Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (VinnyA)      Join Date: Aug 2011       12-18-2015, 10:16 AM Reply   
Let's please get a few of these at different cable parks around the country.

Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-18-2015, 12:52 PM Reply   
Why at a cable park? Why not a separate park?
Old     (MCObray)      Join Date: Mar 2013       12-21-2015, 9:50 AM Reply   
Pretty gnarly. I'd love to ride that!
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       12-21-2015, 10:47 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
Why at a cable park? Why not a separate park?
Why not? Are you afraid the popularity of surfing would somehow squeeze out boarding there like it has on the lakes? If there's room, who cares?
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       12-22-2015, 8:10 AM Reply   
Actually I wouldn't worry or care about that at all. I was just hoping to hear opinions and pros and cons of integrating this into a cable park vs. separate parks. I might worry that an already crowed park becomes more crowded. Any maybe it possible that wakesurfers would migrate to park surfing.

I don't think you'll ever see a park in California with both. It would require an enormous amount of real estate.
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       12-22-2015, 8:23 AM Reply   
I'm sure wakeboarding purists would love any migration and I agree about the enormous amount of real estate needed.
Old     (Ttime41)      Join Date: Nov 2011       12-22-2015, 9:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
Actually I wouldn't worry or care about that at all. I was just hoping to hear opinions and pros and cons of integrating this into a cable park vs. separate parks. I might worry that an already crowed park becomes more crowded. Any maybe it possible that wakesurfers would migrate to park surfing.

I don't think you'll ever see a park in California with both. It would require an enormous amount of real estate.
There's no way that the majority of wakesurfers would migrate to riding this thing. Let's remember, most people that wakesurf do it because it's easy and you can't get hurt. I bet taking a digger on this thing could feel pretty similar to a wakeboard crash (which is what wakesurfers are afraid of).
Old     (poon)      Join Date: Dec 2001       12-22-2015, 10:52 AM Reply   
Kelly Slater created this wave to be a high performance wave, not like the wave garden or snowdonia, which are more mushy and beginner friendly. If you have only wakesurfed and not actually surfed in the ocean (a lot) then you might get worked. Regardless, I would love to see this at a cable park but as C.I.E. J-Rod (jarrod) said it would get crowded and there would have to be time slots set up for when the wave pool is active and when the cable is running. Obviously both can't be done at the same time, but making the cable part smaller to make room for the wave park would be an asset for sure : ) I know for a fact that there are a lot of Pro Wakeboarders that would be stoked to see this at a cable park because they are surfers as well. This is an exciting time for surfers.
Old     (biggator)      Join Date: Jul 2010       12-22-2015, 11:18 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ttime41 View Post
There's no way that the majority of wakesurfers would migrate to riding this thing. Let's remember, most people that wakesurf do it because it's easy and you can't get hurt. I bet taking a digger on this thing could feel pretty similar to a wakeboard crash (which is what wakesurfers are afraid of).
Nosing in on a surfboard is NOTHING like taking a digger on a wakeboard... it doesn't hurt at all (until you hit the bottom.. that's the part that hurts). It might if you're on one of those massive tahitian waves.

For reference - a typical wakeboarder rides... say 21-24mph? Someone did the math and said that in a perfect scenario, the fastest you could get on a pretty big wave is about 27 - and it goes down from there.

Reference: http://www.surfline.com/community/wh...ws.cfm?id=1163

Quote:
In short, as I said before, there are too many variables undefined to give a definite answer to a specific ride, but you could comfortably say that skewing everything toward maximum velocity on a 9-foot wave, a surfer is never going to break the 40 feet per-second mark, which is approximately 27 miles per hour."
..and big-wave surfers who actually had speed checked were significantly slower. The fastest of which was about 24.

http://www.surfertoday.com/surfing/5...ance-in-a-wave
Old     (dougr)      Join Date: Dec 2009       12-23-2015, 1:43 PM Reply   
its a sh@t starter thread lol
Old     (Nordicron)      Join Date: Aug 2011       12-23-2015, 4:11 PM Reply   
Wow this is pretty cool! I can only imagine how much this would cost to build and what the cost per wave would be to ride it! It's for sure 10x better and likely 10x more fun to ride than going behind any boat!
Old     (02byerly132)      Join Date: Jan 2003       12-25-2015, 12:22 PM Reply   
As for price, I heard the Wave Garden goes for about $10 million. (And comes with a guarantee that you will be the only Wave Garden in a particular region.) So, I'm sure this would be similar or more expensive.... There's a reason why there aren't too many (if any) built yet.
Old     (Nordicron)      Join Date: Aug 2011       12-25-2015, 2:30 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02byerly132 View Post
As for price, I heard the Wave Garden goes for about $10 million. (And comes with a guarantee that you will be the only Wave Garden in a particular region.) So, I'm sure this would be similar or more expensive.... There's a reason why there aren't too many (if any) built yet.

Wow!!!! To pay for all that plus running expenses u'd need atleast 50 people a day paying $50 a day everyday of the year just to break even!!!

Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.
Old     (dbdb)      Join Date: Oct 2005       12-31-2015, 5:03 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordicron View Post
Wow!!!! To pay for all that plus running expenses u'd need atleast 50 people a day paying $50 a day everyday of the year just to break even!!!

Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.

50 people a day, every day of the year, would be no problem at all in a bigger city. I live in the Chicagoland area and I'd bet that if they built it here, you wouldn't be able to get on the damn thing. I wonder what the max capacity of it would be? Maybe something like hour long sessions. Maybe 5 guys per side of each wave, so 10 guys per hour. You could easily book that thing for 10-12 hours per day here, maybe even longer. I think you could charge $40-$50 per hour. 100 guys per day at $40 per hour - $4,000 per day, 365 days = $1.46M in sales. If it cost 10M to build + the cost of the land in a big city + expenses of running it per year (can you imagine what the insurance would cost?) I think it'd take a while to see any profit from it. You might be able to charge more, here atleast. I mean...my wife just paid $14 per hour, per kid for them to jump on trampolines at sky zone. Two kids for two hours cost $56 for them just to jump on trampolines......
Old     (Nordicron)      Join Date: Aug 2011       12-31-2015, 10:39 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbdb View Post
50 people a day, every day of the year, would be no problem at all in a bigger city. I live in the Chicagoland area and I'd bet that if they built it here, you wouldn't be able to get on the damn thing. I wonder what the max capacity of it would be? Maybe something like hour long sessions. Maybe 5 guys per side of each wave, so 10 guys per hour. You could easily book that thing for 10-12 hours per day here, maybe even longer. I think you could charge $40-$50 per hour. 100 guys per day at $40 per hour - $4,000 per day, 365 days = $1.46M in sales. If it cost 10M to build + the cost of the land in a big city + expenses of running it per year (can you imagine what the insurance would cost?) I think it'd take a while to see any profit from it. You might be able to charge more, here atleast. I mean...my wife just paid $14 per hour, per kid for them to jump on trampolines at sky zone. Two kids for two hours cost $56 for them just to jump on trampolines......

Yeah but especially in Chicago land your not gonna get 365 days of use, weather sucks a lot of those days. Just don't ever see this making money.
Old     (scottb7)      Join Date: Oct 2012       01-01-2016, 7:19 PM Reply   
Like my dad used to say, "It is a bargain, at half the price".

http://www.wavegarden.com/lang/en-us...ics/investment

According to this it is 7 million euros or $7.6 million dollars, including the planning for the lagoon, etc....

From beginning of this thread to now went from $10 million to $7.6 million, so basically it is depreciating as fast as most nautiques.
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       01-05-2016, 8:32 AM Reply   
Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.[/QUOTE]

So is mowing the lawn.

If we ever seen one of these available to the public in California, I would expect more like 100$ per day.
Old     (tripsw)      Join Date: May 2006       01-07-2016, 9:27 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.
So is mowing the lawn.

[/QUOTE]

That just made my day. Thanks
Old     (bbr)      Join Date: Apr 2002       01-08-2016, 8:31 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.
So is mowing the lawn. [/QUOTE]


Bahahaha! That's funny as hell Jarrod! Pretty true though. The only time I've ever wake surfed was when I was rehabbing from knee surgeries.
Old     (nuckledragger)      Join Date: Jun 2004       01-08-2016, 8:01 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarrod View Post
Still looks 10x more fun than running behind a boat wave.
If we ever seen one of these available to the public in California, I would expect more like 100$ per day.[/

J. - this one is in Lemoore, CA. Wonder if he will open it to the public or keep it for R&D.
Old     (seth)      Join Date: Sep 2002       01-13-2016, 11:57 AM Reply   
It looks like they converted a water ski lake from aerial photos. I wonder what the cost would be if you already had an established ski lake.
Old     (bass10after)      Join Date: Feb 2010       01-13-2016, 8:42 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by seth View Post
It looks like they converted a water ski lake from aerial photos. I wonder what the cost would be if you already had an established ski lake.
actually its right next to the water ski lake.. look to the right and you can see the lifts, excavation, and the sled run thats under construction.
Old     (seth)      Join Date: Sep 2002       01-14-2016, 8:34 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by bass10after View Post
actually its right next to the water ski lake.. look to the right and you can see the lifts, excavation, and the sled run thats under construction.
Yeah that also used to be a waterski lake as well.
Old     (dbdb)      Join Date: Oct 2005       01-14-2016, 10:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordicron View Post
Yeah but especially in Chicago land your not gonna get 365 days of use, weather sucks a lot of those days. Just don't ever see this making money.

Agree, it'd have to be indoors which would really drive the cost. And again, I think it'd be a long time (if ever) before there was any profit. But, imagine a surf contest going off on a Friday night prime time with a predictable start time / end time, and good predictable waves. TV would get interested in covering this. Its would almost be a new sport and could be much more accessible, which then makes it much more marketable. Very long term it could work, but you'd need some big bucks behind it to get it going.
Old     (bill)      Join Date: Feb 2001       01-27-2016, 7:01 AM Reply   
this is cool but cost 3X more than a cable park so I doubt we will see many if any at all at that price point..no way to integrate that into an existing parks lake but no reason if theres real estate and available water you couldn't put it in the same park area..

BSR in Waco has many extra lakes beside the main lake, they have the barefoot and the completion wake lake already there on the property plus the river etc.. I could see Parsons doing something like this over at BSR..
Old     (Orange)      Join Date: Jun 2012       01-28-2016, 4:24 PM Reply   
Another reason I don't think you'll see many of these surf parks is that outside of current beach towns, there are so few people who know how to surf. I'm sure surfing on these manufactured waves is considerably easier than the real deal - you don't have to pound your way through the beach break just to get out there, the peak is in a predictable spot on every wave, etc. - but surfing is not wake surfing. It actually takes talent. I think a surf park would have a hard time finding repeat customers.
Old     (tarek)      Join Date: Jun 2011       02-01-2016, 8:08 AM Reply   
our city put this in and its been huge for boise.


Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:49 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us