Project 2022: Pantheon
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
- Status
Ehh I doubt it now that the slide is coming into fruition. Probably will be like 220 ft tall or so but who knows.
I dont recall ever seeing that and even if it did come from seaworld there's no promise that it isn't them pulling a red herring.
The slide included RMC Gwazi which we now know is happening. Seems like a dumb way to do a red herring if you ask me.
Simply put, people should be aware that often times rumors can became a snake eating it's own tail. I'm not certain that many of the rumors we have "heard" are just heresay that gets repeated by very enthusiastic enthusiasts.
But by all means, discuss away! I'll just be here eating my popcorn.
But by all means, discuss away! I'll just be here eating my popcorn.
The slides are not "confirmed" and never can be unless Seaworld decides to say they are which feels... unlikely. However, what we do know is that other information from the slides has been confirmed and Seaworld did acknowledge the leak. We don't know where they came from, but we do know that at least some information on them is correct. Giving more support to the BGW slide is that RCDB created the listing on their page and confirmed Intamin and the speed is listed at 76mph which the slides also said. Moreover, the slide matches what we just saw at the trade show and Intamin is the only manufacturer we know of making rides that look like the slide.
So.... no, the slide isn't gospel. It isn't confirmed. But I mean, if you have a better lead, let me know. Better yet... @Zachary what should we believe? Tell us, oh wise one.
So.... no, the slide isn't gospel. It isn't confirmed. But I mean, if you have a better lead, let me know. Better yet... @Zachary what should we believe? Tell us, oh wise one.
I need to work harder to get that joke percentage up.
Just a quick reminder that while the information on the slides could have accurately reflected the planning at one time, that does NOT mean it is still accurate. Plans evolve, budgets change, people reverse course. We simply do not have enough information to assess with any certainty whether the leaked BGW slide ever was or now is an accurate depiction of future attraction at BGW, and it irresponsible to claim that anything is "confirmed."
I think that number might be a little high
This is a lie. SEAS did confirm that all of the slides collectively known as the PowerPoint was in fact real and from a internal company presentation. If you need a source:
The only thing SEAS did not back up was if the information was current, unchanged, or the context of that information was in relation to actual attractions being added. Therefore, the information may be old and outdated, it may have changed many times, or any piece of (or the whole presentation) may have been an internal joke or may have been designed to be leaked and contain false information altogether. To simply state that it is not an official or internal document is entirely misleading and incorrect.
I feel bad for all the passerby's who have a hard time trying to follow along passively and are lost in the muck.
Last edited:
Thanks, we're on the same boat. Just concerned that the word "confirmed" is being thrown around so much. IE see Nicole's post.
Just as a fun demonstration, here are the slides we know about and the status of the projects:
If we start to see movement on the two most surprising projects on that list, it would greatly boost my confidence in the accuracy of the BGW slide.
- SWSD 2019: Announced.
- BGT 2020: Teased.
- BGW 2020: Documents filed.
- SWSA 2020: Nothing.
- SWO 2020: Nothing.
If we start to see movement on the two most surprising projects on that list, it would greatly boost my confidence in the accuracy of the BGW slide.
Last edited:
As someone who has passively browsed, seeing all these posts claiming the slide/slides are not confirmed was extremely confusing mainly because their origin was confirmed, just not the content.
It should be clarified and specified what exactly is being referred to as confirmed; the origin or the content.
I had a long ra nting post about this typed out. But got caught up at work. Almost better that you did this than I did because mine was a little meaner.
A few changes...
5% Good new information
2% Reminding people that there is a front page article that has all the carefully confirmed information and only it is verified.
3% Reminding people that opinion, conjecture, and truthiness are not the same thing as verified.
The rest seems right.
- Status