Now everyone hates poor people

Monday, October 23, 2017 11:26 AM

I'm not going to post this as news, because frankly it doesn't seem like news.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5004255/Holiday-giants-char...-olds.html

I don't get the outrage or entitlement. My kid is 7 now, and can quite literally do everything at Walt Disney World. Why should it cost less for him to go?

+2Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 11:39 AM

I don't know why more places don't go by height. If you can ride the majority of stuff at 48", then at 48" you pay full price.

+3Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 12:32 PM

Cash-strapped parents are being forced to pay adult prices for children at many of Britain’s most popular attractions

At gunpoint? And only cash-strapped parents? Affluent parents get to pay children's prices, apparently.

+8Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 12:57 PM

gunpoint is only for US tourists... locals are forced by baton.

kpjb said:

I don't know why more places don't go by height. If you can ride the majority of stuff at 48", then at 48" you pay full price.

The wrist-band debate would be solved that way. Get measured at the gate, pay the ride it all price and get your wristband, or pay the junior price and no wristband.

Both the Detroit and Toledo Zoo charge for 2 year olds, something not even Disney does. Some years ago we took a niece to Disney for her 9th birthday on one of the free dining plan promotions, and paid the adult ticket price so she could order off the regular menu instead of having kids meals. It has been a while, but I just don't remember the price difference being that big of a deal for the difference in food options it gave her.

Last edited by Ken P, Monday, October 23, 2017 12:58 PM
+3Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 1:45 PM

The Daily Mail exists only to cause outrage amongst its very large readership. Honestly, I think the "journalists" there scour the internet to see what non story they can turn into something that people can be made to be angry about. The word "entitlement" is about right - almost all of their stories could be summed up with that one word.

Last edited by tallguy, Monday, October 23, 2017 1:52 PM
+0
Monday, October 23, 2017 2:09 PM

How you can respond to this:

‘Once customers turn 12 they are able to enjoy the entirety of the experience available, as much as any adult visiting the attraction,’ he said.

with this

But Ms Logan countered: ‘All 12-year-olds look very different but they’re certainly not adults. They don’t have any adult rights, responsibilities or privileges, so why do they suddenly have to live a more expensive life?’

is dumbfounding to me. No one is saying 12 year olds are adults. Just that if they can enjoy the full run of attractions, they should pay full price.

+1Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 5:17 PM

kpjb said:

I don't know why more places don't go by height. If you can ride the majority of stuff at 48", then at 48" you pay full price.

That's exactly what my park does. A good majority of our hard rides have 48" height requirements so that is where we naturally drew the admissions line between child and adult. It just seemed logical based on our attraction mix with height requirements.

I've often wondered why WDW charges by age, rather than height. My impression is that the majority of the gated attractions (at least in the US) that I have experienced do indeed charge based on height rather than age. I would think the larceny is huge at places at WDW because in a service friendly environment, when does it rise to the level for an employee to question a guest's age? It's completely subjective and will almost always lead to a negative guest experience, even if the guest gets called out on trying to work the system.

+0
Monday, October 23, 2017 6:20 PM

I suspect the concern is that with Disney a large part of the product is "enjoying the magic" rather than actually riding the rides, especially given how few of them are height limited.

+2Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 8:05 PM

At what age do these people think it's fair to charge full price for a kid? Surely there has to be a cut off somewhere before 18 or are we supposed to pay junior price even though junior can drive himself to the attraction? I mean I like to pay less but reasonably there has to be a cut off somewhere and no matter where you put it people who are just over it will be unhappy. My kids no longer qualify for discounts on much of anything but they're taller than me and eat even more so why would they cost less? Unless there are activities included in a price that hey aren't legally old enough to take advantage of...

+0
Monday, October 23, 2017 9:58 PM

Paisley said:

At what age do these people think it's fair to charge full price for a kid?

Well, your children can stay on your insurance until 26 now, so...

26?

+1Loading
Monday, October 23, 2017 11:11 PM

ApolloAndy said:

I suspect the concern is that with Disney a large part of the product is "enjoying the magic" rather than actually riding the rides, especially given how few of them are height limited.

I propose they instead charge based on how much you will enjoy the experience. Kids love Disney, so they should be charged the most. Lots of adults do too, but not on the same level, so they pay less. And that Dopey Turtle guy would get in for free.

+3Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 12:48 AM

My few cents...

A ) Yes, the Daily Mail is a clickbait factory.

B ) My mileage on "cash strapped" probably varies from most, as would be apparent if you saw my tax return for last year. Five figues. Low five figures. I just find it hard to buy into the notion that there many cash strapped families at Disney Parks.

C ) Agree with ApolloAndy. Disney can have a different pricing structure because their parks are rather different beasts than Six Flags or Cedar Fair. Walt's initial idea, while sitting watching his daughters ride a carousel, was there should be a place where parents and children could rides rides together, and they've done a pretty good job at holding to that concept.

+1Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 7:14 AM

Not to hijack the thread but an interesting question nonetheless. Why are visibly pregnant women charged full price at amusement parks? With the exception of Disney they are prohibited from riding just about everything.

+0
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 7:34 AM

They should be charged for one adult and one child.

+15Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 7:47 AM

Good luck asking a woman who you think looks pregnant if she is pregnant without knowing the answer to that question before asking.

+4Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:22 AM

Just ask if she has any kids and you’ll get an answer without directly asking

Last edited by Go Intamin, Tuesday, October 24, 2017 8:23 AM
+1Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:16 AM

In my experience as a childless "adult" - if people have kids, they'll LET you know without you needing to ask....

+1Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:58 AM

Fun anecdote;

My 49" 6-year old daughter, who will ride anything she can get her hands on, has a free pass (the pre-k) to Cedar Point next year. So I'll have a tiny person who will be riding Millennium and most other things all next year at no charge when she will be well above 50" by summer.

The rules were simple. As long as the pass was verified/completed at Cedar Point before the child's 6th birthday (regardless of the child's height) they are good to go. They started verifying passes around mid August, so we made a trip to the park before her 6th birthday in late September, and voila. Pre-K pass for a soon-to-be first-grader.

All that aside, I thought it was a nice move by Cedar Fair to include Cedar Point in the number of parks that offer the Pre-K pass.

+3Loading
Tuesday, October 24, 2017 12:02 PM

Glad that all of us rich folks who have to pay for passes are able to subsidize your family!

+3Loading

You must be logged in to post

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