2017: General Discussion

[Blizzard]

Personally I think The Smiler is an excellent ride. It does what it's designed to, beats records, and has an innovative theme? Theres not many non-IP parks that spend that much money on concept & theming. You only need to look at most parks in the USA to see that.

The public love it & it brings people to the park. At the end of the day, thats what matters in any amusement company's eyes.

 

[Rob]

The public love it & it brings people to the park. At the end of the day, thats what matters in any amusement company's eyes.

It also puts a hell of a lot of people off visiting the park!

The Smiler was great for the park when it opened though, you are right there. It's just a prime example of how not to go about a major investment in a theme park from a planning/construction point of view.

 

[PeteB]

I really don't think Towers is that attractive to potential buyers at the moment anyway

You'd be surprised. Investors will be more interested to buy a park in a slum that they can turn around, than a one which is booming and successful.

I had heard there were a couple of large corporations sniffing around and doing due diligence excersies after the crash so they'd be ready to jump if the park went on the market.

I pray this happens.

 

[Towerslover]

Does anyone have any idea as to who could/would buy merlin?

 

[Matt.GC]

Contrary to what everyone else is saying, I still maintain that I think the impact of the crash is over estimated. It may be in all of your minds because you all follow the park. The general public don't care as much.

Most of the relentless media coverage came from newspapers that where already preaching to the converted anyway.

The crash would have undoubtedly been by the far the biggest contributer to lower attendance during 2015 and 2016. But I think the impact the operational decisions the park has made since are being underestimated.

 

[Rob]

Contrary to what everyone else is saying, I still maintain that I think the impact of the crash is over estimated. It may be in all of your minds because you all follow the park. The general public don't care as much.

Most of the relentless media coverage came from newspapers that where already preaching to the converted anyway.

The crash would have undoubtedly been by the far the biggest contributer to lower attendance during 2015 and 2016. But I think the impact the operational decisions the park has made since are being underestimated.

It is something that we will never know for sure. However the decline in guest numbers ever since June 2015 has been dramatic which makes it the most obvious and significant factor. The 2015 season seemed to be going well until that point, yet afterwards the park was a ghost town - that had everything to do with the incident and nothing to do with any cuts.

I certainly agree with you in regards to Merlin's reponse from an operational point of view in 2016 was hardly ideal. They took the easier and risk free decision to cut the bottom line costs and reduce the scale of the park dramatically. I can see why they did it but I do not agree with it. It does not entice people to return, in fact much of what they have done has surely put off repeat visitors. I've said it before and I'll say it again, repeat visitors are key to the success of any theme park. It's relatively easy to get someone through the door once but harder to make them want to come back. And operational decisions at Alton Towers are bound to have had a negative impact on that.

Have things picked up at all this year? It is hard to say, the start of the season seemed promising however whenever I check Ride Times of late the park appears dead. We'll have to see what happens as we enter the school trip season and then the summer. If these are not positive then I dread to think what future cuts will be coming our way.

I wouldn't agree that the general public don't care as much about what happened though. I would say that 9 out of 10 people bring it up when I speak about Alton Towers with them.

 

[PeteB]

Does anyone have any idea as to who could/would buy merlin?

I don't think Merlin would sell out, but it's certainly possible for them to offload the odd attraction if it's weighing them down.

The impact Towers has had on Merlin share prices is one thing to consider. If they got rid of Alton Towers they free themselves of a lead ballon, still have all their other attractions, and Towers goes to a better leisure company. Win win.

 

[BarryZola]

To be completely honest, I could live with the place just reverting back to ruins and gardens. It's great having the rides etc and I do enjoy them, but I do visit quite often and just enjoy the tranquility of the grounds. The rides are sort of an added bonus for me most of the time. The season pass would be cheaper too

Apart from when they're building and unveiling major new rides, I do really enjoy that aspect of the theme park a lot.

But yeah, I pretty much win whatever happens in the future. Unless we're all wiped out by massive bombs of course.

 

[andeyhart]

Yes, let's see Towers go under. Forget the fact that Nemesis is the best ride in the World (for me at least), and the park still has a World class line up of coasters and despite everything is still the best park in the UK. Let's, on an Alton Towers fansite no less, hope that the park goes under and is forced to close. That's the spirit!!!

And again, if the park were forced to close under Merlin, it would not reopen. Comparing it to the time when Tussauds acquired the park makes no sense. That was decades ago, and the park hadn't suffered a cataclysmic incident that, had it not been for a company like Merlin, would've killed it off already. Dan is right, people still underestimate the effect the crash has had on the park.

I'm not a Merlin apologist by any means, but the fact that some people outwardly want the park to fail is beyond me. Enthusiasts will obviously visit and raise concerns about elements of how the park is run, and rightfully so. But if you hate it so much, just don't go and leave it to those who do still, on some level, appreciate it.

 

[ThemeParkCrafter]

To be completely honest, I could live with the place just reverting back to ruins and gardens. It's great having the rides etc and I do enjoy them, but I do visit quite often and just enjoy the tranquility of the grounds. The rides are sort of an added bonus for me most of the time. The season pass would be cheaper too

Apart from when they're building and unveiling major new rides, I do really enjoy that aspect of the theme park a lot.

But yeah, I pretty much win whatever happens in the future. Unless we're all wiped out by massive bombs of course.

I go to the park for the rides and seeing the gardens from the skyride is nice. However, if anything it is a huge pain, especially with the park so spread out due to the gardens

 

[James]

Alton Towers as it stands now would never close completely and be left to rot. The hardware on park costs millions and millions of pounds (plus we're talking about some of the most iconic attractions in the world), selling most of that off would be difficult since a lot of the rides are custom made and made to fit the landscape created in certain areas, so the park would definitely be sold off as a whole. Would the position of the park (low guest figures, a bad reputation from the crash, difficult and expensive to manage/operate) put potential buyers off? I don't think so, there's bound to be an investor out there that is willing to invest and take risks (how on Earth do you think Alton Towers became what it is now).

Alton Towers has huge potential and I don't think it's the kind of place that will close down and be forgotten, be put up for sale and sold to another big firm yes, but closed down? We're in Cloud Cuckoo Land here.

 

[BarryZola]

I go to the park for the rides and seeing the gardens from the skyride is nice. However, if anything it is a huge pain, especially with the park so spread out due to the gardens

I know yeah, those pesky gardens getting in the way of everything, just generally being there in the way and having the audacity to make people travel a bit further. They've got a bloody nerve!

Jokes

Yeah, I know where you're coming from. I'm aware that I'm in a small minority, it's cool

 

[andeyhart]

Alton Towers has huge potential and I don't think it's the kind of place that will close down and be forgotten, be put up for sale and sold to another big firm yes, but closed down? We're in Cloud Cuckoo Land here.

Either way, I still feel that a situation where Merlin would be forced into dropping the park would be awful for Towers' reputation, regardless of any big company who buys it. I get most enthusiasts hate Merlin, but for them to put the park up for sale would show that they no longer considered it commercially viable. And for a company as wealthy as Merlin to feel that way, it would taint the park hugely. So the fact that one or two believe this would be a good thing, regardless of their personal disdain for Merlin, is beyond me.

For what it's worth, I don't actually believe Merlin are anywhere close to dropping what is essentially their flagship attraction. Whilst the reduced opening hours and depleted attraction line up suggests they no longer feel the need to pump as much money into it as they once did due to the dwindling guest numbers, I'm sure they expect the upturn in visitors we've began to see this season continue over the next few years. I really believe Merlin will be running Towers long into the foreseeable future.

 

[Croftybaby]

The park wouldn't be left to rot. The land is rented, the owners can't do anything else with it so they would have to find somebody to utilise it. New owners might even get a better deal on the rent for a period while they tried to recover.

 

[Matt.GC]

The park may already be up for sale. Ripping money out of just about everything other than TLC, a new hotel and a new coaster looks pretty strategic to me. Investing in long term projects such as a new ride and extra hotel capacity whilst ripping money out of everything else so it looks more profitable than it actually is, will make the park seem more attractive to a potential buyer.

I keep hearing the phrase "flagship" used to describe Towers, yet it hasn't been the flagship of anything in quite some time. Legolands and midways are Merlins core, it wouldn't surprise me if Towers, Thorpe and Chessington are offloaded together as a bulk deal with the money used to fund more core ventures.

All speculation of course, but the park is increasingly looking like a sell up job. As to who the a buyers would be (if any), I would imagine some private equity firm or hedge fund.

 

[ChristmasPud]

Money is the bottom line for Merlin, I'm sure they would sell Alton Towers in an instant if it meant they could open up a big string of vapid Legoland clones or international Madame Tussauds elsewhere.

Alton Towers, from what I learn (I'm not an expert) is not the highest profiting park of their 'resort theme park' portfolio because of its size and running costs, and despite the incredible place it is, the enormous (rare in the UK) opportunity for bigger scale attractions and its huge popularity, it could come to the point where it is jettisoned.

I mean we are still talking a big profit obviously, but now that Merlin is gigantic - it needs super inflated profits to keep the beast growing. I am pretty sure Chessington makes more money than Alton Towers (bafflingly) which is why Merlin chose not to sell its land and lease it back the way they did with Alton Towers & Thorpe Park.

In other words, Alton Towers requires care and capital reinvestment, but Merlin as a business are now only interested in cash cows and an easy formula for immediate expansion. The stripping down of Alton Towers' internal running started before the Smiler crash, but the crash only served to make the case for Merlin that they could make easier money than running Britain's most popular theme park - if easy money is what it wants.

This is how the economics of running a theme park change drastically when a company reaches a certain size, and as the company's management adapts accordingly to be more cuthroat.

However obviously it won't be Merlin's ideal choice, they owe an enormous amount to Alton Towers and would probably want to keep hold of it as long as possible, for the sake of wringing it into a cash cow for the future. The slew of hotels, family IPs and commercial rebranding, whilst stripping down behind the scenes, suggest this is already happening.

Also, a huge amount of their resources are at Alton Towers, like their studio workshops, it would be very costly for relocation. But, still the hard bottom line for them is money. Other attraction operators would kill to have Alton Towers and it could really benefit from a more down to earth scale of management economics. At the same time, it could easily be bought by a much worse bunch than Merlin too.

I think it will be staying for now. Shame it has left the park in a very difficult place and forced it to become so tacky as a result, in my opinion.

 

[Matt.GC]

It's a high investment = high return park. It needs large visitor numbers and a stellar reputation to make money and justify a high gate price. It doesn't do well run as a glorified midway.

A coaster, or even a simple flat ride, costs more to build at Towers than it does almost anywhere in the world. Not only due to planning restrictions, but because of the pioneering reputation the park should be trying to uphold. It also occupies a large mass of land, most of which is unusuable for development, and probably has a large lease to match. Plus it has acres of gardens and forestry to maintain, as well as maintenance costs of it's listed building right in the middle.

To be fair on Merlin, if you were a shareholder which would you prefer to have? A massive English heritage site that costs a fortune to lease, has a tarnished reputation, is in a division of the company that appears to be stagnating and requires almost twice the investment as anywhere else to build a new ride or attraction? Or a Legoland somewhere on a brownfield site, occupying a quarter of the land, where you can knock up any old cheap flat or coaster with Lego branding on it anywhere you like , charging the same entry price and receiving a similar number of guests?

I'd be willing to bet that if anyone came up to Merlin with a wheelbarrow full of cash and offered to buy the park, they'd sell up in a heartbeat. Businesses, particularly Limited Companies, don't have emotions when it comes to the heritage of their brands or assets. If Towers becomes/has become a financial and/or reputational liability to the wider group - it's sold to the highest bidder.

 

[PeteB]

Yes, let's see Towers go under. Forget the fact that Nemesis is the best ride in the World (for me at least), and the park still has a World class line up of coasters and despite everything is still the best park in the UK. Let's, on an Alton Towers fansite no less, hope that the park goes under and is forced to close. That's the spirit!!!

And again, if the park were forced to close under Merlin, it would not reopen. Comparing it to the time when Tussauds acquired the park makes no sense. That was decades ago, and the park hadn't suffered a cataclysmic incident that, had it not been for a company like Merlin, would've killed it off already. Dan is right, people still underestimate the effect the crash has had on the park.

I'm not a Merlin apologist by any means, but the fact that some people outwardly want the park to fail is beyond me. Enthusiasts will obviously visit and raise concerns about elements of how the park is run, and rightfully so. But if you hate it so much, just don't go and leave it to those who do still, on some level, appreciate it.

Completely missed the point (as usual). It's not about wanting the park to close and disappear, it's about getting rid of Merlin who have strangled the life out of all their parks. Thorpe I'm not too concerned about. Chessington, what they've done is unforgiveable.

Towers has to crash and burn otherwise it'll limp on lifelessly in it's current state forever, and I don't want that.

Having said that, I'm onboard with @BarryZola in that removing the rides wouldn't be the end of the world. The place is a beautiful location, the Towers, the gardens, and even English Heritage could look after it better than Merlin does.

I also think Merlin selling off the land was one of the worst descisions ever made. The park no longer has this to borrow against, and if Merlin did sell Towers they'll get a lot less for it now than they paid to acquire it, because they've already sold off a huge chunk of the business assets.

 

[IanSR]

The park wouldn't be left to rot. The land is rented, the owners can't do anything else with it so they would have to find somebody to utilise it. New owners might even get a better deal on the rent for a period while they tried to recover.

That all assumes Merlin can actually get out of the lease, wasn't it a 30 year one? I doubt a guy savy enough to do the deal he did with Merlin didn't write in some sort of heavy penalty clause for early termination on Merlin's part.

As you say the park won't be sold, for the simple reason Merlin can't sell something they don't own in the first place, they could close it and pay the rent and maintain the park to their leaseholder responsibilities, but that would be a silly move long term.

 

[Benzin]

You'd think the way people go on about the crash that no other park has ever had to deal with one that has resulted in worse results...

Merlin had two options after the crash, and they took the cost friendly option, which has probably done just as much damage to the reputation than the initial incident... Because with half the stuff closed it fits completely into the unsafe narrative created by the crash... As well as creating a dire experience for those still visiting...

State of both Towers and Chessie say enough about the way things are going, and Chessie doesn't even have a crash to excuse them...