• 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.

[2025] Toxicator: New Forbidden Valley Suspended Top Spin

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
DistortAMG said:
I would say yes it is worth it. You could make the same argument for many a themepark attraction.

Expedition Everest has a huge over engineering mountain, is it worth it or needed? Absolutely.

Oblivion has a huge over engineered hole into the ground that took up half the budget, is it worth it or needed, Absolutely worth it, deffo no needed. They could have got away with building a coaster that was not underground and spent the money else where, but they chose not to. We have a great attraction as a result.

The same argument could be made time and time again for attractions at almost any park in the world.

Over engineering and going above and beyond is a very important part in making attractions great and unique to the park they are in.

We don't want another Ripsaw very similar to how it was which was very similar to how almost every park on the planet have theirs setup. This is very unique in its exceution t Alton Towers. Something they are famous for, Hex, Nemesis, Oblivion to name a few very unique attractions. This appears to be adding to that list.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but the point I was making was, is this over-engineering worth it when the park is desperate for multiple flats rather than one extravagant one?

If we see multiple flats alongside this one in Forbidden Valley over 2025/26, then hey, I'm all for Towers doing something unique.

If by 2026, all we have seen is one flat in Forbidden Valley and nothing else in other areas of the park, then I would criticise the money spent on the Forbidden Valley flat when it could have been used elsewhere.

As I said in my other post, we don't know exactly what's coming yet, so it’s hard to judge at this point.
 
James said:
I don't disagree, but the point I was making was, is this over-engineering worth it when the park is desperate for multiple flats rather than one extravagant one?

If we see multiple flats alongside this one in Forbidden Valley over 2025/26, then hey, I'm all for Towers doing something unique.

If by 2026, all we have seen is one flat in Forbidden Valley and nothing else in other areas of the park, then I would criticise the money spent on the Forbidden Valley flat when it could have been used elsewhere.

As I said in my other post, we don't know exactly what's coming yet, so it’s hard to judge at this point.
Click to expand...

That is a very good set of points actually, I am inclined to agree with you there.
 
Dave said:
Nobody is saying Varney was a bogey man or that Scott O’Neil is some sort of messiah. Varney was in my opinion a poor CEO but had the ability to get somethings right. O’Neil is unknown as any changes wouldn’t manifest itself until 2025 from a strategic perspective (In year operational budget decision making I don’t see any sign of a change from Merlin).

The change in CEO simply provides a clear boundary between two regimes, which will always create a change in strategy. You add to that a change in leadership at Towers as well and people will rightly scrutinise any change in said strategy.
Click to expand...
Numerous people have alluded to Varney being a bogeyman on multiple occasions. You did it yourself just a few posts back when you blamed Varney for the removal of Enterprise.

Dave said:
Those where not the three Rob was referencing and with the exception of Enterprise which was way beyond end of life all occurred under Varney
Click to expand...

The removal of Enterprise happened in the absolute twilight of his years at the helm, and they haven't bothered replacing it in the two years since, and have since removed 3 temporary flats without replacement. It's also likely that this would have happened regardless of who sat in the big chair wouldn't you say?

The single biggest and absolutely most dominant investor in the business before they were taken private, remains the joint biggest investor now. And Investors hold the purse strings. They employ a Chairman to protect their investments, also the same guy who presided over Varney's performance for the 2 years before he left. The CEO is accountable to the Chairman, who now has 4 years service.
Wherever anyone tries to draw some arbitrary line in the sand to argue the case for starry eyed optimism, there is no definitive boundary between regimes. It doesn't exist. Businesses the size of Merlin don't work like that, and it would be bad business practice if they did.

Varney likely wasn't such a poor CEO as you suggested. He upset Thoosies by presiding over an era that left the organisation with the brown legacy that it now has, but I'm sure there are plenty of investors who saw a return on their investments under his leadership who would disagree with that assesment. Those who made a tidy profit when they sold their shares would argue that he did what he was employed to do, which was to earn them money. The corporate governance structures that provided oversight of his work have changed little since he left.

It's the same business. Different to 10 years ago (when most of us would argue things were better)? Partially yes. Changing and evolving as we speak? Definitely. But there are no parallels between this "new era" and the sort of change we would have seen if Alton had been bought by someone else. The impact of "new management" is usually wildy exaggerated. The chairman safeguards investors cash, the CEO reports to the chairman. This is true regardless of whether the bloke who looks after the toilets in Muntiy Bay is successful in convincing Bianca to change the scented urinal cakes after Francis previously said no. So it is indeed not far off from the "same old".

This thread is about a single flat ride. Just one. That's it. A drop in the "Ocean". To replace multiple. The last of which was binned off 2 years ago, in which time they've since closed multiple attractions, both temporally and permanently. Some sunlit golden era of new Capex investment this is turning out to be. That's the point being made. No one has made false claims about Capex (look back at the thread).
 
Last edited:
James said:
I don't disagree, but the point I was making was, is this over-engineering worth it when the park is desperate for multiple flats rather than one extravagant one?

If we see multiple flats alongside this one in Forbidden Valley over 2025/26, then hey, I'm all for Towers doing something unique.

If by 2026, all we have seen is one flat in Forbidden Valley and nothing else in other areas of the park, then I would criticise the money spent on the Forbidden Valley flat when it could have been used elsewhere.

As I said in my other post, we don't know exactly what's coming yet, so it’s hard to judge at this point.
Click to expand...

Although I agree with the sentiment, personally I’d rather see a couple of dark rides instead.

Although not executed perfectly, something akin to the Sub Terra model. Taking a pretty basic fixed attraction and dressing it up with theming/narrative/FX/AV to make it appear more impressive. (Akin to Crush’s Coaster or Indi Temple of Peril)

Or if the budget is bigger something like Danse Macabre
 
Assuming Project Ocean will be the main “New for 2025” attraction then. What would be good is if 2 more flats open in X Sector in time for the main summer season. A staggered opening would make sense and would go most of the way in restoring the park’s flat ride line up across one season. Then just need something on Roller Disco’s site in Dark Forest
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top