This thought just crossed my mind, and I'm curious what all of you think. I've always thought of SDC and White Water Branson as almost the same park. Probably because I grew up having season passes to both, and we couldn't make a trip to Branson without visiting both parks, sometimes even on the same day. Here's my question. Do you think WWB's attendance would be higher if it was geographically adjacent to SDC (like SFStL's waterpark, for example)? I think its attendance would be higher; I also think it would gain a lot more exposure. It's on the strip, of course, but if people are just visiting SDC and aren't very familiar with Branson I feel WWB can be forgotten. I think it would get a lot more visits from those families that just come down to visit SDC and take in a couple of shows before going home.
Moderators: I was unsure where to post this, since it's about SDC and WWB. I felt the General SDC area was appropriate. If you feel this is more appropriate in the WW area feel free to move this thread.
If WWB was right next door to SDC, so that we could park once and visit both, I would probably give in if the kids wanted to get wet. But as it is, no, sorry, we're not driving down to the strip and fighting traffic.
I dunno, WWB was put where it was for a purpose. It's not the kind of attraction people want to drive out for when there are so many substitutes. It's location right on the strip next to a bunch of hotels and shopping centers gives it a heads up.
I have to agree with the OP on this. I always thought, even when they first announced it's conception, that it should have been built next to SDC. A one/two punch so to speak. Across 76 in that vacant lot they use for parking now would have been an excellent spot.
It's not the kind of attraction that people arrive at by accident or by a spur of the moment decision, as in just driving down the strip and deciding to stop in, like they do with so many of the other things on the strip. Going to WW is a planned adventure, they must be prepared with swimsuits, lotion, etc. So, they would have been willing drive to wherever it was when deciding to go there.
But.... TPTB decided differently, so there you are. I would guess that Branson city leaders at the time probably lobbied pretty hard for it to be located where it is.
Well, when it was put in wasnt it the only thing there on that side of the strip... from what i understand about the development of 76 there wasn't much there at the time it was put in. now the location makes it cramped and hard to get to but in the beginning it wasn't that way
I wasn't here then, but I'm told that my home park, WWB, was built amidst huge clouds of skepticism and predictions of failure. The large hill in the park's center was literally built by bringing in lots of earth. Most people at the time believed Branson would never be able to sustain a water park.
And then it opened... and very quickly became one of the top ten waterparks in the country.
I suppose the park could be re-located, but there is just so much history in it's current location.
As HFEC grows, "HFEC owns, operates or partners in 20 properties in 9 states..." I think you will see even more large updates/additions to White Water.
I'm guessing the thought was never given much credence that two parks adjacent to one another would be a good idea. Since then, it's become the rule rather than the exception. My guess is that they wanted to diversify and spread into town.
...that or the land was cheap
Even then I don't think the land was really cheap by the standards of the day. I just think they have tried over and over to maintain some kind of presence on the strip or in Branson. Perhaps they can have more say in the direction of progress if they actually own business in town.
WWB was built on the old Branson airport landing strip. The joke at the time was that SDC bought the only flat land in Branson and built a hill on it.