So realistically the decision for Alton Towers to become pay one price was probably the single biggest decision in the history of the park and without it we wouldn't have what we have today. Broome's best decision that really did shape the way the park functions even to this day.
-
ℹ️ Heads up...
This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.
Broome Era Towers
- Thread starter ChristmasPud
- Start date
jon81uk
TS Member
Possibly not.
Drayton Manor was still operating with a parking charge and then wristbands or tickets throughout the 90s. Blackpool Pleasure Beach was still doing admission plus tickets before the pandemic.
So not sure pay-one-price was the big driving force behind the way the park went.
I would say that Tussauds ownership and the Runaway Mine Train, Haunted House, Toyland Tours and Nemesis additions in the early 90s did far more to shape the park as it is now
Ok so I've got a bit of an odd question but something I've been thinking about.
So I'm aware of how the sale of Alton Towers took place. John Broome was focusing on his Battersea Power Station project and pulled resources from Alton which ended up eventually with it being put on sale but my questions is about the few seasons this was taking place. Was there noticeable budget cuts and lack of ride availability during these few years or did the park continue to run completely smoothly?
So I'm aware of how the sale of Alton Towers took place. John Broome was focusing on his Battersea Power Station project and pulled resources from Alton which ended up eventually with it being put on sale but my questions is about the few seasons this was taking place. Was there noticeable budget cuts and lack of ride availability during these few years or did the park continue to run completely smoothly?
Matt.GC
TS Member
The first time I visited was during this era and I was a mere boy (1988 or 89 apparently). The most I can distinctly remember is the pace of change and investment in the early 90's. Comparing the park of 89/90 to 94, very stark.
I think the numbers point to stagnation during the later Broome years. I'm just too young to be able give much of an in the flesh account. Maybe an older member could shed some light on this?
Old git on call here.
From the birth of Corky, every year seemed to have new stuff, and needed it to disperse the crowds hanging round the new stuff.
Same as ever!
There was also lots of stuff that is now missing...model trains, bigger gardens, alpine track, planetarium, god worship thingy, sealions, paddling pool...so handy for acheing feet at the end of a long day.
The only slowdown was under Merlin really.
From the birth of Corky, every year seemed to have new stuff, and needed it to disperse the crowds hanging round the new stuff.
Same as ever!
There was also lots of stuff that is now missing...model trains, bigger gardens, alpine track, planetarium, god worship thingy, sealions, paddling pool...so handy for acheing feet at the end of a long day.
The only slowdown was under Merlin really.
Matt.GC
TS Member
As well as making yearly additions, the park also ran pretty long opening hours during this period as well didn't they? I think I recall 7pm closes for much of the summer
Thanks @rob666 and @Matt.GC . It's interesting to me that there wasn't that much of a slow down for visitor facing experiences. Perhaps Broome and the rest of his team still cared about the visitor experience. We do know there was some problems with the management being dragged away and such like. So perhaps most of the issues were only visible to the staff? It just seems odd that nothing changed at all for the general visitor. You'd expect just little things to have been cut. Things like less staff on certain rides and things like that.
Matt.GC
TS Member
I think what some of the accounts of what was going on at the time suggest is that it was more like Alton Towers was there in the background ticking over with minimal day to day input and financing the new venture. After how quickly the transition into a theme park happened and the incredible investments of the early 80's, the latter Broome era would have looked like neglect when comparing it to the preceding seasons.
But this can't be compared with modern standards. Alton would have needed to keep rearranging and introducing new attractions and places to eat, bearing in mind it was still settling down as a theme park proper so there was still an element of the unknown and many of its attractions were cheap, temporary or built without planning permission.
When we think of neglect and cuts, we think of Merlin downgrading everything they touch, 4pm closes, removed or SBNO attractions with no replacements etc. But these are conscious decisions driven by a company that has been primarily focused on short term financials. I suppose in the late Broome era the comparison would be the pace and rate of growth slows and investments are less thought through due to the primary focus shifting away from the bread winner, driven by 1 man's ego.
But this can't be compared with modern standards. Alton would have needed to keep rearranging and introducing new attractions and places to eat, bearing in mind it was still settling down as a theme park proper so there was still an element of the unknown and many of its attractions were cheap, temporary or built without planning permission.
When we think of neglect and cuts, we think of Merlin downgrading everything they touch, 4pm closes, removed or SBNO attractions with no replacements etc. But these are conscious decisions driven by a company that has been primarily focused on short term financials. I suppose in the late Broome era the comparison would be the pace and rate of growth slows and investments are less thought through due to the primary focus shifting away from the bread winner, driven by 1 man's ego.
I think you've probably hit the nail on the head there @Matt.GC . I think now you've said that it makes perfect sense and fits in with everything else I've heard. Clearly Alton Towers was already very popular and so Broome relied on it for funding and just didn't add any major attractions, instead just adding little things to keep the parks attendance steady. I think it's good that he didn't sacrifice on the customer experience like PLC merlin did.
Rick
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Crux
I am not sure that's completely true. If you look at the last four years of Broome ownership, it's not a bad haul is it ...
- 1987 - Sky Ride
- 1987 - Monorail
- 1987 - Swan Boats
- 1987 - Tea Cups
- 1988 - Alton Beast
- 1988 - Alton Mouse
- 1989 - Gravitron
- 1989 - Britannia Farm
- 1990 - Thunder Looper
- 1990 - Canal Boat Ride
Tussauds came along at just the right time and he chose to bet big on the power station.
Thanks @Rick it's very hard to distinguish between these areas' as so much was added in the Broome era. So you're probably right about it being a passion project.
As you alluded to perhaps the sale was more about being able to carry on with his passion project in battersea?
Do you think Broome regretted the sale of Alton Towers because surely he didn't have the resources to do what Tussauds did?
Why not? He was able to raise investment to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds for Battersea.
Would he have done what Pearson did? Well, almost certainly not, but the Schwarzkopf racing coaster project shows that he certainly wasn't looking to starve the park of investment. And that follows on from Towers Street and Aqualand which were both markedly higher quality projects with extensive civil engineering than what came before.
I didn't say he would have done nothing. Broome did make massive investments in Alton Towers and it was clear he wished to carry these on. It was more about the quality of the investments and where to put the money. He also didn't have the funds to purchase something like Nemesis. I think it was more about his mind being focused on the battersea project then his wallet. Clearly he had a lot of funds but these as you say were for battersea. Cleary Broome couldn't do both otherwise he wouldn't of sold Alton Towers. I admit I'd forgotten about the racing coaster and I was unsure about the investments made during this period hence why I asked the original question.
Matt.GC
TS Member
I think it would have been quite easy for Broome to have raised the money needed to build whatever he wanted at Towers. Just look at the place in its first decade as a park and his reputation at the time. It went from a stately home with Sea Lions, model railway's, a fun fair and wet t shirt competitions to a full on theme park with over 2m visitors per year in just 1 decade. He was advising the Thatcher Reich on UK tourism and she even took time out of her busy schedule of snatching milk off of school children, destrorying industry and plotting the pole tax to cozy up to him.
He would have no problems raising investment capital, he had the contacts, the reputation and the success of the park and don't underestimate the political influence either. Who knows, Machine Gun Maggie may even have helped him out with some of the planning issues the park has become burdened with for any future projects. She ruled her party with an iron fist, I'm sure one ride on the Log Flume with her handbag on her lap would be enough to intimidate her Staffs Moorlands councillors enough to know what they had to do.
I think had Alton continued under Broome, the question is more of the direction the park would've taken with him as opposed to Pearson rather than having the funds to do it or not. Pearson and Broome seemed to have different visions for the park and came from different perspectives.
He would have no problems raising investment capital, he had the contacts, the reputation and the success of the park and don't underestimate the political influence either. Who knows, Machine Gun Maggie may even have helped him out with some of the planning issues the park has become burdened with for any future projects. She ruled her party with an iron fist, I'm sure one ride on the Log Flume with her handbag on her lap would be enough to intimidate her Staffs Moorlands councillors enough to know what they had to do.
I think had Alton continued under Broome, the question is more of the direction the park would've taken with him as opposed to Pearson rather than having the funds to do it or not. Pearson and Broome seemed to have different visions for the park and came from different perspectives.
jon81uk
TS Member
I don't think we would have got the fully themed attractions that Tussauds/Wardley were installing if Broome had continued. The Runaway Mine Train and Haunted House did seem to be a push towards being a theme park rather than amusement park.
James
TS Founding Member
Tussauds very much had the vision of 'Disneyland in the UK', turning Towers into a fully fledged themed park with stories and experiences. I think under Broome Towers would have certainly received consistent funding (permitting continued custom of course), however it would likely stayed as an amusement park with no clear themed areas.
Matt.GC
TS Member
You also have the unanswered question of what Broome actually saw AT as? He was very much inspired by Walt Disney World and the evidence is all over the place. The monorail, Towers Street, Talbot Street, Around the World and Black Hole all heavily inspired by Disney.
I think the Hodge podge of random attractions of varying quality dotted around the park where there out of necessity to continue to grow and soak up ever increasing crowds in a park that was growing fast. Even in 2021 Towers has had to rent in temp flats and shove them in as quickly as possible to do this. There was some real random tat plonked everywhere but there was also some quality investments, some of which still stand today, including 2 good attempts at themed areas (ironically, both of which where heavily vandalised by Pearson Tussauds in my opinion), a large Intamin Rapids, a Mack Log Flume, the Sky Ride and a fully themed dark ride.
Would Broome have seen his strategy of just adding stuff every year as a permanent one? Did the Battersea project come about because he thought AT was job done or was it because he bit off more than he could chew and just needed to cash? I find it interesting that although Broome is clearly very proud of what he did with AT, he doesn't mention it as much as others do. He doesn't deny the role he played but seems to see it as another arrow in his bow as opposed to it defining him like the media often does. I wonder what that tells us about the man and what his intentions where? I think at the time he saw AT and Battersea as projects that would sit side by side in his new portfolio but did he see himself as a theme park/leisure industry supremo or just another boring modern day property developer, the likes of which we've seen plenty of since?
Speaking of property development, that is how I'll remember Pearson. Towers in particular was developed to sell on as a full on established theme park. Alton seems to have been bought to do things they couldn't do with Chessington. After cutting their teeth down the road in Surrey, it seems that Towers was the main event with loads of space, infrastructure and an established guest base to build upon. The imagination and thought that went into Pearson Tussauds development strategy was excellent. Wardley was behind a lot of this but I guess we'll never know what creative brains would have come along under someone else and what strategy they would have developed. Pearson wanted to develop and sell on and invested heavily in order to do that with a clear vision of building a fully fledged theme park resort.
There's still plenty of creativity and talent at Merlin today and we see evidence of this making it through from time to time. It's the business strategy and how Merlin see AT that has gives us the resort we see today. I often wonder what AT would be like if it was still seen as a development opportunity?
I think the Hodge podge of random attractions of varying quality dotted around the park where there out of necessity to continue to grow and soak up ever increasing crowds in a park that was growing fast. Even in 2021 Towers has had to rent in temp flats and shove them in as quickly as possible to do this. There was some real random tat plonked everywhere but there was also some quality investments, some of which still stand today, including 2 good attempts at themed areas (ironically, both of which where heavily vandalised by Pearson Tussauds in my opinion), a large Intamin Rapids, a Mack Log Flume, the Sky Ride and a fully themed dark ride.
Would Broome have seen his strategy of just adding stuff every year as a permanent one? Did the Battersea project come about because he thought AT was job done or was it because he bit off more than he could chew and just needed to cash? I find it interesting that although Broome is clearly very proud of what he did with AT, he doesn't mention it as much as others do. He doesn't deny the role he played but seems to see it as another arrow in his bow as opposed to it defining him like the media often does. I wonder what that tells us about the man and what his intentions where? I think at the time he saw AT and Battersea as projects that would sit side by side in his new portfolio but did he see himself as a theme park/leisure industry supremo or just another boring modern day property developer, the likes of which we've seen plenty of since?
Speaking of property development, that is how I'll remember Pearson. Towers in particular was developed to sell on as a full on established theme park. Alton seems to have been bought to do things they couldn't do with Chessington. After cutting their teeth down the road in Surrey, it seems that Towers was the main event with loads of space, infrastructure and an established guest base to build upon. The imagination and thought that went into Pearson Tussauds development strategy was excellent. Wardley was behind a lot of this but I guess we'll never know what creative brains would have come along under someone else and what strategy they would have developed. Pearson wanted to develop and sell on and invested heavily in order to do that with a clear vision of building a fully fledged theme park resort.
There's still plenty of creativity and talent at Merlin today and we see evidence of this making it through from time to time. It's the business strategy and how Merlin see AT that has gives us the resort we see today. I often wonder what AT would be like if it was still seen as a development opportunity?
Matt N
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Mako (SeaWorld Orlando)
Out of interest @Matt.GC, which themed areas do you feel Pearson “vandalised”? Are there any areas that you feel Pearson improved?
I think it is interesting to contemplate where the park might have gone under John Broome. The likes of the Schwarzkopf racing coaster showed promise, and his later plans for the likes of the American Adventure (he planned a B&M invert and a wooden coaster) suggests that the path taken may have been less different to that taken under Tussauds/Merlin than many expect. I’ll admit that there might have been less emphasis on theming, but I think the calibre of attraction hardware would eventually not have been too dissimilar.
I think it is interesting to contemplate where the park might have gone under John Broome. The likes of the Schwarzkopf racing coaster showed promise, and his later plans for the likes of the American Adventure (he planned a B&M invert and a wooden coaster) suggests that the path taken may have been less different to that taken under Tussauds/Merlin than many expect. I’ll admit that there might have been less emphasis on theming, but I think the calibre of attraction hardware would eventually not have been too dissimilar.
jon81uk
TS Member
I'm not Matt, but I think the Talbot Street to Cred Street changes weren't the best, although the Barney and Tweenies shows in the 90s/2000s were very popular, the rot really set in that area later on.
Although the change from Grand Canyon Rapids to Congo River Rapids when the Mine Train was added is probably the biggest improvement.
Matt.GC
TS Member
Towers Street and Talbot Street. Since they were the only 2 proper themed areas under Broome, the answer to your second question is simply everything else. Bearing in mind, Thunder Valley, Gloomy Wood and Katanga Canyon didn't exist under Broome. Aqua Land, Festival Park and the Springfield Centre weren't really themed areas at all, just a collection of rides in a corner of the park with an area name attached.