No one under 18 admitted without a parent....

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 1:02 AM
Well, Lake Winnie startede it, not me.

What are your thoughts on this policy, esp. as with regards to the "too cheap" season passes being doled out. It would prevent parents from using parks as a *babysitting* service. Then again, kids DO have a LOT more spending money than when I was a kid. On the other hand again, is that part of what keeps the parents with YOUNG kids (who $pend money) from relaxing and staying to empty their wallets?

I just thought, since many of you are already dealing with closed parks...how about a "state of the industry" type discussion on marketing and demographics, really NOT trying to get into a *rights of teenagers* debate, sorry...;)

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 1:21 AM
Bill, this would be a great concept and could help out a lot. But I could not imagine growing and not being able to go to a park, or paying too much now that I am grown (you know how that goes).

I grew up at PKI. Seriously, I grew up there. I spent 3 days a week there in the summer. It wasn't a place to babysit me. Believe it or not, I was a good kid. My parents just took me because I bugged them too. They would have rather just had me stay home and play baseball with the neighbors. It's sad that people can cause such probelms and maybe ruin it for others.

I think that they should really crack down on what goes down at parks. I have never really seen anything to bad at PKI, but I know other parks have had incidents like this past weekend.

Maybe a time limit on how late the kids are allowed to be out there, stricter dress code (gang paraphanelia), or tighter security. Maybe they could have teen nights and just hire extra security for those nights, and that might help filter out the kiddies on other days because all the "cool kids" will be there on teen night. Other than that, I personally cant think of anything else that the park can do and still be fair (there I didn't say anything about teen rights ;)).

Anyone else have any good ideas, I would love to hear them, because mine don't sound like they are very creative.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 1:21 AM
Wellllll,

This is a tough one. As a seasonal park employee I see everything,and I dont know about an age limit. I find most of the problems come from the under 14 crowd and the 18-21 crowd. Most of the 16 year old tend to be annoying, but not troublesome, least ways in my experience.

That said, from a guest perspective I would like to see more parents controlling their chillens at the parks. :)

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 1:38 AM
See: Kennywood.

That's all I need to say.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 1:56 AM
I agree on the KW thing.

BUT...

I visited KW twice this year. If season passes were available I'd have increased that number at least 5 times.

I think it is a good policy in general, but the park lost lots of potential income from my bank account this year.

We're the type that still grab park food/souvenirs on the frequent flyer, season pass plan - The seaon passes alone (assuming a $59 to $69 pass based on Compounce's) would have netted more $$$ from us than those two visits did. Figure that we'd visit roughly 10 times minimum from May-Sept and I'd bet the overall cash dropped in the park would be more than it was on our two visits this year.

Then again, I suppose if every moron kid in the 'Burgh had a pass and got dumped at the park, then we might not have been there as often, nor spent as long there during those visits.

It's a fine line to be walking, but overall I think it works.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 2:08 AM
How much money would parks lose out on though if they quit selling season passes.

Most major parks have season passes. If you only have general admission, then I dont think that I would be going all the places I go, but that would not affect them in anyway since the GP aren't park whores like us.

How much more money, if any, do you think KW would bring in a year if they offered a season pass?

Or if SF, CF, and PP's quit offering them, how much would that affect their bottom lines?

Since most parks strive on local customers (except for Fla & Cal parks), it seems to me they would have a lot less customers. But thats just my opinion.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 6:21 AM
I've said for a while that season passes bring more trouble than they're worth. While I wish that all the parks had the same system as Kennywood with General Admissions (only for people over 19, with ID) and Ride All Day passes, I doubt that would happen. But, I think parks would see less "undesirables" (whatever "category" they fall into) if they eliminate the season pass. Plus, I think the whole sharing of season passes between parks in the same chain, while it's use is limited, is also a perk that causes more headaches than it's worth for park PR departments (due to whiny enthusiasts!).
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 8:44 AM
I think that if teens are able to drive themselfs to the park then they should be able to go in. If you are resposible enough to drive a vehicle you should be responsible enough to got o an amusment park and not get into trouble.

It makes sense to me, i don't know how the rest of you stand on a policy sych as that. But it sounds good to me.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:01 AM
Is there something legal preventing KW from selling pass to only people over 18?
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:04 AM
I don't think anything other than it's private property, they can make their own rules on who can come in until someone challenges it.
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:46 AM
Get over it. Do you know how many malls bar kids under 16 without an adult 21 or over these days?

The Mall of America does on weekends. Fairlane Mall in Detroit does it every night. And more and more of them will start.

-CO

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:05 AM

ApolloAndy said:
Is there something legal preventing KW from selling pass to only people over 18?

No idea.

But what good is it if my wife and I have season passes but we can't get them for the kids?

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:10 AM
Huh? Kennywood doesn't sell season passes at all. They do sell "general admission" that gets you in, but not on any rides. However, you can only buy one if you are over 19 or (IIRC) have a condition that would prevent you from riding most attractions.
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:26 AM
I don't think anyone in this thread said they did. :)
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:50 AM
Well seeing that some of my friends work at Sandcastle(Kennywood's waterpark) they said that attendance has greatly increased due to getting season passes this year. 70% of Kennywood's ticket sales are prepaid or pre-bought. If they came out with season passes the park would be over-crowded.

This topic reminds me of 2 days that Kennywood has every year. These days are specific school district days(which will remain nameless, anyone that works at KW knows which days I'm talkin' bout). On this days are theft/vandelism alert is on super high. And park vistors every year have known to get really violent. But other than that we don't get much fights/violents at the park. If season passes were ever offered, I could see a huge increase in riots at the park.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 11:39 AM
I understand where the idea is coming from, but IMO, I believe it is a crock of crap.

What about all those people that are 16-17 years old that have driver's licenses and would want to go to theme parks without parents?

I visited m any theme parks when I was between those ages. Not because I went to goof off, I went because my parents didn't like roller coasters and were sit-at-home type people.

If they made the age 16 years of age or older, then I would agree, but not at 18.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 11:48 AM

Jeff said:
See: Kennywood.

That's all I need to say.


Well, then IMO, you've said nothing! If you are meaning to imply that KW has less "teen-related-incidents" (TM) due to this policy, I'd say that correlation does not equal causation. Look at HersheyPark and Seabreeze. They too have limited "teen-related-incidents'(TM) but have no age policy.

Anyway, to the original question, I dont think that such a policy makes a difference. I've seen with my own eyes at parks including SFGAm, SFA, PKI, CP, and PKD where the kids come in to the parks with the so-called 'responsible adults' only to be let loose once in the park, often far from the "all-seeing-eyes" of the 'responisble adults'. Unless you which to mandate that the adults and kids be "No Father than XXX ft from each other at all times" I dont see how this really helps.

BTW: Didnt Kennywood have a problem when Phantom's Revenge first opened with kids throwing things off the bridge in the middle of PR's line?

lata, jeremy

--this post is powered by punctuation.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:06 PM
I'd agree with Brian S. on this one. If the state thinks your are responsible enough to drive when you are 16, then why not be allowed to go to a park by yourself.

Younger than that? Sure, I can see that.

+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:13 PM

2Hostyl said:
Look at HersheyPark and Seabreeze. They too have limited "teen-related-incidents'(TM) but have no age policy.
Hershey doesn't have an $8 general admission, and I assume Seabreeze is in a much better neighborhood than Kennywood.
+0
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:18 PM
As I recall, Kennywood doesn't exclude unaccompanied minors, but said unaccompanied minors MUST buy the P-O-P.

Is that the case, or did I miss something?

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...