Concept Busch Gardens/Sesame Place/Water Country New Orleans

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
W

warfelg

Mar 16, 2016
8,741
14,509
260
ADMINS - Sorry I didn't know where else to put this.

Ok so, I brought up this idea in the SPSD thread, and I wanted to flesh out the concept a bit more, and that is the concept of a Busch Gardens/Sesame Place New Orleans. Personally, I think this is a market where there's no competition, a lesson on the build out burden, and the space to expand. It would be a VERY risky proposition for SEAS to take on, but it's one that's got the potential to be great.

Untitled drawing.png
So I think in some respects this is easy to follow. We got BGW with the Europe theme, BGT with the Africa theme, and I'm giving BGNO a South America theme.

The PINK area is the entrance zone, themed to Columbia. The trapezoid shape is for an outdoor theater, with the pink covering being a shaded cover (over a flat package too) for the viewing area. Like San Marco in BGW, the general idea is a theater you can walk by and see the show.

Going clockwise the YELLOW area is based around Peru. The strange shape in there is a sit down dining option with a portico that reaches out over the pathway to a small walkup snack stand and shop. Across the way, looping out behind the park, acting as a "welcome carrot" to the incoming traffic is the B&M Hyper.

Continuing RED area we got Venezuela. In this area we got a Sky Rocket II. Yes is silly and boring, but for a rebuilt park, having some cheap coaster would really help. The stretch of red triangles is canvass coverings over the walkway to create a 'cart ally' of food, snacks, gifts, and games. Meant to have a very festive and market like feel. In case you can't tell, most of the areas are getting some type of indoor or covered area to give shade from the hot New Orleans sun.

In the BLACK zone we got Argentina, where I bring in GCI to refurb Mega Zeph to it's former glory, except I would grow it to 160-75 feet tall. The black semicircle would be an indoor theater, doing a show based on the Patagonia region of the country.

Finally the TEAL area is a Brazil themed land. The only spot early that gets two coasters based on the space. The large rectangle there is a Festhaus like space for dining and a show.

Outside of those major things, there would be a drop tower, flats, new shops, dining areas, restrooms, and the systems needed to make the park operate.

I got to go to bed for a one day work trip, but that's just the start of my BGNO master plan/dream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SukaUniFl, Mushroom and BGWnut
I hope you have a secret passage to Ft. Knox. Last June New Orleans estimated about $1.5 million to demolish the "remains". Considering it was all virtually under water, you'd have to start basically from scratch after you demolished what remains. Which is probably why every major amusement player has presumably already passed on rebuilding the site.

Good concept, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter R. and Mushroom
Not really related to whether this is a good idea or not, but can SEAS even build a new park with the Busch Gardens brand? They got special permission to keep the name for the other two parks after the several sales of the company but I don’t think that the Busch family is in any way connected to the current organization. While SEAS owns the brand, it might be a legal grey area to open a new park under the Busch name.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tursiops and Mushroom
ˁ˚ᴥ˚ˀ said:
Not really related to whether this is a good idea or not, but can SEAS even build a new park with the Busch Gardens brand? They got special permission to keep the name for the other two parks after the several sales of the company but I don’t think that the Busch family is in any way connected to the current organization. While SEAS owns the brand, it might be a legal grey area to open a new park under the Busch name.
Click to expand...
Last time they were planning a new Busch Gardens was part of the complex in Dubai that fell through. That was announced after the sale of Anheuser Busch to InBev, but before InBev sold the parks. Quick search in the USPTO site lists Anheuser Busch as owning the Busch Gardens mark still. So, who knows what they can do!
 
If the record says AB but no InBev, then technically it's not the same company as the the current one making all the beer.

I've heard of cases where even if the company operations don't change when it gets acquired (AB-InBev still makes beer), many contracts written before a merger become null and void afterwards because technically the agreement was made with the previous company and not the current one.

So does that mean, however improbable, that SEAS would be able to do whatever with the Busch Gardens name as AB-InBev wouldn't be able to make a claim to it as it's technically not their company?
 
That makes sense - I figured trademarks were a huge piece of the sale.

Thanks!
 
Jonesta6 said:
If the record says AB but no InBev, then technically it's not the same company as the the current one making all the beer.

I've heard of cases where even if the company operations don't change when it gets acquired (AB-InBev still makes beer), many contracts written before a merger become null and void afterwards because technically the agreement was made with the previous company and not the current one.

So does that mean, however improbable, that SEAS would be able to do whatever with the Busch Gardens name as AB-InBev wouldn't be able to make a claim to it as it's technically not their company?
Click to expand...
Also this is why you often hear about deals taking a long time to close. They have to redo a lot of these contracts to reflect the new corporate owner. This is part of the reason why sometimes mergers and acquisitions are announced but they aren't completed for months.
 
Jonesta6 said:
Assume that this all works for the park - what happens when the next big hurricane hits?
Click to expand...

Levy construction and flood prevention tools are lightyears ahead of when it was hit last. Also last time Katrina hit, it was more the levies breaking that caused the problems and not the hurricane itself.

GrandpaD said:
I hope you have a secret passage to Ft. Knox. Last June New Orleans estimated about $1.5 million to demolish the "remains". Considering it was all virtually under water, you'd have to start basically from scratch after you demolished what remains. Which is probably why every major amusement player has presumably already passed on rebuilding the site.

Good concept, though.
Click to expand...

The thought process here is the bones are in place. Thats what the thought is here. A bigger reason why they can't get something in there and every major amusement player has passed isn't the cost. It's the planning and city approval that's struggling.
 
So @warfelg you're saying that the current infrastructure is usable when it's been abandoned for about a decade and a half in the heat and humidity of that region?

Something tells me that it's going to be closer to a total gut job - burst pipes or at least a major need to flush out all the gunk, and likely most wiring is rusted out from whatever is still standing.

Also, I've heard of poor turnaround on planning and permitting but seriously a local government whom could always use $ especially from such a large project (fees for permitting, tax revenue, jobs to boost the local economy, etc) is not willing to provide some sort of pathway forward if there's a legitimate business willing to invest in such a project?

However, I like the idea of being able to reuse the land if what I think is wrong.
 
Nothing is going in there any time soon. The park is s complete loss SF stripped anything usable from it before abandoning it. Years of vandalism as nd the rather harsh climate destroyed it even further it's a complete level and rebuild project at this point. Also the park was never a strong performer for SF making it questionable how much and how fast a company would see return on the high investment cost of rebuilding there.
 
@Jonesta6 What I'm saying is that there is already some level of infrastructure in place (water main line, connection to power grid, sewage main line, level clearings for paths, parking, and entrance).

Yes I understand that any development of this site would require taking it all the way down and building it back up. But often times the expanding of infrastructure to an area is why we don't see many new parks period. If we do see something substantial happen (Hersheypark expansion/Epic Worlds), the park usually ends up paying a good amount for changes to the infrastructure to handle the utility and transportation changes. In this case you got a ready made lot with infrastructure.

The only place I would say someone come in and rebuild what's existing is Mega Zeph. Outside of that, most of what I would look at is use the footprints of the buildings and pathways but rebuilt. Add some areas of personal touch (like I showed), and build out the park from there.
 
I know SF supposedly took everything worth taking when they abandoned the park, but what would it take besides some large cranes and a few new components to remove the rides from this park, refurbish, and install elsewhere?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad