Why no Gravity Group at a major park yet?

[Jarrett]

So I was debating this on Facebook the other day and this person actually had a good point so I thought I'd make a thread for it.

Gravity Group is actually my second favorite manufacturer behind RMC and I absolutely love their work. However, they've gone a pretty long time without having been picked up by a large corporate park to do anything. This person I was talking to said that it was because of "bad engineering," knowing that GGs have been prone to issues. And while this might be true with Voyage's train configurations, occasional complaints of roughness on rides like Hades 360 and Mine Blower, and Mine Blower apparently getting rough like as soon as it opened (friend of mine who went to opening day while doing Disney College Program called me as soon as he got off, said it was amazing but slightly rough). However, Intamins are way more problem prone and parks up until recently were buying them like there was no tomorrow. And it can't be an issue with the actual product they offer, as GCI is an extremely popular choice among park corporations.

Why haven't we seen a Gravity Group at a larger park?

 

[Pink Cadillac]

HV Shanghai? HV Wuhan? etc etc etc

 

[Mysterious Sue]

I'd say that Fantawild is a very big park chain and they've totally committed to Gravity Group.

 

[Mrsupersonic8]

...Holiday World? I'd like to think they're a major park, even if they're not "corporate".
And yes, I know there's the Chinese corporate parks (Happy Valley, Fantawild Dreamland, Oriental Heritage, etc.), but it's highly unlikely that your average coaster enthusiast would be able to visit them.

 

[HeartlineCoaster]

Think the original post just needs an 'outside of China' slipping in.

Maybe they've been happy keeping themselves busy over there and aren't really pushing hard for other sales.

 

[toofpikk]

And yes, I know there's the Chinese corporate parks (Happy Valley, Fantawild Dreamland, Oriental Heritage, etc.), but it's highly unlikely that your average coaster enthusiast would be able to visit them.

No?
An average enthusiast is someone who likes rides. What do you mean average enthusiast? Because as far as I'm concerned, there's some average enthusiasts over in Asia who probably won't ride RMCs because they can't visit them.

 

[Ben]

To be average you have to be white, straight and American, everyone knows that.

Everything else is just weird.

 

[Mysterious Sue]

The orginal comment suggested that GG haven't been 'picked up by a large corporate park' for a while.
It doesn't matter how many enthusiasts get to go to China or not, you can't deny that GG have spent their time, recently, working for large corporate parks in China. They've been very busy there.

 

[Hyde]

Gravity Group is also a younger firm. GCI was founded 8 years beforehand in 1994 when Mike Boodley decided to break off of CCI and found his own firm with Clair Hain. Through the end of the 90s, it was really GCI vs. CCI, with CCI eventually going bankrupt in 2002, while GCI was able to keep their doors open. Gravity Group consists of a lot of the core CCI firm, though Boodley (and subsequently Pike) is arguably the better designer of the bunch.

It's also worth recognizing the rather limited market wood has to compete in - each respective amusement park typically sports one or two large wooden coasters. Once an amusement park has built their wooden coaster installment.... they're pretty good to go. Looking through both GCI and GG lists, majority of each installment was each park's respective "large, wooden coaster." And for other major parks that have not installed a GCI nor GG yet? .... Chances are they already worked with those designers underneath their previous tenure at CCI or Dinn Corp!

 

[Lofty]

Not to repeat everyone, but this topic is completely stupid by design.

Out of the list of 23 Gravity Group coasters, 15 of them are at 'major' parks - this being a park in a large chain, a park that dominates an area/chain with no competition, one with large attendance or sheer scale. That's 65% of them. Just because they're not on US soil, doesn't mean they aren't major parks.

 

[Jarrett]

Looking at GG's portfolio, there are actually way more of those Jungle Trailblazers than I thought. I thought there were like four total that were hardly connected and I thought some were GCI (I was thinking of that Python coaster I think), in reality there are like 6, all GG. Forgot they worked with Happy Valley for a bit too.

However, while my wording might not have been the best, my wondering why major US chains shy away from them still kind of stands. Hyde explained this pretty well in that they're newer, that's a legitimate explanation. But for in the US, I think the only one on that list that I think had corporate owners was Boardwalk Bullet (Landry's), the rest were small to mid-sized family or small corporation-owned parks. No Cedar Fair, no Six Flags, no Blackstone, no Herschend. Seemed like a legitimate question to me.

Absolutely no need to be rude, if someone asks a question and you know the answer the correct thing to do is politely educate, not act snarky and stuck up.

 

[Ben]

Oh yeah because you're always super polite to everyone, and have never called an entire population stupid just because of where they come from...

 

[gavin]

To be fair, Jarret, it does just come across as being ignorant and elitist. You're not an idiot, so don't need "educating" since you know how easy it is to find out this information.

Out of all the Chinese woodies only 4 (not even all open either) are not Gravity Group. Happy Valley/OCT and Fantawild are absolutely major players now. OCT are working with both GCI and GG, while Fantawild have thrown a s**tload of business at GG, producing some of the best things either company has ever produced.

Independent parks like Hotgo also went with GG. Ireland's first woodie, one of the only major wooden additions in Europe for a long time, was GG.

A more realistic question would be to ask why Six Flags and Cedar Fair haven't used them.

 

[Howie]

^Why haven't Six Flags or Cedar Fair used Gravity Group?

<runs away and hides>

 

[DelPiero]

^Why haven't Six Flags or Cedar Fair used Gravity Group?

<runs away and hides>

Most likely because RMC stepped in giving an option to redevelop existing woodies with the I-Box and both park chains decided to basically book RMC for yearly upgrades. That's the budget for those parks done for now, give it a couple of years and their next investment may be wood again, but knowing CF and Six Flags, they will stick with RMC as a manufacturer, the Raptor track says Hi!
In the meantime, GG have been booked up by the China parks to basically create their headline rides, with the odd smaller install happening elsewhere., I'm sure GG would accept a large contract in these two parks if offered, but CF and SF have form, so I don't expect anything there in the near future.

 

[Jarrett]

I just typed out a long response to all of this but in the end I think it would be best left in two sentences.

I asked a simple question, yes with a flaw, but I feel a more appropriate way to address that would have been to politely mention the flaw instead of taking a totally unnecessary personal attack over behavior that happened a year ago that I've since evolved out of and publicly apologized for (if anyone wants to address this bit further, please PM me as I will be happy to politely explain). More correctly, why have park chains in a country with many independent parks that have gone with them in the past left the manufacturer to do only independent parks instead of picking it up themselves?

And if we wanna take this somewhere really interesting, why have both corporate and independent properties in China bought from Gravity Group but only independent parks in the US gone with GG? Why the different situations?

 

[Hyde]

But for in the US, I think the only one on that list that I think had corporate owners was Boardwalk Bullet (Landry's), the rest were small to mid-sized family or small corporation-owned parks. No Cedar Fair, no Six Flags, no Blackstone, no Herschend. Seemed like a legitimate question to me.

To carry a bit of my thought experiment forward, take a look at the Dinn Corp and CCI listings on RCDB: this is where you will find your major amusement parks. Nine Six Flags parks built projects between those two respective groups (5 Dinn, 4 CCI, including former parks), Five Cedar Fair parks (4 Dinn, 2 CCI). Herschend too has a CCI at Wild Adventures. To then proceed forward in time with the work GCI laid before GG's founding in 2002 (again remember, GG comprises of majority CCI staffers): Six Flags pulled the trigger on Roar installations at two parks, Blackstone (kinda) had Gwazi built, and Herschend was well into planning for Ozark Wildcat (RIP) and Thunderhead (which opened in 2003, 2004). Hershey too went for GCI Wildcat and Lightning Racer.

By the time GG opened their doors, a vast majority of America's first and second tier amusement parks already had a large wooden roller coaster built. And these roller coasters have staying power; 46% of Dinn Corp./86% of CCI projects are still standing. And of those roller coasters that have closed? Dinn Corp coasters has 7 defunct coasters: 3 have been RMCed, 1 scrapped for closure (Raging Wolf Bobs), and 2 immediately replaced by large roller coasters (Efteling removed Pegasus, installed Joris en de Draak; Dorney Park replaced Hercules with Hydra; SFMM replaced Psyclone with Terminator). For CCI coasters, only 4 have ever been removed (Mega Zeph at SFNO is still SBNO), 2 having been RMCed and the other 2 scrapped due to closure. Parks show a relative unwillingness to remove previous wooden coaster installations - even when a park is bankrupt/defunt, wooden coasters are typically the last thing to be removed.

So that's to say, a lot of major amusement parks had already made moves on large wooden coasters before GG incorporated (again... CCI was GG, and had already been active in this deployment). And with GCI getting those few outlying major parks through the late 2000s, there really was no major park client left for GG to pursue. Maybe they were hoping these same parks would replace their older, large wooden coasters with hot new GG numbers (something I think we all could agree upon), but the entrance of RMC totally disrupted the market, allowing parks to breath life into those same old assets. And let's not also forget the other firms that were also active in wooden coaster designs: Intamin, International Coasters Inc. (aka Hurler: The Company), S&S, RCCA, etc. And again, staying power - a vast majority of roller coasters built by Dinn and CCI are still standing (even if it is only the support structure for an RMC).

Maybe then your question rationale is the answer: smaller, independent amusement parks were all that was left for GG to work with. And for GG's drive to the Chinese market - let us not forget GG delivered the country's very first wooden coaster with Fireball in 2009. And with the latest TEA Attendance report, China's big three park groups (Oct Parks China, Fantawild, and Chimelong Group) placed #4, 5, and 7 overall in respective attendance, and were the only three park chains to sport double digit growth year-over-year. So, a rapidly growing market that has only been 8 years in the wooden coaster market vs. a saturated wooden coaster market with single percentage point growth and more competitors? You tell me where the business opportunity lies.

 

[Chris Brown]

And if we wanna take this somewhere really interesting, why have both corporate and independent properties in China bought from Gravity Group but only independent parks in the US gone with GG? Why the different situations?

I do think this is a very good question and am curious as to why? I know, as a specifier, that if dont like a sales person i will happily choose an inferior product. Wonder if the GG US rep just a bit of a penis?

 

[Gazza]

I think the reason is simply because the major parks in the US are woodied out, and if they do want a new one, then GCI and RMC are the immediate choice.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of it is down to parks having "relationships" with certain manufacturers. It doesn't seem such a big thing now. But look at how Arrow just dominated US parks, presumably because they were cheaper and easier to deal with than their European counterparts. Why risk the new guy on the block when you've already got a good working relationship?