• 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.

Thorpe Park: General Discussion

Plastic Person said:
It's a response to feedback from guests, who were apparently discouraged by the possibility of having to spend more than one day at Thorpe Park.
Click to expand...
What's weird is this line
"All Shortbreak packages will now come with a 1 day park ticket. The ticket can be used either day of the guests stay."

The "hotel" is inside the park so how is that meant to work out.


Edit: it's been emailed out to affiliate partners with underlined red text!
 
Bit of a strange one for Thorpe, always thought the two days park access was to give value as the hotel is essentially a shipping container.

Checking in on a day when you don’t have a park ticket, maybe move the check-in time to park close or even more radical move the turnstiles to the dome - IIRC that was an option when they were trying to work out how to cope with the security check, current turnstile area would of become security.
 
ringo said:
Bit of a strange one for Thorpe, always thought the two days park access was to give value as the hotel is essentially a shipping container.

Checking in on a day when you don’t have a park ticket, maybe move the check-in time to park close or even more radical move the turnstiles to the dome - IIRC that was an option when they were trying to work out how to cope with the security check, current turnstile area would of become security.
Click to expand...
The website still says 2nd day free even through the email says it takes effect today...
Has their been some miscommunication between THORPE and holiday extras (who run the affiliate program).

Edit: it now shows non resort hotels as 1 day and shark as 2.
 
AT86 said:
Looking at Alton Towers it is the same there too. So offsite is only 1 day entry now.

Likely done to help push sales of onsite hotels.
Click to expand...
Makes sense but you would assume they would tell affiliates to upsell on site hotels.


"Please ensure you no longer use any images which mention ‘2nd day free’.
- Please ensure you amend all content which mentions “2nd day free” to “1 day”."

That's explictly prohibiting affiliates from mentioning on site hotels have the 2nd day free.
 
AT86 said:
Offsite bookings seem to allow you to add a 2nd day for £10pp before checkout.
Click to expand...
£10 isn’t too bad but as @imanautie points out if you only have park access for one day then how does Thorpe especially keep you out of the park? There’s going to have to be a check point.
 
imanautie said:
If it's off site it's easy, just issue a day ticket.
Click to expand...
How though, I’ve booked a one night stay but only want to come in the park the day after my sleep. I can check in from 3pm and the park is open until 6pm - nothing (currently) stops you from doing check-in at 3pm and then go into the park.
 
ringo said:
How though, I’ve booked a one night stay but only want to come in the park the day after my sleep. I can check in from 3pm and the park is open until 6pm - nothing (currently) stops you from doing check-in at 3pm and then go into the park.
Click to expand...
Because they can issue one day tickets that can be used either day, if your off site you don't exactly have any way to avoid going via turnstiles again.
 
imanautie said:
Because they can issue one day tickets that can be used either day, if your off site you don't exactly have any way to avoid going via turnstiles again.
Click to expand...
Ignore me! Sorry yes you’re correct. I was still thinking it was on-site as well but as noted further up it’s only changing for offsite :)

Obviously though that issue we highlighted is why on-site still get two days as at least at Thorpe they couldn’t manage it.
 
I just finished my copy of Making Thorpe Park, a very interesting book about the park’s history and possible future! It did spawn a question for me, however; what do you guys think would have happened at Thorpe had the great fire of 2000 not happened?

Personally, I think that the park’s thrilling transition would likely have happened far more slowly, and possibly not to quite the same degree; I think the park would almost have become more like the Alton Towers of the South as opposed to the out-and-out thrill park they ended up becoming. The book actually states that a Wicked Witches Haunt retheme was planned prior to the fire, and a lot of the earlier Tussauds additions (e.g. Pirates 4D, Tidal Wave) were designed to more gradually transition the park’s clientele to more thrilling attractions while not necessarily abandoning families either. I’d argue that the fire almost forced the park down the route of huge thrill rides a lot earlier and a lot more quickly than if Tussauds’ original plans had been realised.

I think that things like Nemesis Inferno and the 2001 thrill rides almost definitely wouldn’t have happened had the fire not happened, and given that they were originally said to be planning an S&S shot tower for the site where Stealth presently stands, I’d wager that that may not have happened either.

What do you guys think?
 
Matt N said:
I just finished my copy of Making Thorpe Park, a very interesting book about the park’s history and possible future! It did spawn a question for me, however; what do you guys think would have happened at Thorpe had the great fire of 2000 not happened?

Personally, I think that the park’s thrilling transition would likely have happened far more slowly, and possibly not to quite the same degree; I think the park would almost have become more like the Alton Towers of the South as opposed to the out-and-out thrill park they ended up becoming. The book actually states that a Wicked Witches Haunt retheme was planned prior to the fire, and a lot of the earlier Tussauds additions (e.g. Pirates 4D, Tidal Wave) were designed to more gradually transition the park’s clientele to more thrilling attractions while not necessarily abandoning families either. I’d argue that the fire almost forced the park down the route of huge thrill rides a lot earlier and a lot more quickly than if Tussauds’ original plans had been realised.

I think that things like Nemesis Inferno and the 2001 thrill rides almost definitely wouldn’t have happened had the fire not happened, and given that they were originally said to be planning an S&S shot tower for the site where Stealth presently stands, I’d wager that that may not have happened either.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
Did it mention anything about the possible Vekoma Slc Thorpe were meant to get or the gci woodie or maybe the B&M launch coaster?!
 
Pleasure Beach Valhalla said:
Did it mention anything about the possible Vekoma Slc Thorpe were meant to get or the gci woodie or maybe the B&M launch coaster?!
Click to expand...
It did mention about the wooden coaster; it’s said that John Wardley even designed a GCI twin track racer with LSM booster sections to “fix” the race and make the winner a complete secret until the end, offering a different experience each time. Wardley said that this was in order to remove the often common element on racing coasters of knowing which side was going to win if you’ve ridden enough times. The book did also mention the more commonly seen design planned for the Saw site.

Many other interesting things were mentioned too, including that John Wardley actually wanted a B&M Hyper Coaster instead of a Wing Coaster for the park’s 2012 B&M that later became The Swarm. The quote from the book about this says:
When [B&M] was approached to suggest ideas for the first of the new development islands, they were strongly against using the new Wing model. The flat piece of land really didn’t play to the strengths of the concept, and Wardley felt that a different B&M option should be utilised instead. His preference was a Hyper Coaster, a tall ride that offers high speeds and massive airtime. Having good knowledge of planning restrictions, he was confident that permission could be agreed, and it would be the perfect complement to the four major roller coasters already in operation at Thorpe Park. However, when the suggestion was put forward, the message from the very top of Merlin was a familiar one. They were adamant that any major new attraction would need to have some kind of unique selling point in order to attract the public, and getting their hands on a Wing Coaster would give them an exclusive.
As much as I adore The Swarm, I would have loved to have seen what B&M could have done with the site had a Hyper Coaster been picked!
 
Good job Merlin, we all know what a success the swarm was for the park in terms of getting guests in the park

I think world firsts such as “wing coaster” means nothing to the public at all, they aren’t bothered if it’s sat down, hanging, winged, etc. They just see a coaster. A giant mega coaster might not break records but it would probably look a lot more impressive than the swarm looks on the island.
 
djtruefitt said:
Good job Merlin, we all know what a success the swarm was for the park in terms of getting guests in the park
Click to expand...
In all fairness, Swarm wasn't an initial success because of external factors such as the Olympics. The product itself is popular, reliable and the Brave it Backwards campaign in 2013 shows that the ride did captivate the interests of the public.

djtruefitt said:
I think world firsts such as “wing coaster” means nothing to the public at all, they aren’t bothered if it’s sat down, hanging, winged, etc. They just see a coaster. A giant mega coaster might not break records but it would probably look a lot more impressive than the swarm looks on the island.
Click to expand...
I mean this is the era in which Merlin's CEO is supposedly on record for saying "Alton Towers will never get a wooden coaster", and look what happened. If as Matt's book mentions that a B&M hyper is technically feasible at Thorpe Park, they could easily find a way to market a hyper coaster especially if they place the USP on the theme and experience of the ride rather than breaking records. Or hell even pull a Cedar Fair and make the USP true but very oddly specific, it still gives them a gimmick to market. If the park offer a solid product, the marketing team can always find ways to market as a USP (not the other way round). Word of Mouth marketing is very strong and is undoubtedly one of the reasons Wicker Man is so popular.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top