Sorry for making a long post, but I realized the other day that the UK amusement park scene is due for some massive changes in the near to medium-term future. Unfortunately, I don't know if they will be for the better or worse. But I'm pretty sure that that the current situation is not going to hold. Specifically, thrill rides are facing a very uncertain future.
The TL;DR is as follows: Essentially, the 1990s and early 2000s were a huge experiment for the park industry. Many actors poured millions into parks and coasters, hoping that they'd draw large crowds and earn big money in ticket sales. Now we're about to learn whether it paid off, and whether it's worth doing again. Whatever the answer is, it will change the amusement industry dramatically.
Let's quickly recap the status quo: Thrill rides are currently scattered in parks all over the country, with the Merlin parks tending to have the most of them in one place. If I'm counting RCDB correctly, 12 parks currently contain coasters with inversions, or coasters RCDB classify as "Extreme": Adventure Island, Alton Towers, Blackpool Pleasure Beach, Brean Theme Park, Brighton Pier, Drayton Manor, Fantasy Island, Flamingo Land, Oakwood, Pleasurewood Hills, Southport Pleasureland, and Thorpe Park. In total, 26 "Extreme" coasters are operating in the UK at the moment. An additional 19 parks have coasters classified as "Thrill", too many to list here. These are 37 of those coasters, making it 63 in total between the two categories. Presumably, the situation for flat rides is comparable, but stats are harder to find there. Let's focus on coasters for the time being.
Most of these coasters were built during a period that roughly spanned from 1990 until the financial crisis of 2007. Of the 26 Extreme coasters, only 6 were built in 2008 or later: Saw, Mumbo Jumbo, Swarm, Smiler, Hero, and Icon, the latter of which is the only one built after 2013 (although it should be noted that Flamingo Land's new 10-looper will add another to the count).
On the Thrill side, things look better, with 20 coasters opened after the financial crisis. However, if we look at relocations and manufacturing dates, the picture is a little different: Only 10 of the coasters were actually manufactured after the financial crisis. 4 of them have been relocated at least once since they were first built. Only three were custom made for their park, and one of those is a Wiegand Alpine Coaster (the other two are Thirteen and Wicker Man at Alton Towers).
Or in other words, the rate of new constructions on this scale has slowed dramatically in recent years, and the existing stock of thrill coasters is aging. It seems completely unthinkable these days that a small country park could build the longest coaster in Europe, or that a seaside park would buy a pair of 40+ meter tall Vekomas. Even a small park like Pleasurewood Hills acquiring a Boomerang would be extraordinary. I mean, the biggest and most exciting new acquisition in a UK park in the past three years has been a cloned spinning coaster at Paultons Park. There are many parks that currently have thrill rides, but few parks that build them. Even the ones that do, largely rely on cloned models designed to be easily disassembled and sold on to somebody else. Even the biggest parks are mainly building family attractions or temporary attractions (if they build anything at all), while relying on the old "crowd pullers" in the thrill category.
However, this situation can't continue forever. At some point, the "crowd pullers" will become too old to operate, and because of the relative lack of investment from 2008 onward, the parks currently have nothing like them to fall back on. The parks would have to replace the coasters "as they fall", or live with the loss. Since most of them were built in very short order, the wave of retirements will be similarly big. Just look at Thorpe Park, which had more than half of its attractions built between 2001 and 2006. In the 15 years since then, they've effectively built only four new rides.
And that's pretty much the case all over the industry. Parks are relying on the old thrill rides, without building new ones on the same scale, and the day will come when the old rides will be so old they must be retired. The parks are currently operating below the sustenance limit, meaning there will have to be a reckoning quite soon.
I see four possible ways out of it, and they all hinge on one question: Are big thrill coasters worth it? Are thrill coasters, like the ones installed in 1990-2007, profitable? All things considered, does it pay off to cater to the adrenaline junkies? In the age of excellent video games and home streaming of any movie you can think of, amusement parks face stiff competition as a spare time activity. It is relatively expensive and requires travel, and you risk spending most of your day standing in line. Meanwhile for parks, big coasters are a huge expense to plan and build, require lots of staffing for operation and maintenance, regular inspection, specialized spare parts, and so on. They don't want to put down that sort of money for an attraction unless it draws in a lot of people. But do the numbers add up? Would it be worth it to rebuild, say, Fantasy Island tomorrow, if it vanished today? Or would it be better to build something less wild, that appeals to a wider audience? Or just using the land for real estate development instead?
The answer to this question is literally make or break for the UK amusement park scene like we know it today. The wildest coasters are aging, their "replace-by" date is coming up, and parks will have to make the decision whether to replace them or go for something more family-oriented instead. Or just go out of business altogether, once the current "inventory" of attractions becomes too old to continue operation.
There's also a question of what the parks are able to afford. Here are the four scenarios I think are the most likely, ranged by how optimistic they are:
1) A renaissance. Thrill coasters are worth it, and the parks can afford to replace them. Coasters like Nemesis, Avalanche, Colossus, and Millennium meet their eventual end, and their replacements are up and running shortly after. Even coasters at minor parks, such as Shockwave or Megafobia, are carried on in spirit through their successors. Parks like Alton and Thorpe renew their entire flat ride lineup and are almost unrecognizable within a few years. The current scope of the existing parks is largely retained as it is, but the rides will become a lot more modern.
2) Competitors take over. Thrill coasters are worth it, but the existing parks cannot afford (or won't risk the cost of) the required renovations. Instead, other parks spring up to take over their market niche. Some regional parks close, but new ones are built and thrive. Old iconic coasters at old iconic parks close, but new ones are built in new locations. The current scope of the industry is retained, but shifting to different parks.
3) Downsizing. Thrill coasters are not worth it after all, and once the existing ones are too old to operate, the parks replace them with something smaller and more widely appealing. We see family woodies where we wished for RMCs. Vekoma Rollerskates instead of B&M multiloopers. SFCs instead of SLCs. Thorpe and Alton commit to relying on escape rooms, temporary IP attractions, and events on a permanent basis, alongside some cheaper mechanical attractions. A few thrill coasters are still built, but smaller than the coasters they replace. Forget Intamin Blitz coasters, a mid-sized Gerstlauer Infinity is the biggest you're getting. Only a tiny handful of parks will ever build non-cloned attractions. The existing parks reduce their scope, but retain their grip on the market.
4) Mass extinction. This is the scary one. Thrill coasters are not worth it, nor is it viable to operate a park without them. Caught in a negative spiral of aging rides --> dwindling income --> less maintenance --> aging rides, major parks struggle to stay afloat, or they try to milk their existing cash cows for as long as possible until one day the inspector says they can't open and there's nothing left to fall back on. Unable or unwilling to bear the cost of renewing the thrill coasters, parks go out of business and sell their land to real estate developers. Some parks become the sites of temporary funfair attractions, but house no permanent infrastructure or themed lands. The public fail to turn up in the numbers needed to sustain anything more than that, with parks being seen as an expensive novelty of a bygone era. The whole concept of amusement parks is deemed nonviable on a regional scale, leaving only a few parks to operate thrill attractions across the country, and to do so on a vastly smaller scale than before.
As it currently looks, I think we're looking towards a future in the lower half of the list. Parks like Lightwater Valley and Oakwood are pretty much doomed, Drayton appears to be abandoning the thrill segment, and there doesn't seem to be any great appetite for anybody to fill their gaps. Covid left a gaping hole in both the revenue and reputation of amusement parks. The London Resort is either a joke that won't go anywhere, or at least the parks aren't gearing up to face the competition. We haven't even seen mid-term development plans for any of the biggest parks for a while. And Icon famously did little for BPB's numbers. I'm not sure if we'll see mass closures, but it seems like the UK has passed "peak coasters" already.
Also note that this is not exclusive to the UK. Parques Reunidos is facing the same dilemma with a shrug. Six Flags has the mother of all time bombs coming up when their 50-odd thrill/extreme coasters built between 1995 and 2006 hit the "best served before" date. The Danish parks haven't built an "Extreme" coaster since 2008. Cedar Fair is barely giving crumbs to invest in their second-tier parks. There is some activity in the thrill ride scene of parks in some European countries, but overall we're not seeing as much as we used to, and I wonder if we ever will again.
Or am I being overly pessimistic?
The TL;DR is as follows: Essentially, the 1990s and early 2000s were a huge experiment for the park industry. Many actors poured millions into parks and coasters, hoping that they'd draw large crowds and earn big money in ticket sales. Now we're about to learn whether it paid off, and whether it's worth doing again. Whatever the answer is, it will change the amusement industry dramatically.
Let's quickly recap the status quo: Thrill rides are currently scattered in parks all over the country, with the Merlin parks tending to have the most of them in one place. If I'm counting RCDB correctly, 12 parks currently contain coasters with inversions, or coasters RCDB classify as "Extreme": Adventure Island, Alton Towers, Blackpool Pleasure Beach, Brean Theme Park, Brighton Pier, Drayton Manor, Fantasy Island, Flamingo Land, Oakwood, Pleasurewood Hills, Southport Pleasureland, and Thorpe Park. In total, 26 "Extreme" coasters are operating in the UK at the moment. An additional 19 parks have coasters classified as "Thrill", too many to list here. These are 37 of those coasters, making it 63 in total between the two categories. Presumably, the situation for flat rides is comparable, but stats are harder to find there. Let's focus on coasters for the time being.
Most of these coasters were built during a period that roughly spanned from 1990 until the financial crisis of 2007. Of the 26 Extreme coasters, only 6 were built in 2008 or later: Saw, Mumbo Jumbo, Swarm, Smiler, Hero, and Icon, the latter of which is the only one built after 2013 (although it should be noted that Flamingo Land's new 10-looper will add another to the count).
On the Thrill side, things look better, with 20 coasters opened after the financial crisis. However, if we look at relocations and manufacturing dates, the picture is a little different: Only 10 of the coasters were actually manufactured after the financial crisis. 4 of them have been relocated at least once since they were first built. Only three were custom made for their park, and one of those is a Wiegand Alpine Coaster (the other two are Thirteen and Wicker Man at Alton Towers).
Or in other words, the rate of new constructions on this scale has slowed dramatically in recent years, and the existing stock of thrill coasters is aging. It seems completely unthinkable these days that a small country park could build the longest coaster in Europe, or that a seaside park would buy a pair of 40+ meter tall Vekomas. Even a small park like Pleasurewood Hills acquiring a Boomerang would be extraordinary. I mean, the biggest and most exciting new acquisition in a UK park in the past three years has been a cloned spinning coaster at Paultons Park. There are many parks that currently have thrill rides, but few parks that build them. Even the ones that do, largely rely on cloned models designed to be easily disassembled and sold on to somebody else. Even the biggest parks are mainly building family attractions or temporary attractions (if they build anything at all), while relying on the old "crowd pullers" in the thrill category.
However, this situation can't continue forever. At some point, the "crowd pullers" will become too old to operate, and because of the relative lack of investment from 2008 onward, the parks currently have nothing like them to fall back on. The parks would have to replace the coasters "as they fall", or live with the loss. Since most of them were built in very short order, the wave of retirements will be similarly big. Just look at Thorpe Park, which had more than half of its attractions built between 2001 and 2006. In the 15 years since then, they've effectively built only four new rides.
And that's pretty much the case all over the industry. Parks are relying on the old thrill rides, without building new ones on the same scale, and the day will come when the old rides will be so old they must be retired. The parks are currently operating below the sustenance limit, meaning there will have to be a reckoning quite soon.
I see four possible ways out of it, and they all hinge on one question: Are big thrill coasters worth it? Are thrill coasters, like the ones installed in 1990-2007, profitable? All things considered, does it pay off to cater to the adrenaline junkies? In the age of excellent video games and home streaming of any movie you can think of, amusement parks face stiff competition as a spare time activity. It is relatively expensive and requires travel, and you risk spending most of your day standing in line. Meanwhile for parks, big coasters are a huge expense to plan and build, require lots of staffing for operation and maintenance, regular inspection, specialized spare parts, and so on. They don't want to put down that sort of money for an attraction unless it draws in a lot of people. But do the numbers add up? Would it be worth it to rebuild, say, Fantasy Island tomorrow, if it vanished today? Or would it be better to build something less wild, that appeals to a wider audience? Or just using the land for real estate development instead?
The answer to this question is literally make or break for the UK amusement park scene like we know it today. The wildest coasters are aging, their "replace-by" date is coming up, and parks will have to make the decision whether to replace them or go for something more family-oriented instead. Or just go out of business altogether, once the current "inventory" of attractions becomes too old to continue operation.
There's also a question of what the parks are able to afford. Here are the four scenarios I think are the most likely, ranged by how optimistic they are:
1) A renaissance. Thrill coasters are worth it, and the parks can afford to replace them. Coasters like Nemesis, Avalanche, Colossus, and Millennium meet their eventual end, and their replacements are up and running shortly after. Even coasters at minor parks, such as Shockwave or Megafobia, are carried on in spirit through their successors. Parks like Alton and Thorpe renew their entire flat ride lineup and are almost unrecognizable within a few years. The current scope of the existing parks is largely retained as it is, but the rides will become a lot more modern.
2) Competitors take over. Thrill coasters are worth it, but the existing parks cannot afford (or won't risk the cost of) the required renovations. Instead, other parks spring up to take over their market niche. Some regional parks close, but new ones are built and thrive. Old iconic coasters at old iconic parks close, but new ones are built in new locations. The current scope of the industry is retained, but shifting to different parks.
3) Downsizing. Thrill coasters are not worth it after all, and once the existing ones are too old to operate, the parks replace them with something smaller and more widely appealing. We see family woodies where we wished for RMCs. Vekoma Rollerskates instead of B&M multiloopers. SFCs instead of SLCs. Thorpe and Alton commit to relying on escape rooms, temporary IP attractions, and events on a permanent basis, alongside some cheaper mechanical attractions. A few thrill coasters are still built, but smaller than the coasters they replace. Forget Intamin Blitz coasters, a mid-sized Gerstlauer Infinity is the biggest you're getting. Only a tiny handful of parks will ever build non-cloned attractions. The existing parks reduce their scope, but retain their grip on the market.
4) Mass extinction. This is the scary one. Thrill coasters are not worth it, nor is it viable to operate a park without them. Caught in a negative spiral of aging rides --> dwindling income --> less maintenance --> aging rides, major parks struggle to stay afloat, or they try to milk their existing cash cows for as long as possible until one day the inspector says they can't open and there's nothing left to fall back on. Unable or unwilling to bear the cost of renewing the thrill coasters, parks go out of business and sell their land to real estate developers. Some parks become the sites of temporary funfair attractions, but house no permanent infrastructure or themed lands. The public fail to turn up in the numbers needed to sustain anything more than that, with parks being seen as an expensive novelty of a bygone era. The whole concept of amusement parks is deemed nonviable on a regional scale, leaving only a few parks to operate thrill attractions across the country, and to do so on a vastly smaller scale than before.
As it currently looks, I think we're looking towards a future in the lower half of the list. Parks like Lightwater Valley and Oakwood are pretty much doomed, Drayton appears to be abandoning the thrill segment, and there doesn't seem to be any great appetite for anybody to fill their gaps. Covid left a gaping hole in both the revenue and reputation of amusement parks. The London Resort is either a joke that won't go anywhere, or at least the parks aren't gearing up to face the competition. We haven't even seen mid-term development plans for any of the biggest parks for a while. And Icon famously did little for BPB's numbers. I'm not sure if we'll see mass closures, but it seems like the UK has passed "peak coasters" already.
Also note that this is not exclusive to the UK. Parques Reunidos is facing the same dilemma with a shrug. Six Flags has the mother of all time bombs coming up when their 50-odd thrill/extreme coasters built between 1995 and 2006 hit the "best served before" date. The Danish parks haven't built an "Extreme" coaster since 2008. Cedar Fair is barely giving crumbs to invest in their second-tier parks. There is some activity in the thrill ride scene of parks in some European countries, but overall we're not seeing as much as we used to, and I wonder if we ever will again.
Or am I being overly pessimistic?
