I keep seeing that number spouted as it's speed. Perhaps Kent's exaggerating?

Chuck, glad the coasters found a new home

Dude, What's that say? and I've seen it in other articles as well.

Chuck

The coaster has a long history and low maintainence cost compared to some of the newer gen out there. Im sure feasability studies and other things added to the cost of just moving and rebuilding.

Yeah, You could build a new coaster for 6 million and probably have a better one on your hands But I think Kent was at least partially into the preservation of this ride to do it.

Chuck

Still, sounds like someone designed some modifications.

I also think it's a family ride geared to a family park.

Chuck

That must be a hell of a tailwind taking that train to 70mph. I was thinking like 45mph, which is still respectable. mathematically impossible. Still, its great to have a wood coaster that is a proven good ride.

Didn't Ken buy a new train for Starliner, as well?

Anyway, glad to see it running again.

Kiddieland reloacation is an 'expense', not a capital project. You can't finance 'expenses'. That can be done day to day moving kiddie rides. Most competent staffs could move 1-2 rides a day, once cement pads are cured and electric is finished. CG isn't open to the wee-hours, so they don't need to wait for dynamic lighting, etc.

Their entire capital budget for fiscal 2007-08 may be $4 million, but highly unlikely with bankruptcy settlements and finalizing insurance recovery payments.

You knowledge is truely appreciated!

Remember, our rule of thumb: Promise this level, deliver 'that' level.
*** This post was edited by Agent Johnson 7/22/2007 11:41:11 PM ***

This isn't about inflated statistics. This isn't about whether $4 million was a ridiculous price for a "used" wood coaster. This is about a coaster being preserved... a fact that I know is lost on many around here, but a fact that resonates with a group of people just as large. Starliner is an example of a ride from a bygone era as well as a relic from an amusement park that is now a footnote in history. That doesn't necessarily make it a better ride, but there's nothing wrong with a ride having a history. I love Gravity Group and GCI coasters but it's nice to know there are wood coasters still out there that are representative of their respective eras. Halo, Grand Theft Auto and Gran Turismo are all great games, but I love video gaming because in addition to those, I can still go back and play the original Sonic the Hedgehog, Metroid and Golden Eye.

And why is it suddenly a crime to lie or or deceive in advertising? It's okay for a park like Cedar Point to take an opinion that is completely subjective- "Cedar Point- It's the Best!"- yet Cypress Gardens claiming their new coaster runs faster than it does is reason to be up in arms? I agree with Agent Johnson- since the park preserved Starliner, they would probably be better served by hyping the ride's history and the changes that were made to make it better, but in the end, what does it matter? A piece of history was preserved and it's now available for anyone to enjoy. How- or why- anyone would want to put a negative spin on that is beyond me. Some people aren't happy unless they're complain about something.

I'm not arguing one way or another, I just don't understand it to be anything more than an emotional attachment to things.

I'm not arguing one way or another, I just don't understand it to be anything more than an emotional attachment to things.

There are two types of value: Monetary and historical. If you're asking why the Starliner gained monetary value when Miracle Strip closed, there's a simple answer: It didn't. But if you're talking about historical value, that's a whole new issue.

No one was really concerned with the ride's historical value when the ride was at Miracle Strip because there was no reason to believe the ride was in any kind of danger. Most assumed that Miracle Strip and its Starliner would continue to operate indefinitely. But when something of historic note suddenly becomes endangered, it gets a lot of attention and its value increases. People worry about historical stuff a lot more when its future is made questionable, usually appreciating things the most when they're gone.

My point: Just because it isn't talked about much or well known, doesn't mean it isn't a great ride.

Now for fun, let me state another "angle"...
On the same trip that I road Steal Eal, I also finally made it to Frontier City to ride Wildcat relocated from the defunct Fairyland Park in Kansas City. I have been excited about this ride since I joined ACE in 1989. Wow, what a lame coaster! Part of it is the ridiculous braking added by the park, but the ride would still mostly suck without the trims. Not sure why this coaster was saved.

It was designed by John Allen, who is credited with the "rebirth" of the wood coaster in the 1970's. Of all the coasters he designed and built. there are only a handful left and even fewer in operation.

It was part of a seaside amusement park- an amusement park genre that is quickly disappearing.

What kind of "historical" significance are you looking for? If you want something technical, I can't help you there... probably because there's nothing for. But something can be historically significant without being the last of its kind of a certain number of years old.

There's a lot of hero worship in the enthusiast community that I've never understood, I suppose. It's especially strong and nostalgic for wood coasters, which I also don't understand because, at least in my opinion, I haven't been on many wood coasters I got off of that I was really crazy about other than CCI/TGG or GCI rides. There are a few Miller rides I liked too.

I'm not anti-old stuff, I'm just not pro-old stuff for the sake of them being old. These coasters aren't like carousels, for example, which I believe involve a level of art and craftsmanship that goes far beyond what I feel amounts to wood track on scaffolding.

In fact, that "rebirth," if you can call it that, is exactly what makes it less special. If they cropped up all over the place, and none of them were stand outs, then what historical importance do they really have?

The problem, as I see it, is a lack of perspective. You're talking about what Starliner means- or in this case, doesn't mean- to you, Jeff Putz. While I respect your opinion and the opinions of everyone else provided they are based on something, a ride's historical or nostalgic value has nothing to do with how one individual views it. Maybe you didn't get a lot out of the John Allen rides that you've ridden (even though I remember agreeing with you on how well CP's Blue Streak was running a few years back), but there are a lot of people that like John Allen rides. The fact that Starliner isn't a blow-you-away white-knuckle thriller doesn't mean it has no value. For a park like Cypress Gardens that needs a thrilling- but not too thrilling- alternative to its smaller Triple Hurricane, Starliner is probably perfect. I don't see why this could be viewed as a bad business decision. The park could have built a new family coaster from scratch for $4 million. Instead, they took a ride that has a bit of a history behind it and spent $4 million on that. Am I missing something here? Regardless of whether or not you have a respect for history of any kind (I'm guessing you don't, despite your "I'm not anti-old stuff claim), I don't see how this was a bad move.

And so what if there is hero worship among coaster enthusiasts? Sports fans worship pro athletes like Derek Jeter and Peyton Manning. Car afficiandos deeply respect the work of Harley Earl. Video game nuts have a special fondness for Shigeru Miyamoto and Yuji Naka. Architecture fans look up to Frank Lloyd Wright and Frank Gehrey. What makes it wrong for coaster enthusiasts to appreciate the work of John Allen on a level that likely rises above the greatness of all his work? Modern-day baseball players would probably put Babe Ruth to shame, but people don't take that into consideration. And that's perfectly fine.

You answered your own question by not "getting" what people love about wood coasters. You don't get it. And that's fine- I don't get why people like Fergie and Bryan Adams. But that doesn't categorize their fans as a bunch of people who don't know any better.

First, who defines what "good" is? I have no doubt you can go to Cedar Point and find people who think Mean Streak is good; you can go to Knotts and find people who think Boomerang is good; and you can find people who go to Holiday World and think Voyage isn't good!

IMHO whether the ride is "good" is a moot point. The park has chosen to use the ride's historical significance as part of their marketing but they certainly didn't set a precedent: cases in point Lost Kennywood and Hershey's new Boardwalk.

Second, it doesn't matter if Floridians [or you, or anyone for that matter] knew of the coaster or its historical significance before it came to Cypress Gardens. What matters is that its known now and hopefully that -- along with the exaggerated claim that the ride hits 70MPH -- is enough to get bodies thru the turnstyle. And, taking the other side of the argument for a moment, perhaps the reason for that claim is that the park feels historical significance alone isn't enough. But I digress....

I remember a few years ago when a lot of people in Pittsburgh were up in arms over the removal of one of the downtown sports stadiums. It was scheduled to be torn down so that a newer one could be built. Their argument for keeping it? It had historical significance. Just because I had never heard of the stadium or knew of it's history --heck, I can't even remember the name of the old stadium today! -- didn't make their argument less valid. Nor did it mean the stadium didn't have any historical significance.

Last year in NYC the historic club CBGBs closed. It was the club many, many famous bands including the Talking Heads, B-52's, and the Ramones got their big break. And when it closed many people in NYC and music fans around the world were saddened. It should be saved. Why? Because of it's importance to music history. Wanna bet there are people who have never heard of the club? And does the fact that they've never heard of it diminish it's significance? I'd say no.

And that brings us back to Starliner and your recent awareness of the ride.

Anyway that's just my .02 cents on the matter

*** This post was edited by Mamoosh 7/23/2007 9:34:30 PM ***

See, comparing a coaster to CBGB's seems insane to me. I very obviously recognize the worth of a place like that. I can count the coasters that strike me as that significant on a hand or two. I do see what you're getting at, but I think that's not a good example.

Maybe that's the expectation gap... I don't see roller coasters as particularly relevant in terms of history or culture in the first place. A few, sure, but not many.

That is the point I'm trying to make. I would have made it regardless if Rob posted his thoughts. There was no collusion or "Dude, back me up" messages passed back and forth, lol

*** This post was edited by Mamoosh 7/24/2007 12:23:29 AM ***

Anyway, getting back to what Moosh was saying (and he's right, this isn't some kind of planned attack or anything... nor a passionate display of man-love in a public forum... we do that behind closed doors... usually when my wife's giving me a hard time), it's up to each individual to decide what is important to them. You find CBGB's important to music history, and that's fine- I consider it to be a very significant footnote in the history of music as well. But just because you don't deem amusement parks to be on the same level as music doesn't mean that the Starliner is any less signficant. I don't follow computer programming that you're involved with but I'm sure there are people that have played a significant role in the history of computer programming, and they're going to mean something to people like you, whether I've heard of them or not. Keep in mind there is a world outside your reality, Jeff... just as I admit there is a world outside of my reality.

I live near Chippewa Lake. Do you know how many people who live around here care that the park is, or was, there? Most people haven't even heard of it, and there are actual structures still hanging out there.

Perhaps I'm too average guy to be running a coaster site, but the preservation of amusements just doesn't strike me as particularly "important" in the big picture, thus my general apathy to all things coaster preservationist.

I will admit that there are a few things part of moder-day society that are in a class all their own because of their widespread acceptance- sports, movies, cars and music instantly come to mind. I don't think that anyone can dispute the important of any of those things in the history of this country, even if they don't have any appreciation whatsoever for sports, movies, cars and music. But the history of this country is made up of so much more. Drive-in theaters, diners, bed & breakfasts, railroads, battle sites and amusement parks have all worked together to give our country a rich history that consists of a multitude of aspects instead of just a few. If sports, movies, cars and music were all that people ever cared about, American history would seem a lot more one-dimensional.

Honestly, I believe that historically-significant things from those "other" groups are made even more important because they represent things that a small ratio of the population cares about. People know about Lou Gehrig, Humphrey Bogart, the Corvette and the Beatles, but fewer people know about those other things. They need all the attention they can get because they're very much at risk of disappearing. And just because they don't rank with the most well-known aspects of American history doesn't mean they should be ignored. There's room for hunrdeds of professional sports franchises and thousands of minor league sports franchises in this country... certainly there's room for a hundred or so wood coasters, and certainly there's nothing wrong with paying attention to them.

The fact that you're an average guy running a coaster site isn't all that big a deal... what is a big deal is that while you have your own views on preservation and why it doesn't matter to you, you care not to respect the opinions of those that think preservation matters. Personally, I don't care at all about women's volleyball but I'm never going to tell you that it's silly for you to care about.

"See, comparing a coaster to CBGB's seems insane to me."

Which is it, Jeff?

"A club like CBGB is something you can see artifacts from at the Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame. Come to think of it, pro sports have halls of fame too."

The Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame was established in 1983. It wasn't until the museum opened in 1995 that there was a place to see historical artifacts -- unless you count Hard Rock Cafes, lol. So what if CBGBs were to have closed in 1982? Does the fact that a Hall of Fame or museum didn't exist at that time diminish it's importance in music history?

I live near Chippewa Lake. Do you know how many people who live around here care that the park is, or was, there? Most people haven't even heard of it, and there are actual structures still hanging out there.

So only things people know or care about are important? I'm not sure I'm following your logic.

[Edit - I'm off to work, where I have no access to CBuzz.]

*** This post was edited by Mamoosh 7/24/2007 11:59:05 AM ***

The RNRHOFM opening date is irrelevant beyond identifying the medium, music, as having a significant enough impact on culture that someone decided to build a structure to showcase that history for millions of people every year. You can't study anthropology without seeing music and its impact everywhere. You can't say that about roller coasters. That's where I'm coming from regarding its relative importance.

And yes, I am saying that what people know is important in our culture. What's particularly interesting about that is that it all comes back to the business of amusement parks. If something is valuable, then why does it fall to neglect and failure? Ohio used to have dozens of amusement parks. If they were that important, why were they not supported enough, i.e., important enough, to survive?

I'm all for saving whatever is able to be saved. My point is not, and never has been that I'm not OK with that. The point I am making is that things not deemed important in a more universal cultural context will not be preserved just because a small minority of people interested in it want that.

It is true that there is a small correlation between popularity and significance, but popularity is far from being the only thing that defines something's significance in the history of society or American culture. I doubt you're going to find a huge number of people that are into Revolutionary War muskets, but I'm not going to say they aren't a significant part of society and culture. I realize that the comparison of war muskets to roller coasters is the comparison of something necessary (at the time) to something relatively frivilous (at the time), but the belief that amusement parks didn't play an important role in society and culture is just wrong. Back in the days before television, movies, football, hiking and traveling, amusement parks were a major part of the country's entertainment scene. Amusement parks kept Americans occupied.

Many things of value fall into disrepair and altogether disappear and it hardly ever is a reflection of how those things are viewed by the public. Additionally, there are times when people fail to realize the importance of certain things and only see the big picture when it's too late, or almost too late. The going rate for a restored 1970 Chevelle 454SS is close to $100K. That number is artificially inflated by demand to an extent, but that's only because people failed to realize the value of old cars when their numbers were relatively high. Like people junked their old cars without thinking twice, people allowed old amusement parks to get bulldozed.. realizing much later the historical/nostalgic value of those things.

I, for one, am glad that there are so many different types of people with so many interests trying to save things. I can't say that I agree with every single preservation effort but that's only because I never take the time to try and understand what every single group of people sees in the objects of their desires. The point I'm making is that coaster enthusiasts are a small bunch but their desires aren't insignificant because of that. Just because one person- or many people- don't see the allure of something doesn't render any preservation effort unnecessary or fruitless.

Cypress has made every attempt to play that angle *to the hilt* in their marketing effort. Four million, considering the changes made to the layout, seems reasonable to me. Tightened up the structure to fit into the NARROW space, increased the first drop height, increased banking on the turnaround, new lumber, re-engineered, all seems to point to a great ride on a budget.

Was Starliner "famous" around the State? No. Can it be marketed effectively as "Florida's Original Scream Machine"? I think it can...

Monetary value has little correlation to cultural impact. It's a Wonderful Life can be had for $14 on DVD. It's widely regarded as an important movie.

He came in and saved Cypress Gardens from certain closure, and now has saved Florida's first big time coaster and as Gator said, 4 mill doesn't seem to expensive especially now that the coaster was re-engineered, etc.

This is actually a re-birth to Starliner as now that it's located at a park near Orlando, it will probably see more riders then it has in its history up in Panama Beach.

Not all coasters are worth saving. I do feel this one was warranted to save.

And who said that there is a correlation between monetary value and cultural value?

Suppose a really old colonial house in your neighborhood gets torn down to make way for a new housing development. Do you really think that because the house was torn down, it never had any kind of value whatsoever to begin with?

Considering how much it would cost to revitalize a dormant wood coaster, I'm going to assume the thing is worth practically nothing if you're talking dollars. But just because something isn't worth money doesn't mean it doesn't have nostalgic value. There are some things that can't be tagged with an actual price. I don't see why this is so complicated.

When examples of a certain thing disappear, they become more valuable, whether you're talking monetary value or nostalgic value. Suppose there were once 500 Putz's Burger Shacks throughout the country, but over the years most got replaced by new development. That might not make one of the last few remaining worth anything in dollars but people are sure as hell going to assign more nostalgic value to those few than they did when a few hundred still existed. Rarity increases something's value... sometimes monetary, sometimes nostalgic, sometimes both. I don't think that at all proves that nostalgia, by itself, doesn't warrant preservation.

When certain things disappear, they do not become more valuable. Where's the value in a Yugo? I have a lot of old things that have no value to anyone but me. Again, you keep going down the road of my opinion versus yours, but intrinsic value in a cultural context doesn't come down to me or you. Only the aggregate can really determine a more universal answer on whether or not something has value. If not enough people care, then things go away, so the cultural value is not there.

And then there's the economic impact, the business case, for whether or not even something valuable can be maintained. Aside from my comments about the artistic value, a carousel is a relatively small, self-contained, and more easily moved object compared to coasters. At least around here, you can't throw a stone without finding a "saved" or "preserved" carousel. Can't say the same about roller coasters.

And duh, I don't eat beef.

Doesn't that make the few remaining older roller coasters more significant since relatively few of them have been saved?