Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
JewlzX2 said:
JMHO.. maybe now that Pirates AND EITA is closed, MAYBE they will sell those off to a different park, and come back with some kick ass ride!! I have a feeling that July is going go be a BIG month for them. That's really when families take their vacation. I also believe that the July 4th event will be a great take off for them. I have faith that BGW will see it's 40th AND THEN some.

But as what?

I wish I had your enthusiasm. It's just that, as has been pointed out before, Busch Gardens used to not have to make money. So for most of those 40 years, all it had to do was not go broke.

Now, they have to generate income, which is tougher, and they don't have AB to buoy them.

I hope you're right. Things are just starting to look up for the park.
 
David said:
Shafor said:
When it's a ride that NO ONE rides, has a horrible reputation, and has been nothing but a massive embarrassment to the park since it opened...?

That's beside the point. The reason it was closed was due to budget, not because no one liked the ride. There is a big difference.

Closing an attraction for "budgetary reasons" and because "no one liked it" are not mutually exclusive.

It's also possible that they've had mechanical issues and simply decided not to continue dumping money into this thing for the needed upkeep. (Could explain why it was closed abruptly on the busiest week of the year?)

Forgive me if I don't partake in the "panic" over this. I don't see it as some kind of foreboding omen. I think there is probably a lot we don't know.
 
If EitA was closed to save money on operations, then we might see other operations slowed down as well. I'm thinking no more three trains and even one train on slower days for the coasters (except bolt, where we might see three or four). Fire in pompeii might be cut, stuff like that.
 
Dr. Julius Money Ed.D said:
It's just that, as has been pointed out before, Busch Gardens used to not have to make money. So for most of those 40 years, all it had to do was not go broke.

People need to repeat this to themselves as a mantra everytime they think the park is going to hell. Their entire financial mission has been turned on it's head the past few years.
 
Zachary said:
Cody said:
Dammit Zach, we expect you to be a hard hitting, no holds barred, whistle blowing journalist, why else do we go to this page daily?!?! Report, man, report! :D

:p Source Safety > All

I thought you meant no one would care if you reported the park Landscaping Department could only budget for 450 new daisies instead of 500 or something like that...
 
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.
 
It's about attracting the right clientelle.

When you offer deep discounts, you attract discount seekers. These people tend to find ways to cut their costs wherever they can, rather than spend what they saved on other things.

As a simple example: you're an Arby's franchisee. Two big-box stores come to you and say they want you to put a restaurant in their store...Walmart and Target. Which one makes more sense?

Walmart, by far, attracts more customers. BUT, Target customers are more likely to spend money.

If it's me, I'm building into Target. People shopping at Walmart are looking to *not* spend money. People shopping at Target are more likely to come up off of a few extra bucks in order to have a certain kind of experience.

When you offer things for free, you get free loaders. You fill the park up with people who are willing to buy a soda, maybe, but they're not buying the glass flowers or the wine-tasting option or whatever the hell else you're selling.

You need to attract customers who want to spend money...you don't do that by giving things away.
 
Zachary said:
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.

Then you aren't a very good journalist huh? As a media member, I report everything that comes across my desk...*&%# Friendships...:p
 
Cody said:
Zachary said:
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.

Then you aren't a very good journalist huh? As a media member, I report everything that comes across my desk...*&%# Friendships...:p

Pretty soon, your desk finds itself without anything coming across it, haha.
 
Cody said:
Zachary said:
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.

Then you aren't a very good journalist huh? As a media member, I report everything that comes across my desk...*&%# Friendships...:p

There are also jobs at risk for releasing this information, not just friendships.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zachary
Dr. Julius Money Ed.D said:
It's about attracting the right clientelle.

When you offer deep discounts, you attract discount seekers. These people tend to find ways to cut their costs wherever they can, rather than spend what they saved on other things.

There you described a large part of the issue. Disney World has done just that. They have inflated costs and then advertised everything as "30% off" etc. That grabbed the attention of the extreme couponer class. Those who do not care about quality or variety of offerings so long as they feel that they are obtaining a deal.

Issue is that that is only sustainable in the short term. That will disappear as well as discounts are regularly offered.
 
Dr. Julius Money Ed.D said:
Cody said:
Zachary said:
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.

Then you aren't a very good journalist huh? As a media member, I report everything that comes across my desk...*&%# Friendships...:p

Pretty soon, your desk finds itself without anything coming across it, haha.

Nah, I'm in sportstalk...people always want to say something!


Pretzel Kaiser said:
Cody said:
Zachary said:
Nah, I know people would want to know if the daisy count was cut back. :p

Generally, I say everything I can. There are exceptions here and there, but if it's safe to do so, the source approves it, and I'm sure of its validity, I'll normally post it.

Then you aren't a very good journalist huh? As a media member, I report everything that comes across my desk...*&%# Friendships...:p

There are also jobs at risk for releasing this information, not just friendships.

I am messing with Zach, hence the :p at the end
 
Pretzel Kaiser said:
I feel the same way. While I can objectively understand why the park is in this situation, it's just jarring to hear the park that we all know and love to have to resort to shutting down ride to save a few bucks.

How is the local media up there? Do they skew toward the businesses or toward the consumer population? If they favor the consumers I can not see this ending well if they get a hold of it.
 
Pretzel Kaiser said:
redsoxfan787 said:
It is just so shocking to me hearing BG being in financial trouble..

I feel the same way. While I can objectively understand why the park is in this situation, it's just jarring to hear the park that we all know and love to have to resort to shutting down ride to save a few bucks.

Like Six Flags or something.

I hoping Shafor is right and this is really more about maintenance costs for an unpopular ride.
 
OnTheFritz said:
How is the local media up there? Do they skew toward the businesses or toward the consumer population? If they favor the consumers I can not see this ending well if they get a hold of it.

Typically if they cover the park, it's just because the park paid for the promotion time or there's a new ride opening.

Dr. Julius Money Ed.D said:
I hoping Shafor is right and this is really more about maintenance costs for an unpopular ride.

The thing about that is the ride hardly had any downtime from what I understand.
 
Wow! This topic certainly has blown up the forums. Well, I for one have no idea what Zachary is talking about. He must have me confused with somebody else. Me thinks he put too much cream (the adult beverage kind) in his coffee this morning. I have never blown off work to go to a theme park for a few hours.

That being said, a buddy of mine shared a WHOPPER of a tale with me just a few minutes ago. He goes by the monicker ChickenHawk. He is primarily a lurker, but on occasion he lets me in on some cool stuff, and may even make himself known to the forums on occasion (Though the moons may have to be aligned just right).

Anyway, there is a really good story coming shortly. Stay tuned!! :cool:
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad