Should Alton Towers Keep The Smiler?

[ignace]

And how was that marketing money spent?

Telling everyone and his dog that it was a "world first", "one of a kind" etc....

Swarm had a massive marketing campaign and it flopped apparently.

So you are saying that if they announced Swarm as a World first (thus lying), it would have been a hit? I'm understanding it as "It is not important to have gimmicks or not, just announce it this way and the GP will come towards your ark of lies".

 

[Smithy]

Don't get me wrong I love it myself, but I'm sure it was widely considered a dud and the park were disappointed with it with regards to their attendance figures and that's part of why they added the backwards aspect of it.

 

[ignace]

Don't get me wrong I love it myself, but I'm sure it was widely considered a dud and the park were disappointed with it with regards to their attendance figures and that's part of why they added the backwards aspect of it.

I like The Swarm to myself and even prefer frontwards.

Back on the Smiler: I don't really believe it will be closed forgood, but wouldn't cry if it did happen.

 

[Smithy]

And how was that marketing money spent?

Telling everyone and his dog that it was a "world first", "one of a kind" etc....

Swarm had a massive marketing campaign and it flopped apparently.

So you are saying that if they announced Swarm as a World first (thus lying), it would have been a hit? I'm understanding it as "It is not important to have gimmicks or not, just announce it this way and the GP will come towards your ark of lies".

No :roll:

What I'm saying is that when it comes to marketing Merlin's installations, the most successful ones have been the ones where they've focused their marketing around it being 'unique' in one way or another.

 

[MouseAT]

And how was that marketing money spent?

Telling everyone and his dog that it was a "world first", "one of a kind" etc....

In the case of the Smiler, they didn't focus on the defining feature (14 inversions) at all though, and until now it seems to have been a fairly major crowd draw. The 14 inversions were to tick the unique selling point box so that Nick Varney would give the project the green light, and then ignored in the marketing.

 

[Smithy]

Yeah I remember a lot of us discussing (I think Wardley commented on it at a QandA at Oakwood too) that they didn't mention it as they almost wanted to prove to higher management that they could successfully market a ride without relying on gimmicks.

 

[wakey1512]

Scrap value wouldnt quite recuperate the initial costs but perhaps the ride could be sold to rescue some monies.

You have to understand that if the ride is constantly breaking down its costing the tech team unecessary wasted time and if gerstlauer arent offering any warranty or goodwill towards the repairs then you have to consider if the ride is ever going to make back the 18 million investment that was put in the first place. And if the ride deteriorates the park image it's actually losing money rather than gaining. There is usually no recovery from notoriety of this level.

 

[gavin]

^ Rubbish. There are coasters that have had far worse accidents that are still operating and still popular. Most people barely remember the story a couple of years down the line.

 

[Dan1989]

Your going on about gimik coasters but Spinball surely is not a worlds first is it?

 

[ignace]

Your going on about gimik coasters but Spinball surely is not a worlds first is it?

Worlds first spinning coasters that spins before reaching the lifthill?

 

[Dan1989]

But didn't Chessington have one before Alton, or Camalot?

 

[nadroJ]

I've heard the ride is being dismantled as we speak.

 

[Dan1989]

Well there obviously going to have to take some of it apart to determine the problem, I highly doubt they will dismantle the whole ride though

 

[CookieCoasters]

I've heard the ride is being dismantled as we speak.

Nah, I heard they were just adding another layer of very stringent safety protocols.

 

[Robbie]

I've heard the ride is being dismantled as we speak.

Nah, I heard they were just adding another layer of very stringent safety protocols.

It was Kay Burley on Sky News who said it was being dismantled. As she spoke.

 

[Smithy]

Hardly the best of sources, I could be stood outside in the pouring rain and if she told me it was raining I'd think she was lying.

Though I'd rather it was sunny so the horrible witch ceased to exist, zombie faced **** ****.

Probably, as usual, massively twisting it for her gullible mongy audience and she was actually on about the trains being removed. At the very most maybe they're taking the batwing down to finally try and resolve the stalling issues.

 

[Rankle07]

Hardly the best of sources, I could be stood outside in the pouring rain and if she told me it was raining I'd think she was lying.

Though I'd rather it was sunny so the horrible witch ceased to exist, zombie faced **** ****.

:lol: The hatred for her on this forum is great.

I think scrapping the ride will make a lot of people jump to conclusions that the ride was never safe to begin with, in an almost 'I told you so' like way. Re-theme, yes - to me it would not feel right to have it operate with the same name and theming.

Also as a side note, does anyone know how much it would cost to de-construct a ride of this size?

 

[nadroJ]

I've heard the ride is being dismantled as we speak.

Nah, I heard they were just adding another layer of very stringent safety protocols.

It was Kay Burley on Sky News who said it was being dismantled. As she spoke.

Yh believe it or not that was sarcasm

 

[CookieCoasters]

Yeah my comment was sarcastic too. I was playing on the fact Nick Varney kept on saying the word 'stringent' in the interview. I I should've have put a :wink:

In answer to the question, yes Smiler should be kept, for all the reasons already mentioned. It was just a very unfortunate occurrence that obviously shouldn't have happened, but also there is no reason why it should lead to the ride's demise.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Swarm's issue, going back to that discussion, was that they falsely marketed it. They implied it was extreme and it wasn't, even slightly. And so the GP reacted negatively after riding it, everyone I spoke to described it as "boring". Is it? Or was the issue that they said it was something it clearly wasn't? If AIR was marketed the same as Swarm, would it have flopped similarly?

I actually believe that this is negligible, and the real difference lies in real factors. Theme parks across the country were low in attendance for 2012. The Olympics, crap weather, etc.

Smiler is a wonderful brand. They did an outstanding job on that front. There's a few coasters I don't care to ride, but I love that they exist, and Smiler was one of those.

An American friend was saying to me that he thinks the UK is being super OTT about the Smiler accident. And I kind of agree - but the reason why is that were densely populated and its our most major theme park, on a ride so well branded and loved everyone knows it.