Shapiro: Charging for autographs and pictures - more line cutting

I don't see them as silly or absurd I see them as a company trying to change the direction they were headed in. The more characters walking around, no smoking, and less money on coasters(which should equal more on themeing/paint/employees for stalls) points to a more family park idea.

I don't think people will be as pissed about paying $3 for a soda if they don't have to wait 10-15 minutes to get it, and if they are served with customer service. It's amazing how a "Can I help you?" and a "Thank you, Enjoy your day" can change your view of a place, over "NEXT".

If you listen to where they want to price point the parks, you will be spending money. But now the key for them is to make you see a value at that price point. Little things will make the difference. Visible security enforcing park rules, clean restrooms and nice paint jobs, all stands and carts open for refreshments and souvenirs, and the like will all be needed to be constants throughout the future visits to maintain the value of their price point.

If they do raise season passes, it will make a dent in the teenager crowd, AKA "Six Flags Babysitting Service." This is where I feel the best change in the overall park atmosphere will occur. I don't mean $5-$10 increase. I am talking about a 2-3x increase. A $160 season pass to Great Adventure, Great America, and Magic Mountain and 120 to parks like America, Darien Lake, Kentucky Kingdom would probably be a good price point to make the pass a fair return on investment but also be more fair to the bottom line of SFI.

Yes I know that price puts SF above CF in season pass rates. But if they turn the theming level up and make improvements in customer service SF will be better than CF in my eyes. I have been to Cedar Point, Geauga Lake and Dorney Park for Cedar Fair and Great Adventure, America and Kentucky Kingdom for Six Flags. I have had both good and bad days at Cedar Point, Dorney, Great Adventure and America on repeat visits. Geauga Lake and Kentucky Kingdom, I have only visited once and to tell you the truth if they were visits that showed the typical day at those parks, I won't be looking at return visits to either park often.

To me any day at a park is a good day but when the employees seem to be enjoying doing their job and are pleasant to guests it seems to make the day a little better.

But dragonoffrost, A lot of other parks that are a lot cheaper already provide a level of service that SF is striving for. They are trying to use better service, that others already provide, to justify their giant increase in admission. It seems to me that if one can expect a great day at a cheaper park, for the same amount of money you should be able to expect the same kind of experience at a SF park.

...And that makes SF look greedy, imho.

---

...I am talking about a 2-3x increase. A $160 season pass to Great Adventure, Great America, and Magic Mountain and 120 to parks like America, Darien Lake...

---

Wow, dude... just wow. I can't justfity that kind of spending. A family of four would pay about $600 for a season pass at a larger park (assuming it's a $10.00 savings for a family pass).

I'd never pay that much. That's the kind of money you pay for the ski-slopes (early-bird special)... and that's only justifiable because it's basically an extreme sport where you control your destiny. A day at the park shouldn't be that much. It's like comparing mangos to grape nuts...

You've basically just priced your lower & lower-middle class families out of a visit to the park. Not too many lower-middle class families would be able to afford $600 for a season pass to a park of which they'd maybe make 5 visits to at most.

I think dragonoffrost is dead on with the pass pricing scheme. If it's any less than that then SF missed the boat.

The CP pass with GL option is $130 this year and gets you into 1/3 of the parks that the SF pass would.

---

Not too many lower-middle class families would be able to afford $600 for a season pass to a park of which they'd maybe make 5 visits to at most.

---

But if they paid even the reduced or discount prices to enter, they'd be spending around $200 each for those 5 visits. It's still a deal.

I totally agree. As much as I hate to admit it, SF really needs to crank up the season pass prices.

It seems like the prior management was dying to get anyone to visit more than once because the experience they were selling was neutral at best. I got my SFoT pass for $60. That's ridiculous considering even the average GP would come 3 or 4 times a season on a pass.

Now, if Shapiro can actually create a positive experience that people will want to repeat, you can bet they'd be willing to pay more to do it. $150 for 3 or 4 good visits is still a steal when you throw in coupons and other benefits.

On top of that, (from a business perspective more so than a compassionate perspective) it keeps unsupervised kids out of the park AND it reduces lines and crowding.

Upping the season pass price is a no-brainer to me.

Well, there's usually not too many "deals" on season passes unless you get them before the season starts. Otherwise, it's not like a day-pass.

ONE thing that may help reduce the price of the ticket, but keep up the revenue would be to restrict or have tiered level of season passes.

Tier I: level of service would restrict the season pass to just that specific park
Tier II: level of service would restrict the season pass to just that park, but include a parking pass as well.
Tier III: level of service would allow entry to all Six Flags parks.
Tier IV: level of service would include entry to all Six Flags parks as well as the parking pass to all parks.

If Shapiro & co. could give more options such as those listed above, they wouldn't be pricing them out of contention.
Most families don't visit other Six Flags parks. They just want their own regional park and usually don't have any intention to visit other parks... so why make them bear the cost of other parks into the season pass when it can be slid under the belt of a tierd service??

---

Most families don't visit other Six Flags parks. They just want their own regional park and usually don't have any intention to visit other parks...

---

I agree.

So most seasonal parks are open 4 to 6 months of the year. Visiting just once a month means 4 to 6 visits. I don't think that's an unreasonable estimate. Why buy a SP if you're doing less than 4 visits a year? (well other than the fact that SF gives them away)

Do the math. $160 is a bargain. It's not pricing anyone out of anything, it's giving a great deal to people who'd like to visit multiple times over the summer.

You forgot about Tier V...the "Q-babe" tier. This level of service would include entry to all Six Flags parks as well as the parking pass to all parks...AND full day escort from a scantily clad "Q-babe" to make those lines move oh so faster.

Wait...forgot about the family friendly thing...How about "Q-Bugs"? In this tiered level you actually get to dress up as your favorite character and have at it. The added bonus is all those good families that are so motivated by costumed characters won't be able to tell the Tier V passholders from the staff.

Here's a question: what should the "break-even" point be for day visits vs. passes? This is the point at which a seasonal/annual pass is cheaper than buying day visit/multi-day visit tickets.

For Cedar Point, the break-even point is three, four, or five, depending on whether you want CP only ($100), CP+GL ($130), or CP+GL+Soak City ($155). This is compared to gate pricing only. If you consider the possibility of discount-channel purchases, the break-even point is four for CP-only, because three AAA tickets is a few bucks cheaper than a season pass.

Knott's is four (park only, $115) or five (water park too, $140) based on gate prices. If you consider discount channels, the break-even is five for KBF-only.

PKI is five visits for an individual ($107), but only three visits for a family of four or more ($80). This seems odd, but a 2-day PKI ticket is only $50, and they do not need to be consecutive days.

BGW is 1 day for VA residents ($52). 3 days for non-resident individuals (assuming non-consecutive days, $110) and 2 days for families of four or more (again assuming non-consecutive days, $82.) BGW also has a 7-consecutive-day ticket that is less than two single-day tickets ($80), and that's good for the water park too.

SFGAm is 3 days for individuals ($95), 2 days for families ($85). (Compared to web purchase of day tickets, not gate purchase---otherwise it's two days for each.)

That's a pretty broad range of price points.

---

dexter said:
But dragonoffrost, A lot of other parks that are a lot cheaper already provide a level of service that SF is striving for. They are trying to use better service, that others already provide, to justify their giant increase in admission. It seems to me that if one can expect a great day at a cheaper park, for the same amount of money you should be able to expect the same kind of experience at a SF park.

...And that makes SF look greedy, imho.

---

Yeah, but how many of those "cheaper" parks feature rides like Superman:Ride Of Steel, X, Nitro or Tatsu?

It doesn't make SF greedy, it means they are *finally* realizing the value of what they have. There's a reason some of ya'll keep going back to SF despite the crappy service you get. It's because they do offer unique coasters and a style all their own.

To bad they never realized the value of what they have to offer, until now. If Shapiro can add top notch service and clean, well run parks to the mix, it's worth every penny to ride some of the best coasters in the world. *** Edited 3/17/2006 4:00:52 AM UTC by DWeaver***

Well, Cedar Point and Hersheypark come to mind if we are talking about the same level of quality of rides as some of the SF parks.

You do have a good point though that they do offer some very unique and high quality rides, but why have them if you are not going to run them at the capacity that they were designed to run.

I also agree that the SF season pass is way underpriced, but I also think that the $10 price hike at the admission gate and the $5 price hike at the parking booths are WAY too much to pay for what the parks offer, and by offer I'm talking about service and operations.

I've complained way to much about them though. I will try very hard to forgive and forget if things change for the better. I don't know if what they charge will be worth it though, even if it does change, which from experience I say probably will not.

It's kind of like this guy who used to be your friend but one day turned out to big a big jerk. Years later he says that he will not appologise for being a jerk, but he has changed and you should like him again. Fool me once...

See the difference is though, Cedar Point and Hersheypark (which I *do* consider superior products by the way), would become a major destination to most of the GP who don't live within 200 miles. Where as you can more easily access a Six Flags park from most major areas. That's why they're valuable.

The fact that the parks (or this case, rides) haven't been run at capacity, with crappy service to boot, is part of the undervaluing of the company. This is part of what Shapiro is saying. The parks were undervalued within the company itself.

The price increase is a tricky subject as far as I'm concerned. Why is it when people complain about SF being more expensive than Disney, they always fail to mention that with the $59 price, you've bought your admission not only for the season, but for the season at every other SF park as well? That's still rediculously cheap even if you only use it twice! So you'll get no sympathy from me there.

The parking situation is crazy, but Snyder is smart enough to know that in 2 years, most people will be used to it, and will pay it without even thinking about it. If that turns out not to be the case, they'll simply drop the prices slightly, especially once they can offer season pass prices at what they should be.

My argument though, is that the VALUE in what they have (Nitro, Tatsu, X, or RoS) is in OPERATING them. Sitting there idle, offseason or not, the value is in the rides given. So isn't it in the best interest of the company, *within reason*, to try and maximize the rides being taken...then to make sure they recover the cost (and then some if they'd like profits) by promoting the park - this is where my *scheme* calls for deals on merchandise of all kinds.

Virtually everything else I saw at SFMM convinces me they're heading in the right direction.....but single-training and selling more fastpasses, that won't work. The prices are becoming more like the other chains, the operations have to be there too...the other chains won't charge for Fred and Wilma's autographs, SF can't charge for Tweety's or Sylvester's...

"Normal" people really don't use their SF pass at more than one park, right? :)

Right, normal people may not use their SF passes all over the country, but they do use them at their local park all summer long...see SFMM. I have friends who came down from San Francisco to do the So-Cal tour. They were appalled when they saw the daily admission price for SFMM, until I reminded them that they live 25 miles from SFMW. Meaning their admission to that park is already paid, and should they decide to return to SFMM anytime *this year* to ride Tatsu...

And your right, the value in having such great coasters is in operating them correctly, I think I already mentioned that above:

"The fact that the parks (or this case, rides) haven't been run at capacity, with crappy service to boot, is part of the undervaluing of the company. This is part of what Shapiro is saying. The parks were undervalued within the company itself".

Alot of people seem to think they should fix things, THEN raise prices. From a enthusiast standpoint, I would agree. From a business standpoint, considering Shapiro is stuck with a rediculously low season pass price until 2007, I'd have raised prices too. *** Edited 3/17/2006 3:55:23 PM UTC by DWeaver***

Yep, everyone isn't thinking business or consumer wise. They are thinking about single day price. A smart consumer that knows they are going to go multiple times will buy a season pass and take advantage of the low cost there. Or same smart consumer would find a way to go to the park with ticket already in hand that they paid $10-$20 off the gate price for at their local AAA office or online. Why charge so much more for purchase at the gate. Now the person buying the ticket at the gate is helping to paying for the person sitting there to sell them said ticket. The $20 is probably a little more than the person who sold you the ticket and the person who took your ticket's hourly wage at GADv so you paid for the hour they were there. Now if that person sells 10 tickets or so they probably brought in the same people's salaries for the day and a little profit. Online and AAA sales can be sold at the cheaper rate since you aren't using the ticket sales person's service. (edited to reflect the little research I did on Gadv's prices)

It's all a matter of doing a little research now to get to go to the park at a price you feel is worth it. So instead of the park doing the work for you now you have to do the work to get the price you want.

Stupid business classes...well I guess they weren't stupid if I can use the knowledge I got in them to understand why Six Flags is doing what it's doing to get them out of debt and to consider what may be next (season pass increases.) Remember we still have next season's changes by the new management, since they couldn't do some changes for this season. *** Edited 3/17/2006 4:53:56 PM UTC by dragonoffrost***

Well, there ya go... that does make a little more sense...

Taste the rainbow... have a Lay's potato chip... once your lured in hook, line, & sinker... then jack up the prices to show you're sirius (;)).

If you jack up the prices now in just about every sense, but make all these so-called changes... who really knows about them outside of the park enthusiast crowd? Mom & Dad or Joe Schmoe don't know that anything's really different. All they know is that they jacked up the prices at the gate and in the parking lot a heluva lot more than last year.

If you introduce them to the whole new "Six Flags Experience" and use that as a promo for your marketing with the same prices as 2005, then you may bring in the same guests as last year introducing the entire crowd to the improved changes from the year-before.

Once you lure them in, then the following year... you can justify jacking up the prices if the customer experience HAS indeed been improved, based upon guest surveys & witnessed accounts from employees & other personnal.

I just can't see the price jacking now when nothing has been proven to be better other than promises & suggestions (ie: talking the talk). Wake me up when Six Flags actually has the better reputation that Shapiro & co. are promising.

Problem is you can't afford to wait another season for the raising of prices when your in as much debt as Six Flags is. Single day gate and offer more visits at a cheaper price is the easiest change to make. Then next year you hit everyone for the new price scheme. The changes should be noticeable if Texas is any indication of how things will be to start the season. Now the challenge will be to keep things working at that level throughout the chain for the whole season.

Magic Mountain's last weekend didn't sound too promising so we may have hit or miss improvements, this season.

I will be watching all the Six Flags reports to see how the changes are doing. But if I see more reports that show what I have seen in Texas than reports that show Magic Mountain last weekend I will call this year an improvement and look forward to see what else the new management can do to right the company in years 2 through 5. Yes I do believe it is going to take that long to change the whole culture.

If Six Flags operated in debt for the past half decade, I'm pretty sure one more season wouldn't have killed them, especially since they weren't getting any further in debt... they just weren't getting out of it anytime soon. The parks were making money, so it's not as if they were dragging them down further in debt, especially if they were going to make more subtle changes such as corporate sponsors which would bring in the addt'l revenue.

It's not as if they are in a rush to get out of debt within the next 3 years. For the amount of debt they're in, it's going to take a long time, and one season of a "wait-n-see" approach would have been acceptable, especially to a seasonal park.

Something I think a lot of you seem to be missing or maybe not, But Six Flags is going to make a killing of parking alone. Sure Season passes are dirt cheap but in comparison to all other amusement parks in CA, they are right on target, so that parking increase is a way to buffer some of that missing value from ticket sale. I can imagine that when Season pass prices rise and parks are pristine then parking might drop back to normal.

I have a season pass but I bought the one that cost $125 so my parking is included, but this would be a way to entice other to buy the more expensive season pass, which would generate more money I think. I don't consider myself a Season Pass Whore like someone has so delicately called us peeps who have them, but I like the option to go for a few hours maybe to ride a few rides then leave.

I've never had a season pass. I go to a park once and then go to another within a season. The closest SF parks are 4-5 hours away, just to put my situation in perspective.

I will agree that a season pass is a great price, but not a great value at all.

Why do SF season pass holders keep buying them year after year? One would think after a park chain makes you wait in line for 2 hours for any of their coasters because they are only running one train, you would not get a season pass for the next season. It seems like a waste of time to me, unless of course you pay even more for a Q-Bot, of which I think SF is planning on you to do (Cough-SCAM!Cough). I really do not believe that they are really going to improve capacity for coasters, like they say they are going to do this year, because that would cut severly into their Q-Bot profits (Cough-SCAM!-cough)

Why didn't the buying spree make them stronger. More parks should have meant more money added to the profit pot. How could a theme park NOT be profitable? How could 20something parks NOT be profitable? I think it may have something to do with the fact that upset guests do not spend the same way that happy guest spend. I think that is why they are where they are right now, and why they are trying this last ditch effort to save the company by raising prices.

But raiseing prices is not the answer, imho. Doing all of the things that we have said all along that they should be doing to better compete with other parks is what they should be doing to save themselves.

Shipiro has said that he is going to get the parks to do all of those things we know will make SF a better overall experience. Even if the park is up to the same standards as say, Hersheypark, why would I want to spend around $25 more to see for myself? Why would a family of 4 or 6 want to spend much more money? We can get what SF is planning to offer cheaper at a park that has already been offering it for years. CP, GL, HP, BGW, BGT, USIOA, ect.

They didn't have a clue before (about how to operate coasters to make paying guests happy), and I really think that they don't have a clue now either (this time about what to do to become profitable). I say this because I really believe that they will be a lot less profitable now that they have raised prices so much out of reach to normal, everyday, hard-working people who can only afford to go to a park once a year. They want to be a once a year (or more) kind of park, but are charging once in a lifetime prices like Disney.

(This is a fun and interesting discussion. I'm sorry I keep being so negative about SF, but it's how I feel and how I believe that's how I can best contribute to the conversation.)