I mean, they don't call Lightwater Valley the Saudi Arabia of Yorkshire for nothing.The downtime and disappointing the guests is one thing, but the sheer effort required to keep Falcon's Flight operational will be a huge tax on the park in any case. It's a very maintenance-heavy coaster, requiring constant attention to all the things that can go wrong. Its upkeep will be very, very expensive even in the best-case scenario, and potentially much more so if things don't work out as planned. It's going to be a hog on the budget in any case.
With that in mind, I can't help but see a comparison to Lightwater Valley, of all places. They too built a ride that was a bit too big for the park, and the costs associated with its operation was probably a major contributor to the park's relatively modest investments even as the other parks in the UK sized up around the turn of the millennium. The Ultimate was a bigger bite than they could chew in the long run. Granted, though, they got 25 years or so out of The Ultimate, but when those 25 years were up and the coaster had to go, the park hadn't grown very much in the meantime.
The potential trouble for Six Flags Qiddiya is that they are committing to a lot of upkeep costs from the get go, in an area without much established tourism or local traditions for going to amusement parks. Even the other coasters they are building will require a hefty footfall for the investment and upkeep to break even, but Falcon's Flight adds another huge pile of risk on top of all that. The park really needs to be a massive success from, perhaps not day one, but certainly some of the first days, if they want to afford keeping their rides open. And that assumes they work perfectly. If not, well ... I think Falcon's Flight will be a very rare cred indeed.
Apt comparison!