Kings Island removes Firehawk

[Antinos]

As @Hyde stated, this is likely just a generic job posting used chain wide. If this is the case, the 425 foot number makes sense since Top Thrill Dragster is a thing that exists. The park has its fair share of tall rides though - Eiffel Tower, Drop Tower, and Windseeker are all over 300 feet tall. The presumably generic copy-pasta'd job description still applies.

My latest prediction, based on CF's recent earnings and strategy call, is that Kings Island will actually receive nothing next year. I can't wait to see all the butthurt fanboys losing their minds on the interwebs because of it.

 

[Boris81]

Well, Kings Island filed plans with B&M for a 2020 attraction, I am sure they won't drop those plans only because of the latest conference call...

 

[Hyde]

My latest prediction, based on CF's recent earnings and strategy call, is that Kings Island will actually receive nothing next year. I can't wait to see all the butthurt fanboys losing their minds on the interwebs because of it.

How I read that:

 

[BansheeBerry]

I mean CedarFair seemed pretty comfortable blaming the weather earlier this year for their bad attendance so if that’s what they truly believe then I don’t see why a new Kings Island rollercoaster is out of the question.

 

[Kw6sTheater]

It's amazing how much land Kings Island owns compared to how little they have actually used. If I'm dreaming, they could even build a B&M 500 footer and still have many acres to spare using the land they own behind Beast and such. However, I doubt the land will ever be tapped in to even when the park inevitably closes though, but one can dream right?

 

[BansheeBerry]

It's amazing how much land Kings Island owns compared to how little they have actually used. If I'm dreaming, they could even build a B&M 500 footer and still have many acres to spare using the land they own behind Beast and such. However, I doubt the land will ever be tapped in to even when the park inevitably closes though, but one can dream right?

I don’t think they’ve developed half of the land they even own. It’s 750 acres ish from what I believe.

 

[Antinos]

Well, Kings Island filed plans with B&M for a 2020 attraction, I am sure they won't drop those plans only because of the latest conference call...

But they didn't. A document was released that contained every company that the park has done business with for 2018-2020. Diamondback just received new seats: B&M's appearance on that document could have been just because of that. I wouldn't get your hopes up.

I mean CedarFair seemed pretty comfortable blaming the weather earlier this year for their bad attendance so if that’s what they truly believe then I don’t see why a new Kings Island rollercoaster is out of the question.

This is standard corporate behavior. My employer frequently blames weather for low sales in our quarterly earnings calls.

It's amazing how much land Kings Island owns compared to how little they have actually used. If I'm dreaming, they could even build a B&M 500 footer and still have many acres to spare using the land they own behind Beast and such. However, I doubt the land will ever be tapped in to even when the park inevitably closes though, but one can dream right?

They do have quite a bit of land, but the further beyond Beast and the closer you get to the river, the more unforgiving the terrain is. They could probably expand to the north, but then guests would have to deal with a couple huge hills around where Banshee sits - something that is not ideal for wheelchair bound guests and those with other mobility limitations.

 

[tomahawk]

But they didn't. A document was released that contained every company that the park has done business with for 2018-2020. Diamondback just received new seats: B&M's appearance on that document could have been just because of that. I wouldn't get your hopes up.

This is what I have been saying since the hype train started. They got new seats. That alone qualifies them appearing on the list. Reason 2020? Maybe they are gonna do restraints on Banshee. Or, you know, they get their wheels from them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[BansheeBerry]

This is what I have been saying since the hype train started. They got new seats. That alone qualifies them appearing on the list. Reason 2020? Maybe they are gonna do restraints on Banshee. Or, you know, they get their wheels from them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The purpose of the document was to discuss development of the property, new trains on a rollercoaster is not developing the property nor would it likely be required to be reported.

 

[GuyWithAStick]

The document explicitly states that it is listing the companies they are working with for all Additions and Modifications to Kings Island until 2020:

While it's not a definite answer as to why B&M is on the list, it rules out the idea that it must mean a new roller coaster. As stated above, it could easily be a new set of wheels/seats.

Also, it would most definitely be required to be reported regardless of how menial it might seem. If you had to replace all the doors and windows in your house/apartment, your family/housemates/landlord would not be happy to see such a large project be "not reported" because it's not a development of the property. If it costs money, make sure it's reported.

 

[Antinos]

@GuyWithAStick beat me by ten minutes.

There is absolutely zero shred of evidence of a new coaster going to Kings Island in 2020. This document is not proof for the reasons stated. A fan made concept is not evidence. Firehawk's removal isn't even evidence - for all we know, the plot of land can sit barren for years before anything happens with it.

You absolutely want proof of a new ride? Go to the city/county clerk's office and look to see whether the park has filed any site plans or building permits. Pay attention to city council agendas to see if the park is presenting future plans. Even if you do dig up site plans or listen to the park's spiel, that isn't even a total guarantee that they'll build something. To be completely blunt, it shouldn't be claimed that any park is building a new coaster until track arrives. Forget dirt pushing and footer pouring - that could be for a new path, lamp posts and other decorations. Show me track, particularly with the lift spine, or site plans that say "B&M Giga" and then I'll believe you.

Maybe @Hyde can stop in and sift through some documents next time he's down in the Cincinnati area?

 

[Hyde]

Edit - Glad we were all typing at the same time. . Agree with @GuyWithAStick's take, though to @Antinos' point, I don't think it's a matter of not having "any evidence" - just this isn't the one to confirm definite planning. Indeed, a filed site planning would be the more surefire thing to look for.


I've attached the document in question, which you can find with other Kings Island filings at the Warren County Recorder's website: http://www.co.warren.oh.us/recorder/SearchInfo.aspx and search Kings Island as your business (The Notice of Commencement in full lives here, had to export to first page as a JPEG for uploading.)




This Notice of Commencement is indicative of all new additions and modifications scheduled within the park. To that extent, new B&M trains could be classified as a modification of a ride, as it would require Kings Island having executed contract with B&M to place the order. And while this notice was placed in August, months after the trains were placed into operation, this notice is written after contracts have been executed; so it could be within reason for B&M's involvement in this notice to be the train work.

This is all to say, it's no smoking gun to confirm B&M as building a roller coaster in the park, as they have other work that has happened concurrently. What's more, the other parties listed in this notice are landscaping, masonry, and general upkeep-style contractors - where are the contractors for ride systems, electrical engineering, and other work needed to build a roller coaster? A few missing parties that you would expect to see for a notice on building a roller coaster - one does not simply "call B&M" to build a roller coaster, but rather works with a couple parties to make the building magic happen.

On a side note, there was a filing for Duke Energy to lay more transmission wire on the property filed back in November. So, obviously confirmation for a 400 ft. LSM launch.

 

[BansheeBerry]

The document explicitly states that it is listing the companies they are working with for all Additions and Modifications to Kings Island until 2020:

While it's not a definite answer as to why B&M is on the list, it rules out the idea that it must mean a new roller coaster. As stated above, it could easily be a new set of wheels/seats.

Also, it would most definitely be required to be reported regardless of how menial it might seem. If you had to replace all the doors and windows in your house/apartment, your family/housemates/landlord would not be happy to see such a large project be "not reported" because it's not a development of the property. If it costs money, make sure it's reported.

Replacing windows is development of a property though.... Rollercoaster trains on the other hand are not apart of the physical property. That list would include way more manufacturers if B&M was only on there to replace seats.

 

[Snoo]

To be honest.. unless is states explicitly that it's a coaster, not even worth looking deeper.

 

[Antinos]

Replacing windows is development of a property though.... Rollercoaster trains on the other hand are not apart of the physical property. That list would include way more manufacturers if B&M was only on there to replace seats.

Trains are most definitely part of the physical property of the park. The park owns the land, the buildings, all the rides, and every nut and bolt that holds them all together...including the trains. I work for an automaker - we own lots of land around the world as well as the factories and development offices that sit on the land. We also own thousands of prototype vehicles that are considered physical property, and every vehicle that rolls off an assembly line is considered the company's physical property until it's acquired by a dealer. The same concept applies to a park.

B&M acts as a tier one supplier to the park - with regard to the seats, the park calls the manufacturer and orders a quantity of seats. B&M likely doesn't have a molding machine for the rubber and they likely don't have a welding jig for the frame - B&M almost certainly contracted this work out to tier two suppliers. The park isn't going to cut out the tier one either such that they can do the assembly themselves - supply chains don't work that way.

Where are the other manufacturers? Well Mystic Timbers is a fairly new ride and Kings Island has four other wooden coasters to deal with - chances are that they have tons of spare parts in stock at the park. Stinger was removed from Dorney, so the park almost certainly received all of its hardware for invertigo. Arrow doesn't exist anymore so the park is probably utilizing other means to acquire spare parts for The Bat and Vortex which may be listed in that document. I can keep going with this reasoning for a bunch of other manufacturers as well.

Another thought has to do with the specific definition of modification. It's possible that a part swap where the two parts share an identical part number aren't considered a modification. Parts with different colors typically have a different part number to call out the color differentiation. Because Diamondback went from a red seat to a black seat, and the part numbers could be different, that could be enough to consider it modified and enough to justify B&M showing up on that list.

Look, nobody is denying that it'd be awesome for the park to build a major new ride next year, but lots of people are massively jumping the gun. Just because a dead leaf blows onto Coney Mall or something ridiculous like that does not automatically translate to a massive B&M.

 

[BansheeBerry]

Glad to know Kings Island isn’t ordering a single part from another manufacturer for the next 2 years. Look at the list of companies, what do you notice? They develop physical pieces of property. You see Painting companies, roofing companies ect. Physical development of the property is what needs to be reported, not manufacturers that are supplying small insignificant things. If Kings Island was required to report every company they worked with for the next 3 years that list would be way way way longer. Also trains are once again not apart of the physical property. Yes they are physical objects but they’re not tied to the property.

 

[Hyde]

Maybe the Kings Island Additions and Modifications were in our heart the whole time.

IDK, it's a vague document submitted to the county that simply details any contracts signed for parts or labor. I've worked with Notice of Commencements before on EV Charging Projects for some municipalities here in Ohio, it details the parties involved in work but does not discuss the specific project. This is neither confirming nor denying what B&M's work is.

 

[Antinos]

Glad to know Kings Island isn’t ordering a single part from another manufacturer for the next 2 years. Look at the list of companies, what do you notice? They develop physical pieces of property. You see Painting companies, roofing companies ect. Physical development of the property is what needs to be reported, not manufacturers that are supplying small insignificant things. If Kings Island was required to report every company they worked with for the next 3 years that list would be way way way longer. Also trains are once again not apart of the physical property. Yes they are physical objects but they’re not tied to the property.

Right, because they definitely aren't building Antique Cars right now...you know... property development and stuff. But ok. And no...you don't understand the definition of property. Coaster trains are part of the property the same way the land is. Another example because apparently it's not understood - brooms and dust pans are physical property owned by the park. Try and grab one and walk out the entrance and see what happens. They won't let you take it because they own it. It's a physical property owned by the park.

 

[Hyde]

UPDATE! Chatting some with @pkiknex25, a similar Notice of Commencement was filed naming GCI in 2016, in the run-up to Mystic Timbers. (Specifically dated 8/18/2016 if you're looking at the record) Only GCI is named. Interesting to see, especially back to my previous comment on if other contractors like Irvine Ondrey Engineering (ride systems) and others would be named.



So... put as a +1 for "Possible indicator of B&M in 2020".

 

[BansheeBerry]

Right, because they definitely aren't building Antique Cars right now...you know... property development and stuff. But ok. And no...you don't understand the definition of property. Coaster trains are part of the property the same way the land is. Another example because apparently it's not understood - brooms and dust pans are physical property owned by the park. Try and grab one and walk out the entrance and see what happens. They won't let you take it because they own it. It's a physical property owned by the park.

There’s a huge difference between a broom and a building. When you build your house you need it to be approved by the county, but you don’t need your kitchen renovation to be approved. Rollercoaster trains are not physically attached to the land, yes they’re owned by Kings Island Llc, but they’re not required to be reported on every time the park does maintenance.