The Sinking Ship: (Un)Love Letters to Merlin

[Martin]

To be fair your assessment is correct, it's just

The premise that the business should never return money to the parent organisation/shareholders and that it should all be ploughed into capex is laughable.

This is exactly the root of the issue of Merlin.

There was no magic. Ever.

A rather cold assessment of a place on a website literally set up to discuss how much we like it.

 

[Towerslover]

I know a lot of people may disagree with me here, but this is the way I see it.

I was born in 2002 and have grown up visiting the park, from my first rollercoaster to my obsession with theme parks I've always loved the place and still do today.

In my eyes the park was thriving around 2011-2014, I remeber visiting and there was such a buzz, the audio playing around the park, the 1hour + queues! And don't get me wrong I still love it all! Although things went downhill after the smiler crash I can still have a great day out! I think we are so lucky to have a great theme park here in the U.K. (Not the best I know but without the Merlin parks what would we have, flamingo land?)

 

[CoasterCrazyChris]

I was born in 2002 and have grown up visiting the park)

Blimey. You make me feel old and i'm only 23.

I was exactly the same age as you when I became an AT enthusiast (this was 2008) but I knew even then that the park was trading on its former glories. It was still half decent then though and I was excited about what future developments would bring. Fast forward five years or so and most of that had faded.

You say that the years from 2011 were 'buzzing' and i'm not trying to patronise you but judging by your age you probably don't have much recollection of the place before that time but that was actually when the rot (budget cuts, no new rides, lack of upkeep etc) really started to set in.

Everyone has what I would call a 'honeymoon' period with Alton when they first become enthusiastic about the park but trust me the place has been on a downward slope since 2002/3. All the evidence ranging from quality of new attractions, condition of the park and experiences from people visiting along with changes of corporate ownership during these years back this up.

 

[jon81uk]

As the park became more established, the need to expand at the same rate reduces. You reach a level where the park is the right size and the number of would be visitors reduces because you've got them hooked. Before the Smiler incident, Alton had entered a phase whereby they were trying to marginally increase the number of visitors - but essentially it was about growth by diversification, rather than by expansion.

I've seen the same thing written about DisneyWorld. They have got complacent, guests visit no matter what. But then Universal opened Harry Potter land(s) and suddenly Disney realise they need to start investing again as people were spending more time at the other parks.

Similar to what you are saying, AT pulled guests in almost no matter what before the incident.

 

[DiogoJ42]

The trouble is that Merlin have a total monopoly on UK parks. There's no one out there that can make them panic like Universal did with Disney.

 

[Towerslover]

If paramount DOES ever open ... Or even another company investing. Would universal ever invest in Europe?

 

[DiogoJ42]

If paramount DOES ever open ... Or even another company investing. Would universal ever invest in Europe?

Europe maybe, but not the UK, for the same reason that Paramount has slipped quietly away without mention... Theme parks are viewed as evil eyesores by the NIMBYs that complain about anything and everything that is ever proposed. We can't even get a decent rail line built in this country because old morons who should have died decades ago want to cling on to the 1950's. And a railway benefits everyone! There's no chance with something as frivolous as a theme park.

Even if Universal did open a park in Europe, it wouldn't scare Merlin any more than DLP does. (So, not at all). A true rival would have to be in the UK to kick our industry up the rear, and as I explained above, that's never going to happen.

 

[Rick]

This is exactly the root of the issue of Merlin.

That a public company makes a profit and returns income to the people who own it? You've lost me.

A rather cold assessment of a place on a website literally set up to discuss how much we like it.

Or "realistic". I'm a huge fan of Alton Towers, but I don't believe you can make 'magic' in the Staffordshire countryside, or anywhere for that matter. Can you make a phenomenal visitor attraction? Sure, and I am in the minority of folk in this thread suggesting that's exactly what Alton is doing now, better or at least as well as it has done so in the past.

Even if Universal did open a park in Europe, it wouldn't scare Merlin any more than DLP does. (So, not at all). A true rival would have to be in the UK to kick our industry up the rear, and as I explained above, that's never going to happen.

I think this is another misnomer by enthusiasts. The attendance at the Paris Disneyland Park (not studios) was c. 11 million last year. Even at the height of Alton Towers attendance figures, they're in a different league - less than a third. DLP is a European destination park, Alton is not and doesn't seek to be a main player in that regard.

It began as a regional theme park and Merlin are working toward it being a national destination with some international guests. The infrastructure around the park couldn't support huge attendance increases. As stated by the park in most planning documents, they are seeking to grow attendance very marginally and/or to raise per cap spending among the existing customer base.

 

[Martin]

Maybe it's not been clear the million times myself and others have said it, but not every company is as driven by maximum short term profit as Merlin and its owners. Different owners would invest more. Just look at Phantasia, smaller park, less visitors, lower entrance price, family business, invest a hell of a lot more, and more efficiently, than Alton do. Once again, being a business shouldn't be an excuse for them.

Well if your definition of magic is that literal then maybe you can't. But to suggest Alton Towers is providing anywhere near a 'phenomenal' attraction, or is at least on par with what it was in the past, is staggering to me considering the state of the place and the amount of closed rides. Perhaps financially, for its owners, it is doing as well as ever, but unless that's what you care most about, that doesn't translate to being a phenomenal visitor attraction.

 

[Altonadvocate1]

I think that Rick hit the nail right on the head, and I could not agree with him more.

My first trip to AT was around 1980. I had a fantastic time, and I've lost count of the number of times that I have been since. I have never once failed to have a great day, and feel young again like I was in 1980.

We are not going to get the level of investment at AT that some other parks get. The road network cannot support it, the council doesn't want it, the NIMBYS won't allow it, the planning regulations will prevent it and due to all of that the stakeholders will not be prepared to make that level of investment.

The setting is world class, the towers are world class, some of the coasters are world class (and to me Nemesis is world beating).

We have had a lot of big investments, not always the specific investments that we as enthusiasts want, but big nonetheless.

AT is a big fish in a small pond of UK theme parks compared to the world. I remember all of those old attractions from the early 80''s, they were great and I had a fantastic time, but bring them back as they were and they would disappoint in the modern age ( though I don't want VR either) We do see them through rose coloured glasses.

Merlin are far from perfect, but they are not evil. They are trying to run a profitable business and make a return on their investment. I hope they are successful in this regard as it will ensure the longevity of our theme park.

It's still a great day out, it still makes me feel young again. It still gives me that special feeling I arrive and I still love it.

 

[DiogoJ42]

AT is a big fish in a small pond of UK theme parks compared to the world.

I'd say it's more like a minnow in a tank of sea monkeys, sat on the path across the road from Sea World.

 

[andeyhart]

I think that Rick hit the nail right on the head, and I could not agree with him more.

My first trip to AT was around 1980. I had a fantastic time, and I've lost count of the number of times that I have been since. I have never once failed to have a great day, and feel young again like I was in 1980.

We are not going to get the level of investment at AT that some other parks get. The road network cannot support it, the council doesn't want it, the NIMBYS won't allow it, the planning regulations will prevent it and due to all of that the stakeholders will not be prepared to make that level of investment.

The setting is world class, the towers are world class, some of the coasters are world class (and to me Nemesis is world beating).

We have had a lot of big investments, not always the specific investments that we as enthusiasts want, but big nonetheless.

AT is a big fish in a small pond of UK theme parks compared to the world. I remember all of those old attractions from the early 80''s, they were great and I had a fantastic time, but bring them back as they were and they would disappoint in the modern age ( though I don't want VR either) We do see them through rose coloured glasses.

Merlin are far from perfect, but they are not evil. They are trying to run a profitable business and make a return on their investment. I hope they are successful in this regard as it will ensure the longevity of our theme park.

It's still a great day out, it still makes me feel young again. It still gives me that special feeling I arrive and I still love it.

I was just going to make a smartarse comment about Melinda, but you edited too quickly damn you

 

[Altonadvocate1]

I was just going to make a smartarse comment about Melinda, but you edited too quickly damn you

I only just noticed in time... guess my spell checker doesn't like Merlin (or Melinda).

 

[Altonadvocate1]

I'd say it's more like a minnow in a tank of sea monkeys, sat on the path across the road from Sea World.

So all we need to do is build 50 miles of new roads, concrete over hundreds of acres of countryside, shut down the council (now that gets my vote), send the NIMBYS into space, remove Alton's listed building and garden status, and replace Merlin with a few billionaire Theme Park loving philanthropists.

It's so easy when you think about it!

Right, I'll take The Council....

 

[Rick]

You say that the years from 2011 were 'buzzing' and i'm not trying to patronise you but judging by your age you probably don't have much recollection of the place before that time but that was actually when the rot (budget cuts, no new rides, lack of upkeep etc) really started to set in.

But this is exactly the point, everyone's glory days with the place are typically when they first started visiting, it's new, it's fresh and you love it for the right reasons. If you're still tapping away on your keyboard a decade later talking about the Air tunnel, your relationship with the park is somewhat different and the way in which you look at things and the way you enjoy your visit changes.

That's the same with anything in life. Whether it be a job, a relationship or your favourite TV show. Everything has a honeymoon period.

 

[andeyhart]

You say that the years from 2011 were 'buzzing' and i'm not trying to patronise you but judging by your age you probably don't have much recollection of the place before that time but that was actually when the rot (budget cuts, no new rides, lack of upkeep etc) really started to set in.

I'm 38 and have visited since the early 90's, and can honestly say I enjoy Towers just as much now as I ever did.

 

[jon81uk]

The trouble is that Merlin have a total monopoly on UK parks. There's no one out there that can make them panic like Universal did with Disney.

Well as @Rick said the panic moment for Alton Towers was the Smiler incident. Unfortunately instead of improvements to bring more people in they have focused on cutting costs.

Just look at Phantasia, smaller park, less visitors, lower entrance price, family business, invest a hell of a lot more, and more efficiently, than Alton do. Once again, being a business shouldn't be an excuse for them.

The key phrase there is family business. If the only shareholders are the family then they don't need to answer to anyone else in terms of where the profits are coming from.

 

[Rick]

Well as @Rick said the panic moment for Alton Towers was the Smiler incident. Unfortunately instead of improvements to bring more people in they have focused on cutting costs.

Well, in part. The cuts were made to the operational cost base. Less people = less income = less expenditure, of course.

In terms of capex, the accident happened in 2015, the planned capex for 2016 continued in the form of RCR & Galactica - they weren't scaled down/changed as a reaction to the accident. There's vast capex next year in terms of the new overnight offerings. Some might suggest that the budget for SW8 has been tampered with, that's not my understanding - but someone closer to the project might tell me that's incorrect.

 

[Tim]

If I can just wade in here there's one argument which keeps recurring I feel I must address.

Merlin is a business which must make money and please its shareholders. This is undeniably true. However different businesses require different strategy's to meet that aim. If your company sells a product you want to be profit driven; keep all spending to a minimum and sell at the highest margin. In the world of entertainment, especially the investment heavy world of themed entertainment profit can't be the only driving force.

This is the reason Theme Parks (as we know them today) didn't exist before Disneyland. Disneyland was a poor investment opportunity. There was no proof it would work, quite the opposite. But Disney didn't invest in the idea because he expected it to financially pay off. He hoped it would but the driving force behind the park was personal; he wanted to create a place everyone could enjoy together.
Of course once the concept struck gold what Disney would have happily run as a loss leader to promote the brand quickly became the very heart of the company.

This formula of ambition and sustainable business is at the heart of all successful Theme Parks today. Most of the big names started off as family businesses with a visionary at the helm. Some of them still operate this way (looking at you Europa). Others have passed the mantle onto like minded people; They are big name company's but ones that have creative ambitions.

The parks which have failed have not kept this balance. Either they have tried to build beyond what the business could sustain or they have lost the passion for their product which kept people interested. Do both of these sound familiar?

 

[Matt.GC]

I completely understand the points being put forward about rose tinted experiences. I have read some examples of this on this forum and there is sometimes a misconception that all was well in the Broome era for example (when it certainly wasn't!). Just the other day I was challenging my gran when she was harping on about the "good old days" when the perception of the world, in her view, was that it was much more wholesome and safe. Never mind beatings in schools, corrupt police forces, higher murder rates, lower mortality rates, rape being laughed off, mental asylums warehousing people who needed help and kids programs on the BBC being presented by pedophiles.

But then she would point out that in the post war period we set out to fix the ills of our broken country and set up the welfare state, created the NHS, offered good pension provisions, built social housing, designed homes and communities with quality living and play spaces, built concorde, built the motorway network etc all at a time when we were heavily indebted as a nation with the odds against us. This, all in stark contrast to the present "Post modern" era.

I think the same can be said for Towers. It wasn't a bed of roses in the 80's. I was also born in 82 and can remember being taken to AT in the late 80's. The park was little more than a posh funfair with a Vekoma corkscrew in an amazing country estate. But the park tried so hard. It tried it's best to be a proper theme park. Who cares if 1001 Nights was a clapped out fair ground flat, it was still a fun ride, in the shadow of the Towers and Corkscrew in the bustling and vibrant Festival Park. The whole park tried so hard and every year it seemed to get better and better as new and modern attractions came thick and fast. The professionalism of the park operation began to match the new hardware an expensive infrastructure that was coming in. The park was forwards thinking and still determined to be a world class resort with every new project. Those projects weren't built on Disney budgets, but arguably better value for money by the clever creativity of their design making up for the massive difference in actual cash spent.

In summary, it was the will and the attitude that was there at the time which is lacking now. AT was a world class park then, built on a budget. It still had a knackered old Jet star 3 in a tent up until the mid 2000s but even managed to disguise that relatively well just by giving a damn about the guest experience.

I went to Florida with the family in 93 and 94. Although AT never stood up to Disney (neither should it either IMO), after a summer of riding Nemesis in its opening year (trust me, it was absolutely stunning back then!), when I visited the likes of Sea World, Bush Gardens and universal in the Autumn, AT stood proudly alongside them in terms of guest experience. These days that gap is as wide as the Premiership is from league 2.

Of course it would be silly to expect the park to carry on investing large sums of cash forever. The 80s and 90s where all about building a Theme Park, a park that now fully exists. Anyone on here demanding expansions, new themed areas, a 200ft B&M, Disney esque theming etc are being unrealistic. But that's no excuse for the park to at least not maintain its position by updating itself and inspiring it's guests with new and world class experiences every few years. All the park had to do was stay with the times. Instead its heritage and brand has been heavily relied upon to carry it through for the last decade. Now that the brand has been severely damaged, it's very concerning to see how it's parent company are responding.

Yes you can still have a good day at Towers. Yes its still a large park in a beautiful setting with great infrastructure. Yes it still has some decent classy coasters (now ageing however), and it still has evidence of past glories dotted around. But relatively speaking, it's an inferior park than it was a decade ago. Others around the world have moved on or kept up appearances whereas Towers has almost downgraded itself. There's far more to the decline of Towers than simply "rose tinted specs". So what if it's "technically" a better park than it was in 20 years ago. The Simpsons is now technically better than it was 20 years ago with its cheaper but clearer computer generated HD animation, but it's no where near as funny or popular.