Search results

Yeah it happened to me, a park (which I won't name) used my picture, which I had posted online, on the packaging for a piece of merchandise in their shops. In fairness they removed it once I flagged it with them, but still shouldn't happen.

Imagine having a park steal your image and use it commercially. Now that's annoying...

^ Thanks! :)

A few photos of Untamed's construction taken on Friday; I did try to add these images directly into the post (rather than linking to Facebook), but it would only let me attach 2?

What the...?! :emoji_laughing: (Source: https://www.facebook.com/parkupdates/)

Who doesn't like the sound of a wooden coaster?! :(

It sounds like they really care after this weekend. If calling their guests "tits" and telling them to "deal with it" after absolutely abysmal operations counts as caring, that is.

The season before they spent a lot of money on installing a new magnetic brake system, replacing a lot of the walkways around the layout and track/wood replacement.

If it was a rushed and unplanned decision, that makes it even worse.

If the park had announced it, I'd have still been disappointed about its removal but would have understood it was something that had to happen, for whatever reason. My annoyance wouldn't be directed at the park so much, but rather the situation. As it occurred, my opinion changed entirely once...

What was wrong with how it looked? In my opinion the removal was bad enough in itself, but the way it was handled was the factor that changed my opinion of the park itself and whether they "cared."

Is it, though? It seemed a very rushed decision. If I'm coming across as "entitled" then apologies, that isn't my intention. However, I don't see what the issue is with having a different view on it; some people think the removal of the ride and the way they handled it is fine, some don't...

Of course, I totally agree that they shouldn't give away confidential information but there were still much better ways of wording a statement than what they did. Something like this, for example; "We are very sorry to have to announce that the Wild Mouse roller coaster will no longer form...

They didn't, but it'd be logical to assume it's inferred based on the fact it wouldn't really make sense to remove it if there wasn't something else planned unless there was another reason for the removal (which there was - but PB didn't make it clear enough).

Very true. So why then say it closed to make way for "exciting new developments", insinuating that it'll be a quick transition and that it's all in the name of progress?

So now it's changed to sarcasm. I've already said, the way Efteling have handled Bob closing is how it should be done IMO. You're asking questions I've already answered so clearly you haven't even read my posts or just want an excuse to be sarcastic. I'd suggest Wicker Man has equally good...

But now, a year on, it's become evident that the reasons they gave (an "exciting new development") are yet to materialise. Sure, queue times and visitor numbers aren't everything, but it's still strange for a huge new coaster to only draw queues of 30 minutes. The park were hoping to increase...

Again I think you're making assumptions here, I've never said it was a "personal attack" - that's crazy. I have already said that I understand there were reasons for removing it but that the way PB handled it was very telling of how much they really cared. I refer back to their statement...

But the statement read that it was to make way for future developments, it was rushed out (once they were asked for one) as they had failed to announce anything beforehand. A park that cared would have handled it properly, they'd have put a display up about the history of the ride, the...

The way the park handled it is my main issue, it shows that they just didn't care.