Could like-for-like retracks of coasters ever eclipse coaster removals?

[Matt N]

Hi guys. In recent years, like-for-like retracks as a concept seem to have gained considerable popularity. Before the mid-2010s or so, they were a mostly alien concept on steel coasters in particular, but ever since the Incredible Hulk at Islands of Adventure got retracked for the 2016 season, the idea of like-for-like retracking on coasters became far more engrained in the conscious of the theme park industry. Since then, the idea has taken off considerably, and not just among Disney and Universal; there have been a number of rides in parks that have lower budgets to work with that have been retracked like-for-like in recent years. For instance, the likes of Eurosat at Europa Park, Python at Efteling, Shaman at Gardaland and Colossos at Heide Park have been retracked like-for-like in recent years, and Nemesis at Alton Towers is currently in the process of being retracked.

With more and more rides being retracked and given a new lease of life as of late, it does beg the question; could like-for-like retracks of coasters ever eclipse coaster removals? In many cases, could preserving existing rides and giving them another lease of life become more common than removing rides?

I know that retracking is still a relatively uncommon phenomenon at present, but with even rides like the conventional Vekoma/Arrow looping coasters receiving retracks as of late, not to mention the rides that are receiving more piecemeal retracking work like The Big One at Blackpool Pleasure Beach, it does make me wonder whether retracking will become a more common path moving forward, possibly even more common than coaster removals.

Personally, I think that coaster removals will always be a thing. For progress to happen, removals will always need to happen, and some smaller parks likely can’t make the business case for retracks. However, I do think that retracks could possibly become more common and removals could become less common. I feel that this could be exacerbated by the fact that coasters are arguably aging more slowly from a reviews standpoint than they used to.

For instance, Nemesis V1 and Corkscrew at Alton Towers were both 28 years old when they closed. It seems as though most who were around in 2008 agree that Corkscrew aged a fair bit more quickly than Nemesis did. I get the impression that while iconic, Corkscrew just didn’t stand up to the newer rides reviews-wise and felt inherently dated by the time it closed, whereas Nemesis V1 was still many people’s favourite on park when it closed. Even away from Alton Towers, it does seem as though older coasters are generally better at holding their own against the newer rides than they were in the past, and I do think that that could potentially result in more retracks and less removals in the years to come.

But what do you think? Do you think that like-for-like retracks will ever eclipse removals, or do you think that they will remain a rare phenomenon, with removals still being the typical path taken?

 

[Hixee]

I doubt they'll ever become the first choice. They're an expensive way to refresh a ride which is difficult to market as 'new'. Especially with the massive advances in ride style that have happened over the last 5-10-15-20 years, I imagine it's very hard to justify from a cost-benefit perspective. It seems to me to only really make sense for particularly iconic rides, where there's a lot more to the ride than just the physical hardware.

Plus, perhaps not all manufacturers would be as keen. It ties up production in their plants that they may prefer to use for their newer, more marketable, product lines.

I reckon it'll still happen fairly rarely, in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Indy]

@Hixee pretty much summed up all of my thoughts. A retrack will occur from time to time, but I can't see it becoming particularly prevalent. It's difficult for the park to market so it is difficult to see a good return on the investment. Outside of Disney and Universal, I feel it'll be particularly rare in the US as parks are obsessed with marketing superlatives, for better or for worse.

 

[Hyde]

John Hildebrandt, former President of Cedar Point, put it poetically during the Gatekeeper Media Day (which I recently stumbled upon swag from doing some basement cleaning!) when asked about the removal of Disaster Transport and Space Spiral for Gatekeeper, to the effect of; "Every ride and attraction has their place and time. And as new generations of park goers visit, they have a chance to create new memories with new experiences and rides, which sometimes means removing classic and beloved attractions." This was especially resonant on the removal of the Space Spiral, a very cherished ride, that didn't need to be removed, but was so taken out as Gatekeeper would essentially landlock removal with no easy egress for taking the observation tower down - in essence committing it to 20-30 more years of existence.

To be blunt - there are very few rides that will stand the test of time (and be "worthy" of retracking), especially for amusement parks in bigger markets that strive ever more to have new wow factor for visitors (as @Indy alluded to). In this way, amusement parks are more than any one ride, but genuinely focused on the overall "experience"... or at least that's what I tell myself to sleep at night.

 

[Gazza]

It ties up production in their plants that they may prefer to use for their newer, more marketable, product lines.

Do they really think like that though? They get paid.

Extending that line of thinking, would Vekoma say "No don't order Roller Skaters from us because we'd prefer to build and market tilt coasters"?

 

[Indy]

Do they really think like that though? They get paid.

Extending that line of thinking, would Vekoma say "No don't order Roller Skaters from us because we'd prefer to build and market tilt coasters"?

It depends on how busy a company is, their manufacturing capabilities, and their staffing. A lot of companies would gladly take a project that will provide income, but some might want to save their capabilities for more profitable projects that grow a brand or product line. For instance, RMC wasn’t exactly lacking in opportunities with topper track, but they stopped offering it to focus on other products.

 

[rob666]

No, people generally want new stuff, not copies of old stuff.
You can get exceptions like nemesis, but generally, coasters are pulled down to build something newer, higher, faster, bigger and better, to pull in more punters.
So like for like replacements will never eclipse removals.
Forward ever, backward never.

 

[Hyde]

Forward ever, backward never.