park is unfortunately saddled with the decision of the past management as well as the present, so it always comes down to what decision will make more money than the cost (RoI). If they spent the $5 million on shows and shut down Ka, attendance would go down. Yes, a few people would come back because "now there are shows!" but they'd lose more people because the signature coaster was closed.

 

And, I absolutely agree, a well rounded park needs shows as well as rides, but that ship has sailed (for now) unless there's a sudden change in management priorities or finances.

 

If Kingda Ka requires $5 Million in annual maintenance they really should have considered such costs when they purchased it. If they didn't, it's just another example of poor management selling off short term profits at the cost of longer term brand equity. If what you'e saying is true, I don't believe for one minute that Kingda Ka draws significant numbers of guests (season pass or gate) to justify its continued existance some 12 years after its debut. Again, it's not like this park is drawing 4 or 5 million people annually. It continues to draw below its 90's peak and has been surpassed by other seasonal theme parks in smaller markets with a better balance of attractions. Sadly, I'm of the opinion that the park can not consistently grow its attendance by marketing a single new attraction each season as opposed to marketing the entire park and park experience. Unfortunately, the entire park experience at this point is extremely limited to thrill rides of limited appeal and children's rides of limited adult participation. Obviously much of the industry has moved in a similar direction, but again, it seems most obvious at the Six flags parks.

Six Flags' biggest problem has been inconsistent ownership and management which has resulted in completely inconsistent marketing directed at an even more inconsistent target market. Why on earth would a company only target the teen/young adult market with its products? Most don't have jobs or the resulting money required to spend on products and have to rely on their parents for such funds. So, yes, Six Flags does appear to conduct a significant amount of research related to its customers/target and what they want, but it's obvious that they completely ignore the huge potential market of customers that are not attending their parks. If you don't have a good balance of attractions that appeal (at least somewhat) to everyone in the family, you're not going to get everyone from the family attending the park. Let's be realistic and consider current attendance levels at Six Flags (specifically GA). The population centers of NY/Philadelphia are, combined, the biggest in the country and have continued to grow since 1974. GA's attendance is stagnant, at best, and below its peak levels of the 90s. Just my opinion, but if your building a park that increasingly only appeals to teens and ignoring the source of income for those teens by removing attractions that appeal to them (again, parents and other family members), you're never going to consistently grow your attendance. It seems, especially with their pricing strategies for FastPass and other revenue sources, that they're content with a very limited target base and the resulting attendance in favor of milking their smaller attendance for greater margins.

I know exactly what you mean, Daved. Couldn't agree more. In 1977, for example, there were so many trees inside GA that you couldn't even see half of the rides. When you went around a bend on a pathway, all of a sudden you saw a ton of rides that you couldn't wait to jump on.

 

Like you, I don't like these fast passes and you go straight to the front of the line. I understand it's all about making a profit anyway possible. That said, it's also about making the guests feel welcomed. It was better when everybody essentially had to wait the same amount of time to get on a ride.

 

I was up by Magic Mountain (I live about 30 minutes away without traffic) the other day and all I could see were roller coasters while driving on the freeway. There's no variety anymore.

Did not know that you, too, are in Southern California. I live in Long Beach and worked in Marketing Research at SFMM during my senior year in college (1986/87). I worked in research at GA when I was home for Summer during my college years. Just my opinion, but personally, GA's balance/variety of offerings problem seems to have really accelerated over (at least) the last decade. MM's balance/variety of offerings problem seems to have existed since probably 1978 dispite occasional efforts to improve the balance. Oddly enough, over time, trees and green space at MM have increased (the park was built in the barren high desert hills) while at GA (built in a forest) the opposite has occurred.

One of the best seasons in the history of Great Adventure. The park was on a major upswing in those days. Love the photos on here from that season. Hard to believe it was 40 years ago.

 

Question: For those of you who attended the park in 1977 and in 2017, which version do you like better and why?

1977 was my first visit to the park and, easily, I prefer 1977 versus 2017. I think the park was a better balanced park (rides, shows, and attractions) back then with something for everyone to enjoy. The significant destruction of the forest atmosphere over time has really detracted from the sense of escaping the real world for a fantasy world. Lastly, I think the addition of fast pass like pay policies (in most theme parks) have created an almost confrontational atmosphere/class structure between guests that really detracts from everyone enjoying all that the park has to offer. And, the variety and balance of attractions is completely lost with extreme rides/roller coasters being the primary attraction and very little in the way of shows and family attractions. So while I was much happier with GA back in 1977, I'd have to say that is true for almost every theme park I can think of that I have visited more recently. I think the differences over 40 years, however, seem more pronounced.

QUESTION #446: What Warner Bros movie character officially opened Skull Mountain at the coaster's grand opening media event?

Parker Stevenson from The Hardy Boys?

HINT: If the animals in the Safari could read, the sign would have served a purpose! (And no, it is not the Safari or SORA attraction.)

The Condor.

Because they used conventional light bulbs that are not readily available?

Sally Corporation? Are they a specialty contractor?

Sally Corporation is a dark ride manufacturer that has been around for quite some time (1977). They more or less started as an alternative that mimics animatronics, but with a less realistic feel for the viewing audience.

That is one perfectly executed product positioning, requiring not one word of explanation... At least for anyone with half a brain.

Why was Captain Crunch a SFGA character from 1978-1979?

 

Easy answer... Quaker Oats (makers of Captain Crunch cereal) sponsored the Aqua Spectacle. The large park maps referred to the stadium as the Captain Crunch Aqua Spectacle.

It's important to keep in mind that Warner LeRoy saw the concept of WDW as a complete resort when proposing Great Adventure in a similar vain. As such, the idea of the hotels and other commercial entities were always intended to be "on property." The idea was to develop Great Adventure more along the lines of Walt Disney World (controlling the development) versus the development of Disneyland (which saw its development beyond its property as out of control).

QUESTION #443: Which Great Adventure coaster was at the park the longest in a SBNO status (Standing But Not Operating)?

I'm going with the Wild Rider, Big Fury's replacement.

I don't ever remember that entrance. Was this actually located on the side of the AMH rather than the front where it is now located. I remember seeing the Mahoney Brothers perform in the theater in 1978 at the very start of the season and could have sworn that we entered the building on the side near Rotor and exited through the doors on the Garden of Eatin' side.

Great finds. I really enjoy reading these things.

I'm going to say the Kiddie Boats.

Roaring Rapids

Absolutely True!

July 1977. The first ride on that day and every visit since, was the Big Wheel.

For me, personally, it's Great Adventure. But the official nomenclature goes back to the park's 1977 purchase by Six Flags. Great Adventure, unlike AstroWorld, was the first of the Non-Original Six Flags parks to actually include Six Flags as part of the park's name (becoming Six Flags Great Adventure as opposed to AstroWorld becoming AstroWorld with the notation "A Member of the Six Flags Family"). Each of the purchased parks beginning with Great Adventure became Six Flags Park Name, with the exception of parks that were acquired in Texas and the reason is that each of the acquired Texas parks were not initially purchased by Six Flags, they were initially only managed by Six Flags, and purchased later. Within the company, each of the park's was given a four digit acronym, that initially was used predominately by corporate and finance systems when identifying revenue from each park that was tallied at the end of each operating day (I worked in cash control on the red-eye shift briefly in 1985) and reported to corporate. Even then, the four letters associated with Great Adventure were SFGA (Great America was SFGM), and AstroWorld was AWSF (despite AstroWorld then being fully owned by the company).

 

Unfortunately, it was with Time-Warner's 100% ownership of Six Flags that the parks saw both an increased emphasis on themed elements within the individual parks, but a real loss in the individuality and identity of each park, both at the park level and in nomenclature.

Great looking little park. It's amazing how just some basic landscaping of the natural environment makes everything appear much more cohesive and appealing.

What people just don't seem to get is very simple. What is acceptable and not acceptable to be worn in a given location, is up to the owner/management of that location. Period. There really doesn't have to be any discussion of the matter at all as long as the rule is posted at the entrance to the location. It's also funny, to me at least, that people are turned away from the Disney parks pretty frequently for not wearing proper attire, yet, I can't recall the last time I have heard anyone making the nightly news or local newspaper because of it.

Since it seems to be located near the blue Dream Street tent , are we talking about that ride with a Free Fall sign on it that was in the middle of Dream Street? But, the building's architectural styling is also signaling either Sarajevo Bobsled or Shockwave?