What's new

Energylandia | Hyperion | Intamin Hyper coaster

Marketing. Fire up the populous into thinking "what could it be!!!" and let the momentum build. Its actually very easy to complete (simply posting a video as it were) and a very easy way to get the ball rolling on a marketing campaign. Once you stop trying to connect the dots to a conspiracy and look at this objectively with business logic behind it, you can see it yourself as well. If you look at the actual timeline of events, there is no coincidence, there is no secret agenda, there is no letting enthusiasts decide in a poll.

I'm sorry ladies and gents, but as someone with a business background and knowledge on the ins and outs of the industry, I'm not agreeing to disagree. You really are just grasping at straws to be honest. I'm all for discussion if both sides make sense or are fun opinions but ya'll are holding on for dear life at this conspiracy for the sake of either blind ignorance or trolling at this point and I'll call you out on both if that is the case.
I suppose so @Snoo.
 
I suppose I'm not really sure what the 2015 statistic classes as "planning stages", in all fairness. But my question is; why would they even do a poll if they already knew what ride they were getting? Isn't it a bit pointless?

I suppose we're going to have to agree to disagree here.

M.A.R.K.E.T.I.N.G.
 
It's already been mentioned but Marketing is such a thing, for both the park AND Vekoma/Intamin. They know this ride will/has captured enthusiasts minds across the world. While enthusiast pull in final decisions is so small it's not even able to be registered, their(our) ability to sell to the populous in mass is something worth taking into account when trying to sell to other parks.

See using my experience a company would not advertise that they had lost a competitive Tender against a rival company. Try find me another example of a roller coaster company advertising that they lost a project. Vekoma lost the project so other parks will be aware that Energylandia (who have worked with Vekoma on their SLC and their prototype next gen launcher F1) chose Intamin over Vekoma despite their good working relationship. I know that there will be other factors but from a business perspective thats how it will be seen and Vekoma would not open themselves up to that reputation.

And I think your MASSIVELY underestimating the decision making it takes to decide on a project like this. If you REALLY think a park is going to let a small group of people who are a very small segment of their annual attendance, you have no idea how a business actually works to be honest.

Im not saying this? Energylandia have already decided they are getting a hyper with x budget, x capacity, x length and x height. When the park invited Intamin / Vekoma to tender they would have been given all of these constraints that would have satisfied the parks needs. If all the parks needs are satisfied and they are happy with both companies proposals but the only differences were slight layout tweaks why not but it to the parks customers on social media to decide? They are giving the two options they are both happy with or they just wouldn't post the videos? Therefore its not this actually a huge decision to make, all the significant decisions required would have been done in the brief given to the manufacturers.

I'm with you Chris, I understand how you can see the correlation between events as I see them too.. but this isn't a conspiracy theory about the earth being flat or who shot JFK.. this is a $25 million Euro investment. I've been part of major companies with insight into their thought processes for making large monetary decisions. There is no way on earth they 1. did not decide this at least a year before they announced it and 2. Let polls on the internet decide for them.

A 25million euro investment that they has satisfied all of the parks needs in the brief so they have no obligation to give with one manufacturer over another. These things happen in business. The poll was posted in October 2016 with Intamin announced as the winner of the poll in November 2016. A huge project like this may require a year or so in the planning but Energylandia had the ride planned, all they needed to do was decide between the 2 proposals and instruct the chosen company? I know you are being logical when it comes to the internet poll but something I've tried to hammer home is that this park is not something you can apply logic too, they announced like 5 roller coasters 2 years ago, announced the RMC for 2020 earlier this year along with the multilaunch Vekoma, these things are not logical and would not be predicted.

It's a nice thought to think they care about enthusiasts and their feelings, but they don't. They went to two companies, said design me a ride, went with Intamin due to their history (as Vekoma doesn't really have any in this ride type), and played marketing as such to allow it to spread. And boy has their marketing worked well. Not only that, Vekoma (the loser) have benefited as more parks have seen their designs who may not have before or have been able to afford an Intamin but will be willing to spend a smidge extra to get a Vekoma instead of a mid-range coaster they were thinking about.

I dont think they care about enthusiasts and havent said that? They care about the visitors to their park and their target audience hence the social media poll. Im not gonna say they didnt go with Intamin because of their track record as i know as much as you do on that (nothing). Vekoma will not benefit from other parks knowing that they lost a competitive tender as i said earlier. If they wanted to release the ride design and market it they would do that anyway as they do with their other launch coaster designs.

All in all, I get what you mean, but from a business standpoint, youre not going to allow the minority to decide for you. You're going to see what works elsewhere, go with someone you trust, and market as such. If they happened to throw out Vekoma.. that may have been something Vekoma requested due to the visibility it's gardnered and they happily obliged due to the stir it would cause with two designs as this thread has indicated.

The thing is the business side of the decision was made, all of the parks constraints were satisfied, hence if Energylandia put it to a poll they could do so knowing that either ride is what the park wanted but with the added bonus that their target audience and customers have chosen what they prefer. Again not buying that Vekoma would have wanted it released due to perception from other potential clients.

I'm sorry ladies and gents, but as someone with a business background and knowledge on the ins and outs of the industry, I'm not agreeing to disagree. You really are just grasping at straws to be honest. I'm all for discussion if both sides make sense or are fun opinions but ya'll are holding on for dear life at this conspiracy for the sake of either blind ignorance or trolling at this point and I'll call you out on both if that is the case.

I wasn't gonna bother writing a long winded response but I found this quite funny. I understand that you have this 'business background and knowledge on the ins and outs of the industry' but do you actually know anything about Energylandia? Do you know that the management run their company the exact way you think? Because although im barking up a pretty weird tree it in plausible knowing how insane this park is. We dont have anything to prove either way but I actually think that the park have gone with the poll decision. What would happen if there was a landslide victory for the Vekoma and they'd already signed the deal with Intamin? Would that still be good marketing?
 
I really don’t think building a lot of rides when you get the funding to do so is really equally as insane as what we’re discussing here.

They’re not the same thing, so your entire argument collapses with that.
 
I really don’t think building a lot of rides when you get the funding to do so is really equally as insane as what we’re discussing here.

They’re not the same thing, so your entire argument collapses with that.

In that case as its funded why not let the target audience decide? Completely removes the business argument.

Anyway the funding myth was debunked a few pages ago, the park funds all its own investments I believe.
 
I... didn’t say they didn’t fund themselves? Doesn’t matter a lick where the funding comes from.

Buying lots of rides because that’s your business model and letting people on the internet decide your ride are two totally different things.
 
I... didn’t say they didn’t fund themselves? Doesn’t matter a lick where the funding comes from.

Buying lots of rides because that’s your business model and letting people on the internet decide your ride are two totally different things.

Im not even sure why you mentioned funding tbh.

Of course they are different but im using it as an example of applying logic to illogical scenarios. The park is crazy, they do mad **** and have done since it opened only 4 years ago. Once again, they aren't deciding the ride so to speak, thats already been decided in the brief to the manufacturers, once the brief has been satisfied and the park are satisfied with both concepts then it can be put to a poll like it was. The park are happy with both concepts. That's not unreasonable.
 
Jesus OK.

You said that your logical argument was that the park does ‘crazy’ things like build lots of rides so it makes sense they’d do this.

I mentioned funding because I talked about them building rides because they have the funding to do so.

That is not the same thing as what we’re talking about here and you can’t say because one happens so does the other. That makes zero sense.
 
Just FYI.. I was going to respond to what you wrote earlier but you just wrote this which summarized all of what you said.. so there is below!

Im not even sure why you mentioned funding tbh.

Of course they are different but im using it as an example of applying logic to illogical scenarios. The park is crazy, they do mad :emoji_poop: and have done since it opened only 4 years ago. Once again, they aren't deciding the ride so to speak, thats already been decided in the brief to the manufacturers, once the brief has been satisfied and the park are satisfied with both concepts then it can be put to a poll like it was. The park are happy with both concepts. That's not unreasonable.

So if you want to throw business logic out the window, they're basing their decision making off of the internet/polls.. which isn't a sound business model when you're looking to expand. I can think of two parks who did that in some way, shape or form.. Hard Rock Park and Geauga Lake. They expanded too quickly based off of bad info from both the company (they didn't do the research) and the current climate. Both parks ended up folding.

And to be honest.. if that is the case.. get on these rides quick if that be true because this park is in the middle of no where by a moderate sized city (Krakow) in a country which is a bit.. flaky when it comes to stability. That either smells of corruption or they're blowing their wad hoping for the best and as I said for the latter.. no beuno.

And as Ben said.. we're on two different wavelengths. LOGICALLY, what we have been saying would be true. ILLOGICALLY, these owners are a bunch of idiots who are bound to fail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben
You know a closed poll result can be manipulated to what the park wants right? Honestly, how many of you would have known about this if they didnt do this one or the other. Sure, we would notice a ****ing massive coaster being built, but it wouldn't have made that impact that this did.

As Ben said. Marketing.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
You know a closed poll result can be manipulated to what the park wants right? Honestly, how many of
Just FYI.. I was going to respond to what you wrote earlier but you just wrote this which summarized all of what you said.. so there is below!



So if you want to throw business logic out the window, they're basing their decision making off of the internet/polls.. which isn't a sound business model when you're looking to expand. I can think of two parks who did that in some way, shape or form.. Hard Rock Park and Geauga Lake. They expanded too quickly based off of bad info from both the company (they didn't do the research) and the current climate. Both parks ended up folding.

And to be honest.. if that is the case.. get on these rides quick if that be true because this park is in the middle of no where by a moderate sized city (Krakow) in a country which is a bit.. flaky when it comes to stability. That either smells of corruption or they're blowing their wad hoping for the best and as I said for the latter.. no beuno.

And as Ben said.. we're on two different wavelengths. LOGICALLY, what we have been saying would be true. ILLOGICALLY, these owners are a bunch of idiots who are bound to fail.

Its not throwing business logic out of the window though? The park had clearly decided it was going to build a hyper coaster and invited Intamin and Vekoma to pitch their ideas for the given budget. The park was clearly satisfied with both proposals as both met their brief. Because the park was satisfied with both coasters the decision between manufacturers was put to a the public because the outcome did not matter to the park. Either way they'd be getting a coaster that satisfies the parks requirement.

You critiquing the business model of the park and the viability of its installations is nothing to do with this. I'd agree if the poll was literally between two completely different rides and they just built whatever but the poll was set up so the park installed what it wanted to install and that was a hyper coaster (regardless of which manufacturer installed it).

@tomahawk sorry i should say that the poll wasn't closed or anything it was literally 2 facebook videos of each ride and whichever proposal got the most likes would win and would get built.
 
Its not throwing business logic out of the window though? The park had clearly decided it was going to build a hyper coaster and invited Intamin and Vekoma to pitch their ideas for the given budget. The park was clearly satisfied with both proposals as both met their brief. Because the park was satisfied with both coasters the decision between manufacturers was put to a the public because the outcome did not matter to the park. Either way they'd be getting a coaster that satisfies the parks requirement.

You critiquing the business model of the park and the viability of its installations is nothing to do with this. I'd agree if the poll was literally between two completely different rides and they just built whatever but the poll was set up so the park installed what it wanted to install and that was a hyper coaster (regardless of which manufacturer installed it).

@tomahawk sorry i should say that the poll wasn't closed or anything it was literally 2 facebook videos of each ride and whichever proposal got the most likes would win and would get built.

How is it not though? What other major parks, trying to add new additions, do this? You yourself said:

"Of course they are different but I'm using it as an example of applying logic to illogical scenarios. The park is crazy, they do mad :emoji_poop: and have done since it opened only 4 years ago."

So, logically using a business mind, a park wouldn't do this because it's.. dumb. I've NEVER seen a park use an online poll to decide their new roller coaster. Now, using the 'they be crazy' business method, of course letting an online poll would make sense because it's illogical and stupid.

Now if you say the park is crazy and going **** wild doing what they want with no regard for anything smart from a business standpoint, we can critique that as stupid until the world ends because it is, fundamentally, stupid, based off of all other parks that continue to operate.
 
Bad translations on the Hyperion POV video...

Daga said:
Fans fans I have nothing to do with you I don't even have a full appreciation for you but you have to be fat enough to go for it

I guess she voted Intamin?
 
How is it not though? What other major parks, trying to add new additions, do this? You yourself said:

"Of course they are different but I'm using it as an example of applying logic to illogical scenarios. The park is crazy, they do mad :emoji_poop: and have done since it opened only 4 years ago."

So, logically using a business mind, a park wouldn't do this because it's.. dumb. I've NEVER seen a park use an online poll to decide their new roller coaster. Now, using the 'they be crazy' business method, of course letting an online poll would make sense because it's illogical and stupid.

Now if you say the park is crazy and going :emoji_zipper_mouth: wild doing what they want with no regard for anything smart from a business standpoint, we can critique that as stupid until the world ends because it is, fundamentally, stupid, based off of all other parks that continue to operate.

Please man, just listen to what I’m saying here. The park has two rides submitted by two manufacturers that both offer exactly what the park wants. They both comply with the parks brief in terms of height, elements, capacity and other important aspects. Therefore deciding between the two proposals makes no difference. The park effectively doesn’t mind which manufacturer it chooses as all of their design constraints have been satisfied. Therefore putting the two designs online and letting the public decide is not a business decision as the park is completely happy with both, the management effectively doesn’t have a preference.

Because the park has already decided it wants a hyper (the business decision) and it’s decided it’s gonna be between these two proposals (another business decision) but it doesn’t mind which of the two proposals as both offer what the park wants (capacity, cost, height etc) then to put the decision to the public is absolutely not giving the public a business decision.
 
Please man, just listen to what I’m saying here. The park has two rides submitted by two manufacturers that both offer exactly what the park wants. They both comply with the parks brief in terms of height, elements, capacity and other important aspects. Therefore deciding between the two proposals makes no difference. The park effectively doesn’t mind which manufacturer it chooses as all of their design constraints have been satisfied. Therefore putting the two designs online and letting the public decide is not a business decision as the park is completely happy with both, the management effectively doesn’t have a preference.

Because the park has already decided it wants a hyper (the business decision) and it’s decided it’s gonna be between these two proposals (another business decision) but it doesn’t mind which of the two proposals as both offer what the park wants (capacity, cost, height etc) then to put the decision to the public is absolutely not giving the public a business decision.

You forget one thing: The detail design stage.

In the construction industry, there's a really long way to go from an architect's drawing to the start of construction. The in-between is engineering, and there is a lot of it. Every single part of the building has to be drawn out in detail, and calculations performed to ensure that everything complies to standards.

What Vekoma and Intamin both submitted was a working proposal. An architect's drawing, if you like. Just their suggested layout. No way they would bother to spend the time and manpower to do all the engineering before the contract was won. The winner would then get paid to finalize the design. Calculating the loads and stresses on every single beam and track piece connection point, plan out the number and location of welds, calculating the exact placements of footers and the loads they would be subject to, determining what size of bolts to use in every bolt hole, programming the sensor package and ride hardware, setting up a maintenance plan, and putting all of it and more through third-party controls. Those processes are time-consuming and expensive, and the manufacturer would not undergo that expense unless they got a customer to pay for it. When delivering a tender to a park, they would only do the rough layout and look of the coaster, without all the time-consuming engineering. That way, they don't sink too much money into the contest without being sure they'd get anything in return.

I bet that Energylandia's consolation price for the loser would be to promote the design anyway. You say Vekoma would not advertise a contract they had lost, but I disagree - it still is an item to put in their portfolio, a runner-up in a design contest. Energylandia's bit of PR advertised their new park, and also put the word out that Vekoma was designing Hyper Coasters. Besides, the ride drawings and video they made for the tender could be re-used by Vekoma to promote their new product. Those videos are expensive to make too, but the Energylandia tender left them with a perfectly usable media package to showcase their concept to other potential buyers. No need to make another video of a custom layout when you can re-use the one you already spent money to create.
 
Wasn’t this a Facebook vote? Ya, I’m sure a Facebook vote made a big difference in the park’s opinions and interests with this multi million dollar investment. 99.9% of the people who ride Hyperion will have no idea what the **** this poll was. It was a marketing strategy and an effective one at that; I mean we’re still talking about it! I think @Pokemaniac has said it best.
 
Any source on this? I find it really hard to believe that the park would take such a decision based on the opinions of a YouTuber and his followers, and not things like design cost, warranties, service deals, contracts for spare parts, estimated maintenance costs, reliability, portfolio of existing coasters, and a myriad of other factors. 99.9 % of the park's visitors would not be able to tell the difference between an Intamin and a Vekoma hyper even if they stood next to each other, so I really doubt brand image for guests was a deciding factor at all.
You don’t remember when Energylandia had everyone vote on which two coaster people wanted? Yeah. They put up a poll to see if people wanted to see the Vekoma or Intamin one. Plus even then Vekoma would’ve been better because it probably would’ve been longer and cost less.
 
Yeah, I'm sorry but coasters are not governed by teenage YouTubers. That's absolutely farcical.

The more logical reasons would be cost, maintenance costs, capacity, marketing reach and even things like personalities during pitching come into play. Absolutely not a silly teenage American with a camera.
It was a joke. Apparently you’re too simple minded to understand what a joke is. I was saying that because if you’ve seen his content you will know that most of his viewers try to look at things the way he does. And he does not like Vekoma so his followers probably want to be like him and also not like Vekoma. I was implying it as a joke. I know that Energylandia would not make such a big decision based off a college student’s opinion. I do know that they put up a poll somewhere and the Intamin version won. And I wouldn’t be shocked if it actually won because people hate Vekoma or are Intamin fanboys. If you look at the comment section for this coaster’s animation video, you will actually find comments by people who are unaware of how good Vekoma is now and you will also find a few comments by some enthusiasts on how they’re happy that the Intamin layout won because “Vekomas suck”. I said it as a joke. Call your tits everyone. Plus if you’re going to ask what your guests want then you might as well go forward with it. That’s why most parks add what they add today. Energylandia gave what the people voted for and wanted. I wish they went with the Vekoma layout but it’s too late for that lol. If they put up the poll and went with the Vekoma layout even after the Intamin one won, then that wouldn’t be good lol. That’s like saying: “Thanks for voting. We’re just go against what the majority wanted and piss everyone off”.
 
Last edited:
Top