what.... i dont understand what youre saying. how did i offend you by saying that
It's not a question of offense, but rather of integrity...when you are asserting that misleading is the same as misunderstanding without evidence. How is I am supposed to believe in anything else you have claimed?

Pro tip: If you want shed light that we're not getting the whole story here, then do what Northern Light-san does...that is, just explain it. We will listen. No need for throwing in weird accusations that posters where misleading anyone or whatever....

...and this is all I am going say on the matter.
 
when you are asserting that misleading is the same as misunderstanding without evidence. How is I am supposed to believe in anything else you have claimed?
Im not asserting anything i just dont care what you wanna call it, misleading, misunderstanding, I just don't care.
It's just not entirely accurate for the reasons said before
 
Except for Wonderland's online tickets are $50 and it's pretty easy to get them for $40-45 through basically any discount website.
Lilley specifically said "at the door" the tickets are $80. I'm sure there'll also be ways to get discounted or cheaper Therme tickets too once they're established. The point is - Therme's pricing isn't aimed for "elites", unless that's also Wonderland's core target, or the CN Tower's etc.
 
I don’t think the tickets are expensive - I just question their assumed attendance numbers. I believe @Northern Light had a post earlier comparing it to other tourist attractions and they were…optimistic.

You mean this post:


Where I discuss attendance projected at 125% of Canada's Wonderland's each year.

Which, btw, works out to 14,000 paid customers daily, based on 365-day operation. (averaged out)
 
You mean this post
Yes - exactly! Wow - you were much faster at finding it.

It’s mind-boggling to me that anyone at IO and the Premier’s office looked at numbers dwarfing Canada’s Wonderland and thought “This passes the smell test”.

EDIT:
This space will need a public subsidy before long, or, Therme will find a way to abandon it. The first VE will come with the build. Those snazzy Diamond-Schmitt renders are going to dissolve into the reality of institutional concrete and glass. Someone should just graffiti their name onto the result so that people know that they’re the firm responsible. :p
 
You mean this post:


Where I discuss attendance projected at 125% of Canada's Wonderland's each year.

Which, btw, works out to 14,000 paid customers daily, based on 365-day operation. (averaged out)
That seems a lot, but remember that Wonderland only operates more or less for 1/3of the year. Wonderland averages, what, 30,000 daily visits through a 4 month season at 4,000,000 annual attendance?

Yes, Wonderland technically operates outside of the 4 month peak period, but their visitor numbers are a small fraction of the main season in October and May.

14,000 may be optimistic, it may not be.. but I don't see it as completely crazy, particularly if their pricing is significantly below Wonderland's as they claim. I'm sure you will also see seasons passes, etc. which inflate the numbers. If their headline ticket price is $40, their average ticket per person would be far below that with group passes, season tickets, etc.

For comparison, Ripley's Aquarium averaged 2,000,000 annual visitors in its first 5 years of operations, more or less:


I can definitely see Therme being a far larger attraction than the Aquarium.
 
Yes - exactly! Wow - you were much faster at finding it.

It’s mind-boggling to me that anyone at IO and the Premier’s office looked at numbers dwarfing Canada’s Wonderland and thought “This passes the smell test”.

EDIT:
This space will need a public subsidy before long, or, Therme will find a way to abandon it. The first VE will come with the build. Those snazzy Diamond-Schmitt renders are going to dissolve into the reality of institutional concrete and glass. Someone should just graffiti their name onto the result so that people know that they’re the firm responsible. :p

In any case, what I do find most troubling is that the terms of the contract/agreement with Therme is not available publicly for scrutiny. It is public land.

AoD
 
14,000 may be optimistic, it may not be.. but I don't see it as completely crazy, particularly if their pricing is significantly below Wonderland's as they claim. I'm sure you will also see seasons passes, etc. which inflate the numbers.
Does any spa worldwide hit those numbers? I did a quick Google and the Blue Lagoon - which is famous - hits 4000 people a day. Granted, you have to go to Iceland, but it is a poplar tourist destination, and has the benefit of a spectacular natural setting. I question these numbers.
 
That seems a lot, but remember that Wonderland only operates more or less for 1/3of the year. Wonderland averages, what, 30,000 daily visits through a 4 month season at 4,000,000 annual attendance?

Yes, Wonderland technically operates outside of the 4 month peak period, but their visitor numbers are a small fraction of the main season in October and May.

14,000 may be optimistic, it may not be.. but I don't see it as completely crazy, particularly if their pricing is significantly below Wonderland's as they claim. I'm sure you will also see seasons passes, etc. which inflate the numbers. If their headline ticket price is $40, their average ticket per person would be far below that with group passes, season tickets, etc.

Hmmm, let me offer this, I just looked up the most attended Water Parks in the world.

Therme, Erding, Germany comes in at #3 - Daily attendance 4,000, annual attendance 1,850,000 - 2019

Note that this is the largest facility of its kind in the world right now, so it should be a peak attraction of its type.

The projection is that Toronto would would do more than triple the business?

 
Where are we even getting the 5 million attendance number from? When I google it I get a bunch of press releases from Therme stating that the Ontario Place facility will be able to "accommodate up to 3 million visitors a year".


Therme Canada will create over 2,200 construction jobs, 800 full time permanent positions, and can accommodate up to 3 million visitors to Ontario Place every year – supporting the city and province's tourism sectors and post-pandemic recovery. Therme's investment is currently estimated to be CAD $350 million.

Are we sure the 5,000,000 annual number isn't some number for the wider Ontario Place redevelopment?

This article discusses how the wider Ontario Place redevelopment, which includes the Science Centre, parks, concert theatre, etc. is expected to attract 4-6 million annually:


Ontario Place’s website says the existing parking lots closest to it currently charge $10- to $35-a-day flat rates, depending on what’s taking place.

Once its redevelopment is complete, the Ford government estimates Ontario Place will attract four to six million visitors every year.
The original press release announcing the Ontario Place redevelopment also discusses 5 million being the number for the wider park:


  • Redevelopment is expected to create over 3,600 construction jobs and staff positions once the attractions open to the public, with approximately five million visitors expected annually.
 
Where are we even getting the 5 million attendance number from? When I google it I get a bunch of press releases from Therme stating that the Ontario Place facility will be able to "accommodate up to 3 million visitors a year".




Are we sure the 5,000,000 annual number isn't some number for the wider Ontario Place redevelopmen

Fair point.

I believe the number came from the Masterplan submission.

I don't think it showed a breakdown of what visitors were projected to land at which facility. I'm not even sure it delineated paid/unpaid visitors.

But in fairness, I don't have time now to re-read the whole thing.

****

Suffice to say, whatever the breakdown, which is unclear because the business plans are largely secret, I do question the long-term viability.

There is no competitor to Therme's signature park comparable to Canada's Wonderland. (in the vicinity of Munich, where it can be found).
 
When Ripley's Aquarium was in the process of being built there was a lot of complaints on subsidies that they were getting from all levels of government, if i recall correctly no property taxes for 12 years. A lot of voices saying that it would flop but in the first 5 years it attracted 10 million visitors, i went by yesterday for the first time and it was packed and i paid almost $50.00 per adult with taxes. If things are well built the people will come.
 
When Ripley's Aquarium was in the process of being built there was a lot of complaints on subsidies that they were getting from all levels of government, if i recall correctly no property taxes for 12 years.

The incentive package was as follows:

The project was a partnership with three levels of government. The federal government's Canada Lands Company contributed CA$10 million to the project to develop the "John Street Corridor" linking Front Street with the aquarium, the CN Tower and the Rogers Centre. The Government of Ontario contributed CA$11 million to the project, and the City of Toronto government provided property-tax incentives amounting to between CA$8 million and CA$12 million over the first twelve years of the aquarium.[5]

Per wikipedia.

Note that the Federal contribution was actually 10M to the City for the John Street project (that we're still waiting on......)

So the City was more or less made whole by the Feds.

Though Ripleys benefit was up to 23M from the above.

That's against an estimated build cost of 130M

A lot of voices saying that it would flop but in the first 5 years it attracted 10 million visitors, i went by yesterday for the first time and it was packed and i paid almost $50.00 per adult with taxes. If things are well built the people will come.

I'll freely admit to being surprised by its endurance.
 
IF Therme is closer to a waterpark than what I think of as a "spa" then I could see it pulling serious numbers of people. Families love waterparks, and if its a bit more 'classy' than the typical Niagara Falls fare, then you can capture a fairly broad catchment. If this is closer to a series of semi-private 'spa pools' then I doubt it; you'd need to cram alot of people in... there'd be an expectation of calmness and stasis that just isn't obviously conducive to 14,000 people a day. I do fail to see it being a cultural institution like it's touted to be in either case. I honestly haven't taken a good look at the internal diagrams, so I'll check those again, but that's my two cents. It's not unfathomable that this thing recoups its costs, but there are quite a few areas where money is being needlessly spent.
 

Back
Top