Discussion in 'European Parks and Attractions' started by Anonymous, 12th Jun 2012.
the plan says they will build a new coaster (see my previous post above)
Not that I care much to defend the evil M but for the following:
1) A lot of Chessingtons land can't be used for theme park development.
2) Accomodation makes a lot of money.
3) You need the main attraction (the park) to make guests want to stay.
4) Accomodation makes a lot of money.
5) Conference facilities are lucrative but need Accomodation.
6) Accomodation makes a lot of money.
Interesting that Bubbleworks gets no mention in those plans...
I also thought that plot of land opposite Dragons Fury (plot 7 on the plans) was protected against theme park development?
You can't create a multi-day attraction and then build the accommodation, that doesn't make any sense.
It's not long since Disney went on the largest accommodation expansion in theme park history, almost to the point where the whole set up has gone 180-degrees and that the parks are there to sell the hotels.
The only reason Chessington is a "multi-day attraction" is because their throughputs are so diabolical!
Also a lot of people may not stay in Chessie's accommodation specifically for the park and zoo, they may use it as well to spend a weekend in London and take the train into the city.
You can't build the accommodation and THEN build the multi day attraction. All that will continue to suffer is opening hours to force people to stay.
Chessington is never going to be this roller coaster paradise that folks want it to be. Chessington is going to be an animal focussed attraction going forward, with the theme park secondary. It has to distinguish itself from Thorpe and more importantly, from Legoland. A family with kids could easily spend two days at the park as it stands and more so going forward. There is no future in large scale day visit only attractions - it's too costly to make it work, the margins aren't good enough.
Very true. If a family spend four nights at Port Aventura, you use it as a base to visit Salou, Barcelona and the region with the benefit of staying at the resort with access to the dry/wet park - same principle.
Some enthusiasts will go for four nights and spend four days on park, but that isn't a typical approach, of course and you have to take that into account when understanding Merlin's approach to Chessington. I admit it's taken a while to get it right, but the direction is pretty clear now.
If you are visiting London you can find far cheaper options on better connections into the city than Chessington.
And? I didn't say it was the most popular choice. It's just convenient for some people who are travelling to the park and want to make a weekend break and spend the other day in Central London.
Also you'd be surprised to see how popular hotels are in that part of London.
Not that I want to give the Daily "hate"Mail more hits but I found this interesting-
Whilst I outright expect that the" 3 hour queue" claim is completely fabricated and that these people are probably fame seeking morons, I do think something needs to be done about queue information. I know it's a different system buy Ridetimes at Towers on the weekend may as well not have been there as every queue was widely out (I'm talking 30 mins + not 15 mins give or take).
You can find a theme park, a zoo and a hotel, with ticketing that's integrated with central London attractions and Legoland?
Works great with the family - it's a great base - away from the city with on site 'stuff' and 35 minutes to Waterloo from Chessington South. I'll happily pay for convenience like that.
Slam. Dunk. Thank you very much.
I would opt to stay in the Premier Inn situated right next to the park if I were stopping over.
The Azteca is a fantastic looking hotel but it's ridiculously overpriced.
Its occupancy rate suggests that there are a fair number of people who don't agree!
My preference of the park's hotels would be the original, as unless that's been attacked with nasty printed vinyls too it looks stylish as opposed to cheap. Aztecs has been 'themed' in an extremely half-posteriored manner.
The difficulty for Chessington is surely that, although focusing on the zoo appears to be the direction they want to go in with such heavy restrictions on planning, when I've been guests have always seemed more interested in the rides. I don't remember having seen the zoo busy, even on days where Vampire and Dragon's Fury have 90+ minute queues. They can't just keep going without serious spending on improving* existing or installing new rides.
*As reviews of Tomb Blaster this year have indicated, 'refurbishing' doesn't always make things better.
To be fair, zoo's aren't cheap to run. So I would imagine they are pushing this side of things due to it being an important USP for them being so close to Lego and Thorpe and beacause it can be multi seasonal to encourage winter hotel stays.
You could argue that it's staying close to its roots, it was after all a zoo first, theme park second.
This is exactly how I see the future of Chessington and it does make sense. With Legoland nearby for families and Thorpe Park for thrill seekers Chessie is left in a funny position and the zoo experience is likely to be more marketable. I'm sure that they will continue to add rides in the future and I think that a new family coaster is desperately needed regardless of the direction the park takes but more animal experiences are to be expected.
According to chessingtons website, Griffins gallon has opened today. Haven't seen it open all season, so at least it's another ride open, even if most people don't know it exists.
Also, which rides are worth fastracking? I'm going in two weeks and I'm guessing the place will be packed. Considering the dragon's fury, Dragon falls, vampire fastrack so I can actually get some rides done.
None of the rides are worth waiting for.
If you have to then I, too, would go for this fastrack. If you can (not sure if it's on their "one shot" fastracks) I'd add Rattlesnake on also.
Having said all that though, I don't condone the use of fastrack and would say to avoid it if you can. But each to their own
Separate names with a comma.