No re-entry at Sux Flags this Year

You forgot the $49 Guest Relations Season Pass Option.

If the issues is convenience and not necessity, isn't convenience good customer service?

I see no other reason other than greed for a no re-entry policy. They want to get that locker money out of you, and they want the people who bring food in their cars (no matter how small that number is) to buy park food.

Amusement parks have always had the re-entry policy, this is taking something away from people that they have always enjoyed. Six Flags will take a hit with this, it is just pilling more bad customer service on top of the manure pile.

It may become "old hat" at Six Flags parks, but unless CF, Paramount, and Busch/Universal enstate the same policy I have a feeling that this might just push a whole lot of people to the competition.

Instead of coming back next year and being prepared, they'll just go to the competition next year and have a good time.

---

Jeffrey Seifert said:

What's going to happen when they shell out an additional $5.00 to park up close and then find out they can't leave the park to go back to their car?

---

I doubt that the folks paying for premium parking are the same type that would balk at a $4 hot dog or a $6 burger inside the park.

I don't have the patience to read the whole thread, but I will say that I'm amazed at would appear to be some justifying the decision.

If true, this goes way beyond stupid. This is not a football game, this is an amusement park. Maybe that's what happens when you have a person with an entertainment background trying to run something that is completely different.

Sure, this alone may not cause some people from coming back another day. But if that is what makes something OK, I'm sure we can think of a lot of ways to screw the guest. Let's charge for napkins!

Yeah, we've had the threads about high beverage prices, overpriced parking and paid line reservation services. In many of those cases, I have defended parks myself. But even you ultra-conservative capitalists have to concede that this is an entirely higher level of greed.

*** Edited 1/13/2006 5:14:05 PM UTC by Gemini***

---

If the issues is convenience and not necessity, isn't convenience good customer service?

---

It would be even more convenient to be able to bring food in with you, but almost no one lets you do that in quantity. So clearly, convenience vs. profit isn't an absolute.

---

I see no other reason other than greed for a no re-entry policy.

---

Of course it's greed. It's a business. The goal is to maximize profits, and if this policy maximizes profits, then it would be irresponsible not to pursue it. It's not clear that it maximizes profits, but that remains to be seen---I'm fairly confident that none of us knows for sure, with the exception of those few Buzzers who are at the senior management level of an amusement park.

As a side note, there is a safety issue. People getting obnoxiously drunk (though small in number) are generally doing it from a stash in their cars. Most serious fights (guns and knives---vanishingly small in number) happen in parking lots. I'd be willing to bet that parking lots are a significant source of property crime, too. If people have less incentive to hang around in parking lots, fewer undesireable things can happen in them, and they are easier to patrol to deter theft.

---

Amusement parks have always had the re-entry policy, this is taking something away from people that they have always enjoyed.

---

Enthusiasts, maybe, but maybe not the GP. Gonch stated somewhere that many of the GP he asked didn't even know you *could* re-enter. Most people have been trained by concerts, sporting events, theater, etc. to expect that ticketed venues do not allow re-entry. Even all-day festival-style concerts. I'm hard-pressed to think of another ticketed venue that *does* allow re-entry. Oregon's football stadium does, but after that I start running out of examples.

---

I have a feeling that this might just push a whole lot of people to the competition.

---

Enthusiasts, maybe, but maybe not the GP. Many parks are not close enough to one another for large numbers of people to have a practical choice. If you live in the Chicago metro area, do you drive around the lake to Michigan's Adventure because you can't re-enter SFGAm? Doubt it. Also, most people who attend a park attend one, once, each year or two. I would expect that the ability to re-enter a park is low on the "distinguishing characteristics" between two equi-distant parks. Most likely, Ma and Pa Kettle pick the park that Jr.'s friends are telling him is cool.

Stepping back a bit, I think this is a bad idea, and I think the business benefits are probably going to end up being outweighed by the business costs. But, it's not clear to me that the costs are inescapably larger.

I am going with Brian on the fact that if it is 10-20% of people who walk back to their car for something then we are over hyping the damage of this especially at parks with seperate gates for Theme Park and Water Park. Why? Because if someone has either a season pass for these or buys a combo ticket they will be exempt from the no re-entry policy. This was stated in the memo from SFGAdv's PR rep.

I bet if we wait til after No-coaster and East Coaster, we will find out more about the decision and why it is being considered. Cause I know for one if weather permits I will be at Eastcoaster and will ask about this policy. I will be at a doctor in less than 2 weeks to find out if I am going to be on insulin or not. If so this policy might alter my visits to GAdv. Insulin can be kept in a cooler in a car for the day. My mother has done it for the past 5 years when we go to NASCAR races and it's very hot on those days. So that was my plan for what I would do.

Re-reading Andy's suggestion about the competition, there is one thing I missed:

Theme parks are not a necessity---no one *has* to visit one. So, the competition for SFGAm isn't (strictly) MiAdv. It's *any* summer leisure-time activity. So, you might not be driving your customers away to another park---you might be driving them to something else entirely.

And that's a lot worse.

And yes, Walt, this is an unprecedented level of greed. But, given Six Flags recent history and financial position, they need all the greed they can get if they expect to be a continuing business concern.

*** Edited 1/13/2006 5:36:21 PM UTC by Brian Noble***

Considering the variety of reasons people leave and re-enter, I just don't see how this is going to be a cash cow. That's why I'm even more perplexed.

But there's an ENORMOUS difference between "instant gratification type greed" (greedification?) and seeing the longer-term picture. This MIGHT even make them a *little* more money in the short-term...but in the longer run, PO'd people DO talk to friends and neighbors around the water cooler, and SF really can't handle any MORE bad press (or bad word-of-mouth).

Remember CF and the seatbelts issue. Will it be a big deal, how many people are really affected by the shorter seatbelts, etc....would CP really have to be LOWERING their prices if not for the reactions to the Intamins' downtime and the policies surrounding their operations? And I'll wager the farm that CP was in a MUCH better position in terms of public PERCEPTION than SF was at the beginning of the Snyder era...

You CANNOT afford to be losing customers AND earning a rep for bad customer service in the HOSPITALITY industry...this is NOT the same as the entertainment business.... ;)

As always, I welcome dissenting opinions... :)

i still know people [reltivies w/ large families / lots of kids] who are P.O.ed about not being able to bring in coolers to parks like they used to, such as SFDL, and don't visit anymore...

although people who do visit now see it as the "norm", it doesn't mean they havn't lost some their customers.

// just sayin' *** Edited 1/13/2006 6:25:40 PM UTC by SFDL_Dude***

---

Brian Noble said:

Enthusiasts, maybe, but maybe not the GP. Gonch stated somewhere that many of the GP he asked didn't even know you *could* re-enter.

---

Brian, I'm not sure what Gonch's source would be on this but I highly doubt that. The last words you hear as you walk out of a Disney or Universal park is "Are you coming back?" by someone holding a stamp and an ink pad by the exit turnstile.

Tickets are sold as "day" tickets, never "visit" tickets.

I hear you on the need to maximize the profit potential out of every guest, but if there were studies that indicated as such don't you think that Anheuser-Busch, Disney, GE, and CBS would be all over that no re-entry policy? I find it hard to believe that Six Flags has some keen eyesight into the ramifications that the others park do not.

---

Brian Noble said:
Most people have been trained by concerts, sporting events, theater, etc. to expect that ticketed venues do not allow re-entry. Even all-day festival-style concerts. I'm hard-pressed to think of another ticketed venue that *does* allow re-entry.

---

I have to disagree with that statement. Most theaters I have been to do allow patrons to come and go. I volunteer for a large performance venue in downtown Fort Worth and we allow our ticketed patrons to come and go and as they please. A good number of them run to the Starbucks across the street during intermission. I've been to several other theaters in various cities where this is the norm. Even when I have been to major concerts at the American Airlines Center, I'm pretty sure they allow you to leave the arena and come back in as long as you have your ticket.

As far as Cinemas go, I've been to some small art type theaters where in order to use the restroom you have to exit past the ticket takers. They let people in and out all the time.

I can't say that I have ever tried at one of the large mutliplex cinemas, but I'd be willing to bet that if I left something in the car and asked the ticket taker if I can come back in, I would probably be allowed. I may even test that theory this weekend.

You guys are thinking like Snyder and thinking sports events. Not all ticketed venues trap you inside. Theme parks certainly should not.

*** Edited 1/13/2006 7:15:55 PM UTC by Jeffrey Seifert***

---

Jeffrey Seifert said:

I volunteer for a large performance venue in downtown Fort Worth

---

I didn't know you lived in the metroplex. I live in Ft. Worth, too. Is it Bass Hall?

---

Paris said:

---

Brian Noble said:

Enthusiasts, maybe, but maybe not the GP. Gonch stated somewhere that many of the GP he asked didn't even know you *could* re-enter.

---

Brian, I'm not sure what Gonch's source would be on this but I highly doubt that. The last words you hear as you walk out of a Disney or Universal park is "Are you coming back?" by someone holding a stamp and an ink pad by the exit turnstile.

---

That's actually a bit of a misquote.

One person I've mentioned this to said that. But the response from people that I've gotten (and I'm making a point only to bring it up to people who cannot be considered enthusiasts by any stretch) is a resounding, "meh."

Let me just restate that I do not think it's a good policy to impliment.

However, I do think everyone here is SEVERELY overestimating the reaction this will receive.

Will some be pissed? Yes. But a vast majority will not.

Will some people refuse to return to the park? Yes, but a vast majority will return.

Brian hit the nail on the head many, many times in this thread. Most notably with the competition thing. If they do lose business at all, it will be to other activities, not to other parks.

The one thing that everyone here needs to remember because it applies to ALL of us is:

People don't visit amusement parks in the same way you do.

Although, these guys DO have a rep for trying silly policies and then taking it back rather quickly:

On January 30, 2005 the Washington Post reported:

---

The Washington Redskins are for the first time requiring season ticket holders who buy their seats with a credit card to use a Redskins Extra Points MasterCard, a move the club said will ease ticket distribution and increase fan loyalty, but others said could enhance the team's profits over the long term.

---

Boy, that sounds familiar, huh?

Then on February 2, 2005 they reported:

---

The Washington Redskins said yesterday they would no longer require season ticket holders who buy their seats with a credit card to use a Redskins Extra Points MasterCard, dropping a policy the team had announced only a week ago.

---

So that stupid policy lasted all of two days.

Were severely overestimating????

Maybe short term but I hightly doubt long term.

Word of mouth is bigger than any policy and all it takes is one person to tell ten back at the offices that THAT PARK WOULDN'T let me go get Diapers for my kid and come back.

Your 1 person is now probably 8 people who got a bad vibe on the park.

Chuck

---

Maybe short term but I hightly doubt long term.

---

See, again my mindset is exactly the opposite.

If anything, I think the short term reaction will be extremely negative, but as time goes on it will become accepted. (assuming they don't flip-flop like they did with the 'Skins tix)

Just to keep clarifying:

I do think it's a stupid policy.

You want an idea of how powerful a negative experience...ANY negative experience...can be?

Just look at the problems Geauga Lake is having getting attendance back to even 1999 levels. And you can't blame it on the animal park...Geauga Lake didn't have an animal park in 1999.

Burning the lot is almost always a bad idea. It's an especially bad idea if you're an amusement park and can't easily change lots.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

And it works both ways.

Sure marketing is some of it but the overwelming possitve to HW, IB and other parks have been purely word of mouth.

I look for Lake Compunce and Knotts to have banner years.

Chuck, who thinks it's bad enough I know people who leave SFMM to goto Knotts because they weren't having a good time or most of the rides they came for were closed.