• 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.

Drayton Manor Park

The old design had much bigger gaps between seats though, so the height of the backrest doesn't really add much extra protection. Europa Park have modified theirs with a bigger central grab ring and tall handrails on the steps, seemingly to make it more difficult to stand up/fall out.
 
I really fear for Drayton - if it weren’t for Thomas Land I would imagine they would have gone the way of American Adventure and co by now. There really is no reason for me to visit these days which is a shame as I had some wonderful days out there when I was a kid and when my kids were 3-6 years old.

I hope they turn it around but I think even £25-£30m investment in ride hardware and spruce up over the next few years won’t save them. That’s without competing with Merlin and Blackpool in the thrill ride stakes - if they wanted to do they you need another £10m budget for a good solid coaster
 
I don't fear for Drayton myself, and it links in to what you first referred to. Thomas Land seems like the best safety net this business could ever have. It's such a liked brand, it's all over youtube with those 'mumvlogs' (whatever you call them) channels, and it has so many events throughout the year. I've heard the Christmas thing they do there is fantastic, and genuinely good quality; I think every day they finished with a professional fireworks display. I'm unaware of their turnover but I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't done half bad this year thanks to the seasonal and summer events. 2014 was a minor blip, probably caused by the fact that they spent god knows how much on Air Race and the new Toilets.
Let's look at the wider park. Yes. It's not received enough attention and things feel a little out of place. But the management have shown they care. The Dodgem's ahoy retheme may not have been huge, but the maps and building look really nice, and its clear they were meticulous with the whole thing. Neptune's amusements looks great now, it's got a nice little spruce up that was becoming more necessary as years have gone by. And the Accelerator retheme was a largely successful recovery from DM losing the CN IP. On the outside, it could of looked quite a lot better, but on the inside and in the queue, it looks fantastic.
All in all, the park needs a new coaster, ideally family thrill, and as I'm pretty sure I (and others too) have mentioned in previous posts, the "Pirate-Excalibur" solution. Personally, I feel it's the last proper bastion of UK theme parks, as it is rather well rounded for every audience, and it's also a park that means quite a lot to me- I've pretty much gone to the place for my whole life and seen it change so much.
 
Didn't someone post back on here a few years ago now about some lunch at the Rollercoaster Club of Great Britain(Or something similar) that Bryan Colin said there was a planned S&S coaster which would replace Buffalo, Which was then followed up a while later when S&S leaked a bunch of videos with what seemed to be a launched suspended family coaster in the site of Buffalo. And also apperently a wood coaster had been planned but it weren't coming for at least another 5 years at the time. And also in the 5 yar plan which was briefly released their was land near Vertigo and Buffalo which is slated for a theme park expansion, That'll be good as there is much there at the minute.

Also there was a book released about Bryan and his wife's experience of founding Drayton Manor and at the end in the future section they stated that they are always saving some money for another investment and i one year the park doesn't get anything then they are probably saving up for a lare investment into the park.

Let's hope at least one of these two coasters happen.
 
I don't think they are failing, they just shifted their focus from family to kids.
They still pull the numbers in that side of the park.
Not been in years, but great for a cheap camping trip on-site.
Used to be able to stroll round the rides in the middle of the night.
 
The park are making money, they are not going under at all. Granted, the profit varies from year to year but they are overall making money. This information is publicly available on Companies House. The profit is usually upwards of a £1,000000 a year, although has slipped below. For a small theme park this is quite an achievement. This is just the parks profit and not the hotel, which is a separate entity financially. But that is also making a decent sum of money for the park.

Bottom line, the park are not struggling financially what so ever.
 
I'm not sure the profit is the concerning issue at hand, but rather the potential H&S fine as a result of the accident, even though the victim was mostly at fault that's victim blaming and we don't do that in this country, someone is always responsible/accountable in our modern liberated world (accidents do not happen, you must foresee every possible outcome and prevent it if in business now), so if the investigation finds that even a sign was wonky that 'may' have contributed in some way, some out of touch judge will come down on them like a ton of bricks, a £5Mil fine for Merlin is but a drop in the ocean for them and could pale into insignificance compared to one over a death, which could finish Drayton.

Then of course unless the park is completely absolved of responsibility, there will be the inevitable civil suit to follow from the victims family, there may even be one anyway, and even if Drayton successfully defend it, it'll still cost them a mint in legal fees.

If there's one thing I've learn over the years, never assume someone in authority will look at things with their common sense glasses on.
 
Last edited:
IanSR said:
I'm not sure the profit is the concerning issue at hand, but rather the potential H&S fine as a result of the accident, even though the victim was mostly at fault that's victim blaming and we don't do that in this country, someone is always responsible/accountable in our modern liberated world (accidents do not happen, you must foresee every possible outcome and prevent it if in business now), so if the investigation finds that even a sign was wonky that 'may' have contributed in some way, some out of touch judge will come down on them like a ton of bricks, a £5Mil fine for Merlin is but a drop in the ocean for them and could pale into insignificance compared to one over a death, which could finish Drayton.

Then of course unless the park is completely absolved of responsibility, there will be the inevitable civil suit to follow from the victims family, there may even be one anyway, and even if Drayton successfully defend it, it'll still cost them a mint in legal fees.

If there's one thing I've learn over the years, never assume someone in authority will look at things with their common sense glasses on.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the fine. Drayton won't get fined north of 5 million on the basis that Alton got fined 5 million for serious injuires. Judges do not work totally by their own judgement, they have to follow guidelines set out by a governing body. If these guidelines are not followed properly appeals can be started and usually won.

A judge has to take a number of considerations into account. These include having a fine that is proportional and fair relative to the size of the company. They also as a matter of law have to take into consideration the impact a fine could have on a buisiness and the people and economeys it supports. While balancing this against the severity of the incidident and culpability of the company.

I would be suprised if Drayton get a fine over 2 million. If that. That is two years worth of profit for the park. Merlins fine was so high because while the incident wasnt a death, the fine was relative to the size, turnover and profit of Merlin. Which is far far higher. Had the same incident been at Drayton, with the same circumstances, the fine would have more than likely been lower.

Recently a company was fined just less than a million, for the death of a worker that was 100% the fault of the company.

You can't compare one companys fine with a different companys one. Each one is considered based on the individual case.
 
Last edited:
True and I'll guess we'll find out soon enough, but £2Mil could still kill Drayton, the turnover of the company is only a secondary consideration, s33 breaches have no limits on the level of the fine that can be applied.
 
IanSR said:
True and I'll guess we'll find out soon enough, but £2Mil could still kill Drayton, the turnover of the company is only a secondary consideration, s33 breaches have no limits on the level of the fine that can be applied.
Click to expand...

When they impose a fine there has to be a realistic prospect of getting the money back. This is why turnover is a big consideration. Yes secondary. They will firstly put the severity of the incident into a catagory, with culpability ect. Then work out a fine that fits the money generated by the park in which there will be a good chance of it getting paid within a reasonable amount of time.

Of course the fines are going to be unlimited, the size of a company can be unlimited so putting an upper limit on maximum fines would mean larger companys would have to pay less for incidents (relative to their size) which would make the fines smaller companies pay seem unfair and too large. Just because the fines are unlimited doesnt mean they will get a high one.

A £2million fine would not even come close to finishing Drayton, no way. They are stronger financially than you think.
 
This is probably long since relevant but do we know where about this incident happened on the ride?

There is part of the ride where the boat can VERY easily get stuck (I have only had one ride where it didn't and that was due to it bouncing off of another boat that was already stuck)
If the boat getting stuck is what prompted the poor girl to stand up, then a judge could easily reason it to be the parks fault!
 
There’s the fine, possible litigation, plus any fall in visitors. I heard that Drayton Manor is normally packed with school kids in July, but it was empty in that period last year.

I don’t know the ins and outs of why they’ve removed the Big Wheel and cable car, but that could be linked to safety concerns. Last year they changed the loading policy on the Wheel, so that they only used a few pods. The cable car is probably their oldest ride, aside from the Gallopers. It might also be that they were looking to cut costs because of a fall in visitors. Losing the rapids, wheel and cable car, along with the bad publicity, probably has hit them hard.

I very much hope that the park isn’t fighting for its survival. I’ve had some really happy times there. Nonetheless, I certainly think that they’re in a very tough position right now. With Drayton Manor’s reduced line up and SW8 opening up the road, it’ll be a real struggle to bring people in.
 
It’s profitable yes but cash generation is key

Profitable businesses fail due to lack of cash
 
I agree with that fully, but in the context of DM's financial situation, I've never heard of Drayton having problems with liquidity at all. According to the 2017 audit (I've seen it now), they have a mixture of short and long term liabilities and handle their loans well. Either way, the point was made that their cash in hand wasn't bad and the business has done WAY better than expected more recently with its shift toward the junior market.
IF they are fined, I don't believe it would be more than £100,000. I looked in to the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, and micro businesses have fines capped at around 60k for harm category 1 (death or extreme injury), but low culpability. I'm not particularly keen on that word tbh; it's a little lazy and allows the judge room for a bit of personal bias so I hope this isn't the issue here.
That aside, if anyone's got closed season news/videos/photos, would be much appreciated, especially as we approach half term :)
 
It seems stupid but if someone dies on a school trip under the age of 18, the parents can only claim £7,500 in liability.

Whereas it's something ridiculous (In the millions) if they get life changing injuries on a school trip.

Plus Drayton were probably following manufacturer guidelines, which means unless they weren't following them then they won't be the main blame to say the least.
 
It wouldn't surprise me if death also results in far less paperwork for the school than an injury.
 
Having read their accounts now it seems debt is well managed across the group, and they are generated cash despite their liabilities - that said cash isn’t a major asset - I.e they haven’t got the money for a £7-£10m coaster without significant borrowings. This probably explains the lack of new coaster that was rumoured and the shift to family attractions, which is probably more lucrative to them from a business perspective
 
Bert2theSpark said:
It seems stupid but if someone dies on a school trip under the age of 18, the parents can only claim £7,500 in liability.

Whereas it's something ridiculous (In the millions) if they get life changing injuries on a school trip.

Plus Drayton were probably following manufacturer guidelines, which means unless they weren't following them then they won't be the main blame to say the least.
Click to expand...

Same reasons airlines tell you to sit a certain way in an emergency, it's cheaper to pay out a lump sum for wrongfull death than it is a lifetime of medical support.
 
Bert2theSpark said:
It seems stupid but if someone dies on a school trip under the age of 18, the parents can only claim £7,500 in liability.

Whereas it's something ridiculous (In the millions) if they get life changing injuries on a school trip.

Plus Drayton were probably following manufacturer guidelines, which means unless they weren't following them then they won't be the main blame to say the least.
Click to expand...

No that makes perfect sense. If you are severly injured (such as the Smiler incident) you need lots of surgery, physiotherapy, prosthetic limbs, maybe a wheelchair or adaptions to your home etc. All of that costs money. and the money can improve the quality of life.

If you are dead you need a funeral. Money can't bring you back to life.

Therefore someone with life-changing injuries needs more compensation than someone who is dead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top