Came across this article:

Oklahoma City Caters to National Groups with Great Accessibility & Dragon Boat Races - Prevue (http://www.prevueonline.net/blog/themes/eco-adventure/oklahoma-city-caters-to-national-groups-with-great-accessibility-dragon-boat-races)

Robin O'Connor of the CVB plugs hard for OKC, making the case for groups to make a visit to our fair city.

I couldn't find a thread dedicated solely to this topic (though it gets mentioned frequently as an aside in other threads). So perhaps it deserves its own.

So how well is OKC doing in luring visitors here? What are the major attractions & points of interest? (O'Connor hits on most of them -- did she leave anything out?)
What more could be done to get outsiders to visit (and spend money) in OKC?

KD Restaurant is high-end? o_O

KD Restaurant is high-end? o_O

That was a bizarre statement, no doubt. It's not high-end, low-end, or any-end right now as the damn thing hasn't even been built yet. I guess she felt the need to throw out the name of probably the most famous person associated with OKC at the moment. She was in marketing overdrive, heh.

Yes, and I also wonder what she mean't by this
How far from the airport?

The Will Rogers World Airport is 8-miles away from the Cox Convention Center. Everything is all in one place. It’s walking distance from the airport and the Colcord Hotel and most other attractions are 15-minutes driving distance.. . .
Maybe I read this wrong, but it sounded like she said the airport is within walking distance from the convention center??? lol.

Yes, and I also wonder what she mean't by this . . .
Maybe I read this wrong, but it sounded like she said everything the airport is within walking distance from the convention center??? lol.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Did a headscratch on that one. My first thought was that was some kind of editing problem or typo. But maybe O'Conner really said that. Dunno.

Despite the above mentioned weirdness, it was a pretty good read. O'Conner made a few good points.



Oklahoma City is a highly accessible, affordable destination with new restaurants, hotels and a surprising array of special event venues.
There are 22 direct inbound flights from 19 cities, which is perfect for national groups seeking a central location.


I didn't know that number: 19 cities with direct flights to OKC. That's interesting.

She also said that the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) was quite busy with lots of interest in OKC from various groups, so that's good to hear.

Yes, I thought it was a very nice article overall. I especially like the picture of the Devon Boathouse.

A friend of mine is a managing partner in one of the Meridian Avenue hotels.

Their business has been steadily increasing over the past 7 years, save for a blip during the economic madness in 2008-09. A lot of people visit OKC from Amarillo and Wichita and make weekend trips out of it. Wichita is really considered a growth market for them; supposedly they has a ton of rabid Thunder fans.

I can definitely see OKC establishing itself as a regional destination, if it has not already.

You have to wonder if there wasn't an editing problem with that article. There was also this statement.


Devon Energy’s boathouse is a training facility for the Olympians. The venue has a weight room and a tank-chamber for rowing. The finish line tower is a state-of-the-art building located at the finish line of the race course. There’s 50-floors and event space that overlooks the river and downtown skyline. They are currently adding more boathouses as we speak. There a new zipline adventure being added as well.



I never noticed that the Finsh Line Tower had 50 floors. LOL

Sounds like she sent this piece to the Oklahoman to have it edited before print run.

I can see OKC as being a regional destination for people from Amarillo and possibly Wichita. People from Arkansas go to Tulsa more often. OKC lacks certain things that make a tourist destination though, such as natural beauty. Dallas and Tulsa are also so close I have a difficult time seeing this city ever becoming more than a regional destination.

I can see OKC as being a regional destination for people from Amarillo and possibly Wichita. People from Arkansas go to Tulsa more often. OKC lacks certain things that make a tourist destination though, such as natural beauty. Dallas and Tulsa are also so close I have a difficult time seeing this city ever becoming more than a regional destination.

Too many other other places, far older and ahead of us with so much to do and natural beauty. I can't imagine being on too many lists as a vacation hotspot. That's just not Oklahoma City, perceived or otherwise. We should accept this, but maybe someday?

Too many other other places, far older and ahead of us with so much to do and natural beauty. I can't imagine being on too many lists as a vacation hotspot. That's just not Oklahoma City, perceived or otherwise. We should accept this, but maybe someday?

I am more likely to agree with this.

Too many other other places, far older and ahead of us with so much to do and natural beauty. I can't imagine being on too many lists as a vacation hotspot. That's just not Oklahoma City, perceived or otherwise. We should accept this, but maybe someday?

Agreed. There is very little OKC can do to change this fact. Even with a better national perception, OKC could be viewed as a great place to live and do business but not a place to vacation unless you live in one of the smaller cities in the region. OKC has plenty to do in this department as it is. OKC's zoo is better than zoos in many cities its size. Then there are the museums, White Water, Bricktown, casinos, etc. I wish OKC had a real amusement park and an aquarium though.

OKC's best chance at attracting tourists is to get more national conventions held here. People aren't going to vacation here unless its for something such as a convention.

Disney cost more to maintain and operate than it did to build, and the maintenance and operation will go on forever. I was watching a show the other day and they said "urban tourism" is 70% of all tourism. When you think of all the natural attractions in the world and urban areas make up 70% of the industry that is pretty impressive. I was trying to explain the attraction of Epcot the other day and really it comes down to Americans will pay $90 a person to see replicas (and I don't just mean the buildings) of what most of the world lives in every day.

I think it takes a serious financial and cultural commitment to build and preserve amazing places.

I still think it cost more and requires more commitment to build and preserve non-amazing places. Just look at how some people on OKCTalk cling to suburbia. Mention walkability and you would think someone broke into their house and kicked their dog. If the public subsidy dried up suburbia would disappear quickly (and we sure wouldn't be building more of it).

Alas, maybe I missing your point so let me see if I can follow you. We could spend $180 million on AICC and get a flashy museum which attracts a diminishing number of tourist every year or we could spend that $180 million creating walkable neighborhoods with nice sidewalks, retail space, public square, sidewalk furniture, etc... which would endure for generations.

If the public subsidy dried up suburbia would disappear quickly.



The burbs are subsidizing downtown. Not the other way around.

The burbs are subsidizing downtown. Not the other way around.

i am not as anti suburbia as some in this threat ..... but this is not an accurate statement

Downtown was dead before maps. No one lived there. Most of Oklahoma City didn't work there and there was no retail. (A good bit of that is still true.) The property values and city taxes generated by property taxes in the suburbs far exceed any taxes generated downtown.

Downtown was mostly saved by Maps, which was a sales tax issue. Sales tax voted on by people who live in the burbs, since there were little to no people living downtown, raised from sales that happened in the suburbs on money spent at businesses in the burbs by people who live in the suburbs, with incomes made at jobs that were mostly not downtown.

Please stop telling the fiction about how downtown subsidizes the burbs. It isn't true and never has been true.

Please stop telling the fiction about how downtown subsidizes the burbs. It isn't true and never has been true.

It sure as hell has been true and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that it's still true.

It sure as hell has been true and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that it's still true.I'm not trying to argue here and I really don't care either way. :) I am a "burb" guy and always will be because I think the suburbs provide a better life of quality, but that is my opinion. But, in response to you response. . . But, how? Just curious :)

Here's a reality check.

Greater Oklahoma City Economic Development - Major Employers (http://www.greateroklahomacity.com/index.php?src=directory&view=employers)

Besides the fact the vast majority don't work downtown, 99%+ of the people working at those businesses don't live downtown or generate sales taxes downtown. And that's today, after we've spent millions subsidizing downtown.

We can debate all day long if taxes generated in downtown OKC are being used to fund expansion in other parts of the city but the simple fact is this; without the Federal Housing Authority creating FHA backed loans for returning WWII vets, the mortgage deduction on income taxes, the Federal Reserve buying $85 billion worth of mortgage backed securities every month, tax benefits to the auto industry for the last 80 years, tax credits to oil companies, and the Federal Highway Administration building freeways suburbia simply would not exist - period - end of story. Just where do you think the $16 trillion in debt we have went? A lot of it went to fund the transition from high density city living to low density suburban sprawl. And yes I include the cost of defense as a by-product of urban sprawl because the reality is we have to keep oil cheap enough to burn in cars or our economy stops. You simply can't call for reduced military spending AND keep living in low density suburbia.

And lets not forget Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who under-write almost every home loan in America and both bailed out by the taxpayers.

Hell, I could do this all day. You like watering your suburban yard - thank the US Army Corp of Engineers and the federal taxpayers for the water.

without the Federal Housing Authority creating FHA backed loans for returning WWII vets, the mortgage deduction on income taxes, the Federal Reserve buying $85 billion worth of mortgage backed securities every month, tax benefits to the auto industry for the last 80 years, tax credits to oil companies, and the Federal Highway Administration building freeways suburbia simply would not exist - period - end of story.

There would be no downtown OKC either, since there would have been no economy to support it. Good luck with rolling back time. Either way, it doesn't matter, the horse is out of the gate and the fact remains, the burbs in OKC subsidize downtown and that's not going to change anytime in the foreseeable future.

There would be no downtown OKC either, since there would have been no economy to support it. Good luck with rolling back time. Either way, it doesn't matter, the horse is out of the gate and the fact remains, the burbs in OKC subsidize downtown and that's not going to change anytime in the foreseeable future.

Cities existed prior to 1951. They had tall buildings and everything. Even downtown OKC existed. What we didn't have were suburbs. Now by claiming that the suburbs are subsidizing downtown do you mean MAPS?

What was the OKC economy based on then? Not what you would have liked it to have been based on. What was it actually based on?

What was the OKC economy based on then? Not what you would have liked it to have been based on. What was it actually based on?

Do you mean prior to 1951? I would say mostly oil, but food production was pretty big.

And lets not forget Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who under-write almost every home loan in America and both bailed out by the taxpayers.

Hell, I could do this all day. You like watering your suburban yard - thank the US Army Corp of Engineers and the federal taxpayers for the water.

That would include underwriting home loans in the urban core as well. How many people do you think move downtown are going to pay cash? As far as my water goes, I already mentioned I live NW and do not water my lawn. (The house was on a well since the '50s when it was built until recently too.) Devon waters theirs though. But in case you were not aware, the North Canadian runs right through the urban core and the damming for my current water supply was authorized in 1938 for flood control and the urban core was one of the primary areas it protected then as it does now. Drinking water was and is byproduct that come much later. Here's some history about that.

1920 October 21-30: Extensive flooding along North Canadian River – levees breached in Oklahoma City, flooding low-lying industrial and residential sections. Hundreds of families were left homeless due to, at that time, the worst flood in Oklahoma City history.

1923 October 13-16: Severe flooding along the North Canadian resulted in a breach of Lake Overholser Dam and forced the evacuation of 15,000 residents in Oklahoma City. This flood led to a radical redistribution of housing patterns in the city as higher income families moved northward, away from the river. The flood began in Woodward where the river crested over its banks and flooded the business district there. Much of western Oklahoma reported “semi-famine” conditions after being cut off from outside contact. The surge of water rushing toward Oklahoma City rose to 25 feet tall. This flood led to a radical redistribution of housing patterns in the city as higher income families moved northward, away from the river.

1932 June 3: A flood on the North Canadian inundated Oklahoma City, leaving eight dead and 3600 homeless. Property damage totaled $1.5 million (1932 dollars), including the destruction of 656 homes. The War Department was asked to furnish 650 tents to set up a tent city at the Fair Grounds to house those left homeless by the flood. Nearly seven inches of rain fell on the North Canadian watershed west of Oklahoma City between 11 p.m. and noon on June 2-3.

I'm a federal tax payer too, just like about everyone else in the burbs, including the ones who live far away from the river but subsidize flood control for downtown with their federal tax dollars.

Prior to 1951 most people payed cash for their homes that owned them. I think the longest home loan available was only 5 years and most were 3 years and only covered between 20% and 50% of the homes value, meaning a 50% to 80% down payment. However, in most ciites the vast majority of people rented. Homeowneship was reserved for the wealthy - hence the federal government creating the Federal Housing Authority after WWII. Not sure what the purpose was of your flooding examples as it appears most people who could afford to moved out of the flood plain.

Cities existed prior to 1951. They had tall buildings and everything. Even downtown OKC existed. What we didn't have were suburbs. Now by claiming that the suburbs are subsidizing downtown do you mean MAPS?

I'm not sure that is exactly correct . . . the part about "didn't have suburbs".
Nichols Hills and Crown Heights were both suburbs at one point in time.
(and the list could go on and on and on and on)

Oklahoma City used to be popular as a "tourist destination" mostly on account of the oil well on the grounds of the state capitol building. and because there were relatives here who never left, longing to return. it was that "friendly folks" thing. difficult to experience in most "urban conclaves". (plus there was Springlake Amusement Park, The Lincoln Park Zoo, and Frontier City.)

Now OKC is just another--constantly improving--beehive of diverse activity that is pretty much like any UrbanCore from Dallas to The Twin Cities.

I'm not sure that is exactly correct . . . the part about "didn't have suburbs".
Nichols Hills and Crown Heights were both suburbs at one point in time.
(and the list could go on and on and on and on)

Maybe so but they weren't auto-suburbs. Yes people commuted downtown via a streetcar, but they still had to live within walking distance of the streetcar (except maybe N.H. who had chauffeurs).

Anyhow -appologies to everyone for getting so far off topic.

No apology necessary! Why OKC, itself, has improved so much since I moved to this area, decades ago, that we occasionally do a "local tourist" driving thing (maybe 15 minutes, through Historical Neighborhoods) just to admire the accomplishments.

No apology necessary! Why OKC, itself, has improved so much since I moved to this area, decades ago, that we occasionally do a "local tourist" driving thing (maybe 15 minutes, through Historical Neighborhoods) just to admire the accomplishments.

I do this all the time in the spring and fall. As an architecture buff, its amazing how many unique neighborhoods are tucked away in this city.

Anyway, to steer this back on topic. I think the OP sailed over some people's heads. Nobody thinks OKC is going to be the Orlando on the plains, but we are in a unique position as the largest city for some way around and have a good baseline of attractions. No doubt downtown, the bombing memorial, thunder games, bricktown, and the horse shows at the state fair draw in a fair amount of people. We also have a lot of people here for business and conferences, being the state capitol and the major business/retail center for Central and Western OK, and a big chunk of KS and TX panhandle to a lesser extent.

But there is still a lot of room to grow. For example, with Bells in Tulsa not coming back, Big Splash being viewed as a death trap, and no theme parks of size between Branson and Arlington, why doesn't Frontier City and White Water Bay increase their marketing in other parts of the region? WWB is getting the idea and expanding, Frontier City seems a bit slower to do the same, but both really don't advertise outside this area which is really puzzling. There's other attractions that are the same way.

Speaking of advertising, when OU or OSU are playing nationally televised games, the Okla. Dept of Tourism always airs those "OklaCool" commercials. Why doesn't OKCCVB do the same during Thunder games? I always see billboards for Tulsa on the Turner Turnpike, never for OKC on 35 though. I think they do a good job, but I think OKCCVB could step up their outside marketing a bit.

No apology necessary! Why OKC, itself, has improved so much since I moved to this area, decades ago, that we occasionally do a "local tourist" driving thing (maybe 15 minutes, through Historical Neighborhoods) just to admire the accomplishments.

I have started doing the same think here in Jax as well. In fact, I have even taken it to the next level by putting my bike on the back of the pickup so I can take in the sites at a slower and more up-close pace when the opportunity arises

I'm not sure that is exactly correct . . . the part about "didn't have suburbs".
Nichols Hills and Crown Heights were both suburbs at one point in time.
(and the list could go on and on and on and on)

Oklahoma City used to be popular as a "tourist destination" mostly on account of the oil well on the grounds of the state capitol building. and because there were relatives here who never left, longing to return. it was that "friendly folks" thing. difficult to experience in most "urban conclaves". (plus there was Springlake Amusement Park, The Lincoln Park Zoo, and Frontier City.)

Now OKC is just another--constantly improving--beehive of diverse activity that is pretty much like any UrbanCore from Dallas to The Twin Cities.

You left out Wedgewood amusement park.

Anyway, here's the burbs of NW 32nd and Shartel in 1947. (Mom, aunt and granny. Granny moved there in the 'twenties when it really was the edge of town.) Disregard the well worn steel contraption in the background. No one used those in Oklahoma City. They walked to work and everywhere else, uphill, both ways, in the snow.

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/1633/girls47.jpg

Using a car for whatever reason would have been a regular affair for a lot of people. Here's my granny again about 30 years prior to the above photo. (Not is OKC this time.)

Do you think between those two dates all she did was walk and take mass trans? Nope.

Yes, without a doubt, it changed the world. You're never going to get to roll back the last hundred years of development, pretend it never happened and do again differently. Better learn to work with what we've got, and that includes the massive investment in everything that makes up the burbs.

http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/1446/cleaningtheford.jpg

The Oklahoma Tourism and Recreation Department has created a new TV campaign. I happend to notice it when I came across this link:

https://www.facebook.com/oklahomatoday/posts/10151493088694864

Various people singing 'Oklahoma!' while going about their (multitudinous and wide-ranging) activities. A bit corny perhaps, but very slickly done.
Of course, this is Oklahoma tourism in general, not just OKC.

Here's a direct link to the lastest commercial:
http://edgecast.travelok.com/videos/1366913767-otrdoklahoma201360a.flv

http://www.travelok.com/scripts/galleryplayerthumb.php?f=/videos/capture/1366913767-otrdoklahoma201360a.jpg


The full set of videos can be found here:
Oklahoma Video Gallery | TravelOK.com - Oklahoma's Official Travel & Tourism Site (http://www.travelok.com/video)

Love it!

Awesome! That song will get stuck in your head for sure! Good advertising!

I don't see OKC ever becoming a major tourist destination. However, it can be a great regional destination for a day/weekend trip and also a stopping point for people travelling across the country. What I really wish is this city would get a real theme park. Being at the crossroads of I-40/I-35/I-44 it could almost certainly support it. I think it would be a huge hit with locals as well as tourists. Anybody know what it would take for something like that to ever become a reality?

I don't see OKC ever becoming a major tourist destination. However, it can be a great regional destination for a day/weekend trip and also a stopping point for people travelling across the country. What I really wish is this city would get a real theme park. Being at the crossroads of I-40/I-35/I-44 it could almost certainly support it. I think it would be a huge hit with locals as well as tourists. Anybody know what it would take for something like that to ever become a reality?If I ever get the opportunity, I'm doing it! ;)

I don't see OKC ever becoming a major tourist destination. However, it can be a great regional destination for a day/weekend trip and also a stopping point for people travelling across the country. What I really wish is this city would get a real theme park. Being at the crossroads of I-40/I-35/I-44 it could almost certainly support it. I think it would be a huge hit with locals as well as tourists. Anybody know what it would take for something like that to ever become a reality?

I agree. I so want this to happen!

Does Frontier City own all that land to the West of the park? That would be prime real estate for a huge expansion.

Does Frontier City own all that land to the West of the park? That would be prime real estate for a huge expansion.

Even though the cost would be huge, I think bulldozing the fleabag motels and moving White Water Bay to the land north of Frontier City would create a nice amusement area. Too bad it isn't closer to the Zoo - if Frontier City and White Water Bay could relocate to the Adventure District the area would really take off.

They are nice little parks for what they are, amusements for people in the metro area. They're require significant investment to turn them into anything more than that. It would probably be easier to build something brand new if you were looking to go bigger.

Edit: Actually I'll rethink that. To turn Frontier City into something like Six Flags, you might want to go to a new location. I understand they own a bunch of land around there, but I remember it being a pretty small park all things considered. But they could probably grow a lot larger than what they currently have. They could be a decent regional tourist destination, bringing in people from Tulsa or small towns. I remember when I was a kid we went down to Six Flags in Texas. You could bring in people from around the state to go to Frontier City or White Water. Have to really increase advertising though and make the parks bigger.

Amusement parks right now are only beginning to come out of the doldrums they experienced over the last five, perhaps ten years - due in part to the recession, but also due to a general ambivalence toward theme parks in general - a down period that led to some being mothballed or sold off and redeveloped. Disney is now starting to see substantial attendance gains as the economy starts to perk up, and in fact has stated they're confident enough in the numbers to start "weaning" people off their traditional heavy annual discounts.

I think hoyasooner hit it on the head - that Frontier City is purely a local park. A theme park that people would make a day-trip to would have to be something new and fresh, and on a par with Six Flags even for local dollars. Considering that you've got Silver Dollar City to the NE and SFOT to the south, you'd have to get a pretty crafty designer/concept person in here to conceive a marketable theme that could compete. That said, I don't think its impossible - was at Silver Dollar City in Branson about three years ago, and while its a nice park, its unremarkable as they've homogenized out many/most of the things that made it regionally appealing in the first place. A unique, properly themed park could do really well, especially given the natural I-40/I-35/I-44 corridor that converges here.

There were all kinds of urban legends from when I was a kid that Disney wanted to build a "Mid America" concept park in the midwest, and that they were at one time looking at property in S. Oklahoma, but the idea fizzled. Done right, I think there definitely is potential there.

The question is, do you make it regionally-themed, or go for something bigger that has zero connection with Oklahoma? A Western-style park has been done, with Silver Dollar City and Six Flags so close. A big water park doesn't really need a theme, but unless you really go big I'm not sure if you'll attract people from Tulsa or Lawton to come up just for that. There are other water parks around that provide a similar experience without requiring the trip.

If you really wanted a big park, and not just moderate exansion of FC and WW, you need some sort of intellectual property that isn't currently represented by places like Six Flags (with the Warner Brothers cartoons), Disney, Universal Studios, etc. Maybe you could do a Hunger Games-themed park or something. Lord of the Rings maybe. Something that has nothing to do with Oklahoma, but is popular enough that you'll attract large crowds from all over.

Or maybe you just put a bunch of giant ass rollercoasters there.

definitely think the parks should combine and possibly move into the Adventure District. They could sell the existing land for development and create a fairly nice theme park by just combining and especially if they also moved into the AD. Then over time, add in a few more coasters and theme rides and spruce up the kid/midway and additional water attractions and YES, I do think 'the new Frontier City' could compete. Move the combined parks to downtown airpark and it would probably take off even better/faster.

Move the combined parks to downtown airpark and it would probably take off even better/faster.

Hadn't thought of that - not a bad idea but I still like somewhere in Adventure District bast.

Does any other American city have their theme park downtown? Most of the time parks are far out in the suburbs like Frontier City or Worlds of Fun.

Does any other American city have their theme park downtown? Most of the time parks are far out in the suburbs like Frontier City or Worlds of Fun.

Elitch Gardens in Denver.

Directions to Elitch Gardens Theme and Water Park Denver | Elitch Gardens Theme Park & Water Park (http://elitchgardens.com/plan-a-visit/directions/)

and to add to that, Elitch Gardens used to be in the suburbs (in Arvada I think) but moved to a vast empty section just west of Downtown Denver back in the mid-1990's and the rest is history. Just imagine if the same took place in OKC with Frontier City Theme & White Water Park? In fact, having it near or close to Stockyard's City might even help that district out a little bit (being that both are western themed while one is amusement and the other is reality). The other thing I like about combined and near downtown is all of the publicity OKC would get from I-40 as a happening/fun place to stop. It would really be like "wow, something is really going on in OKC".

and to add to that, Elitch Gardens used to be in the suburbs (in Arvada I think) but moved to a vast empty section just west of Downtown Denver back in the mid-1990's and the rest is history. Just imagine if the same took place in OKC with Frontier City Theme & White Water Park? In fact, having it near or close to Stockyard's City might even help that district out a little bit (being that both are western themed while one is amusement and the other is reality). The other thing I like about combined and near downtown is all of the publicity OKC would get from I-40 as a happening/fun place to stop. It would really be like "wow, something is really going on in OKC".

You know, there's a common trend throughout most of OKC's recent development that we don't really place things where they can feed off the synergy they'd create together. We plop crap down wherever and then wonder why it doesn't end up fitting, why it's here and not there. Very annoying because all it takes is a little forethought and this becomes a non-issue.

You know, there's a common trend throughout most of OKC's recent development that we don't really place things where they can feed off the synergy they'd create together. We plop crap down wherever and then wonder why it doesn't end up fitting, why it's here and not there. Very annoying because all it takes is a little forethought and this becomes a non-issue.


At the time that Frontier City and, much later, Whitewater were built it would have made little sense to build them anywhere near downtown.

At the time that Frontier City and, much later, Whitewater were built it would have made little sense to build them anywhere near downtown.

I said nothing about downtown. I was simply saying that when Whitewater was built "much later", it surely would have made a lot of sense to locate it near Frontier City for some synergy. Of course, this is but one example of what I'm talking about.

I said nothing about downtown. I was simply saying that when Whitewater was built "much later", it surely would have made a lot of sense to locate it near Frontier City for some synergy. Of course, this is but one example of what I'm talking about.

Someone else mentioned the downtown area.

The two parks were not developed by the same people originally. I don't think White Water has suffered financially from not being near Frontier City and I think there was likely more traffic and better accessibility from more of the metro area where it was built. Would have been nice to be together? Maybe, but it probably didn't make economic sense at the time. When you're having to make decisions based on financial considerations you do what is best for you.

Universal Studios did not build next door to WDW in Orlando.

that may not be the best example since US and WDW are competitors whereas FC and WW are not (and actually a waterpark component would significantly help FC out, even back when WW was built).

Anyway, I so wish there was a way to make a downtown move and combination of parks happen. Imagine driving down I-40 having Frontier City White Water on the right and the downtown skyline on the left. ... Who in their right mind wouldn't stop the car in OKC and spend a day or two (or more)? ....

that may not be the best example since US and WDW are competitors whereas FC and WW are not (and actually a waterpark component would significantly help FC out, even back when WW was built).

Anyway, I so wish there was a way to make a downtown move and combination of parks happen. Imagine driving down I-40 having Frontier City White Water on the right and the downtown skyline on the left. ... Who in their right mind wouldn't stop the car in OKC and spend a day or two (or more)? ....

Universal Studios and WDW and absolutely not direct competitors. They compliment each other and provide additional reasons for vacationers to visit Orlando. Do you honestly think that Universal would have ever built in Orlando if WDW hadn't been there first? And they were obviously not concerned about being close to WDW.

hence my point, that was a bad comparison bringing up WDW.

hence my point, that was a bad comparison bringing up WDW.

No, my comparison was quite appropriate. You might also note that Universal Studios in LA is a significant distance from Disneyland and it has nothing to do with being competitors or not. It was a matter of convenience in location for Universal. Seaworld in San Antonio and Six Flags did not find it necessary to be close together to be successful and they are very different types of parks. As I said, it might have been nice to have the two parks together in OKC, but obviously was not the best option for the original developers of White Water.

A visitor to OKC from Houston blogs about it here:

Jan Paul Yap: [Drive Log] Oklahoma City - Day 1 (http://www.janpaulyap.com/2012/11/drive-log-oklahoma-city-day-1.html)

Jan Paul Yap: [Drive Log] Oklahoma City - Day 2 (http://www.janpaulyap.com/2012/11/drive-log-oklahoma-city-day-2.html)


Oklahoma City has a unique vibe - somewhat of a small town pace in a big old-city setting.

This is actually from about a year ago. I just found the site today. He took some nice pics of the town while he was here.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O7h28VTj-V8/UJfb0vn7dJI/AAAAAAAABtQ/YSmdiVtRJ0w/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-12.jpg


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vva77KNsxGo/UJ4AcWx4fUI/AAAAAAAAB3A/vYRF-qs7txM/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-5.jpg


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dplSudwMXEA/UJfcqYJ6nMI/AAAAAAAABuI/-n9sWjwscyo/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-15.jpg


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OKpJQMLAXh4/UJfdNRJI0mI/AAAAAAAABvo/xuzccXQoc28/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-30.jpg


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aySEosxZM0I/UJfcwTBYg4I/AAAAAAAABu4/bWXlJl2sSMw/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-22.jpg


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-96xGR2H5Urw/UJfc0VDnlUI/AAAAAAAABvY/lPbYUZB1Q4E/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-26.jpg


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9H6nXGfZhFk/UJfc1kR2ZFI/AAAAAAAABvg/eRhfF4CitIw/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-27.jpg


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CgdBC8VQZVQ/UJfdVR22pfI/AAAAAAAABwY/aHfAs7A4msk/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-36.jpg


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ScSL5mUIb2o/UJfdeecI-8I/AAAAAAAABxg/M2Lc3XKA8BY/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-45.jpg


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DVjE7r2FsDI/UJ4A9C4dkGI/AAAAAAAAB3Y/2tZqxUVK79s/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-10.jpg


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-w3aFW-j4qEI/UJ4BNRYQiyI/AAAAAAAAB3w/sfAvjDCk7_w/s1600/oklahoma+city+trip+jan+paul+yap+www.janpaulyap.com +houston+lifestyle+photographer-14.jpg


Many more pics at the links.