Shapiro at it again?
I would expect to pay higher prices at CP than at KW but not as much as at a Six Flags park. Add to that the better overall operations at CP and I am less likely to object to their food pricing. I would probably end up spending as much or more here on food and drink than at KW. After all, something has to pay for those big B&Ms and Intamens and their admission price is quite low for such a big park.
Arthur Bahl
To me, if they want to have their high prices, I want a quality experience to go along with that. Until that happens (if ever), I'll still have reason to complain.Even if Six Flags truely gets good, it could take a while for that negative perception to be overcome--just ask GM and Ford.
I would agree with that as well, but here's the catch:
When do you bump up the prices? If you wait until the product is fixed then people just have the angle to complain that they got the same quality product previously for the lower prices.
If you do it first, then you got people who complain that the price doesn't match the service.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
But if you raise it now and acclimate people to those prices, things will only be perceived as an even higher value down the road when (if?) you do begin to offer a much better product for the same prices you offered the crappy one at. (either that or you can try to raise prices even further by citing the fact that you do indeed now offer a superior product compared to before)
Win/win if you ask me. (which you didn't :) )
Enthusiasts will, but who cares? We don't represent a large number of customers anyway. Ask most common people and they'll wonder why some of you are making a bigger deal out of something that is so simple for them.
I would expect to pay higher prices at CP than at KW but not as much as at a Six Flags park. Add to that the better overall operations at CP and I am less likely to object to their food pricing. I would probably end up spending as much or more here on food and drink than at KW. After all, something has to pay for those big B&Ms and Intamens and their admission price is quite low for such a big park.
CP also quietly raised many of those prices (like the gate) for this season.
I should also point out that you can still visit the most expensive SF park for less than CP. (both gate and SP prices - and SF offers the badass parking pass deal good chainwide)
Flat out - the difference in overall cost to either park is negligible. I'm guessing within $50 for a family of 4 assuming you did exactly the same things at both parks. As much as $50 might seem like a big number, it's not when divided by 4 people.
And why is CP 'paying for those B&M's and Intamins' okay, but SF 'paying for those B&M's and Intamins' (and the previous leaders love of debt) not?
The bottom line is, Six Flags can place itself among the "higher spectrum" in regards to price because chances are, most people aren't going to drive hundreds of miles to find a cheaper alternative.
This is also the reason, I don't buy into word-of-mouth being a significant factor in the big scheme of things.
Except for the destination parks, amusement parks are marketed at the local and regional level and that defines and limits the level of competition.
I would rest assured that are not going to be any Six Flags parks in Ohio or Pennsylvania in the foreseeable future even if they overcome the debt problem.
As for CP raising prices, a lot of parks did this for 2007. SF didnt raise their full price admission but they did raise some of their online ticket prices.
The one place where Six Flags is still a bargain is with those season passes. The savings there can pay for a lot of Flashpasses and overpriced food. But for the once a year visitor, Six Flags just doesn't do well in terms of value.
. *** Edited 1/23/2007 9:20:33 PM UTC by Arthur Bahl***
Arthur Bahl
Brian Noble said:
I do the same thing in some situations. I do my "bulk shopping" at CostCo, not Sam's Club, despite the fact that Sam's is closer and cheaper. Why? CostCo pays their employees a living wage, including health benefits. I spend a few extra dollars, but feel good about it.
Brian, you are my hero. Damn, I wish I had paid attention to this thread a few pages ago.
I'm likely backtracking a little bit here but I feel I have to toss something into this conversation. I have no problem with companies trying to make money- after all, that IS the nature of business. But there is a big difference between paying what is fair and being robbed blind.
Maybe Six Flags makes more money on selling $10 worth of food than Knoebels makes on $20. That's an excellent point, and there's likely a hell of a lot of truth in that. But if I go to Six Flags and spend $20 for a hot dog, fries and a soda filled with ice, I'm going to feel cheated and ripped off... and that's before the people behind the counter made me feel as though I was bothering them. If I go to Knoebels and get a hamburger, chicken fries, a few sodas, ice cream and a funnel cake for $20, I'm going to think I got the best deal in the world. And that all being the case, where am I going to go next time I have another day to kill and a wallet full of twenties? Probably the place where I felt like I got the most for my money, even if the park didn't necessarily get the most from my money. Because in the end, they really are because they convinced me to return and spend again.
While I consider myself a good shopper, there are stores I flat-out refuse to go because of my objections to their business practices. A few years back I was in Florida and felt absolutely miserable on my way from Orlando to Naples. I couldn't breathe because my nose was so stuffy so I finally got off the highway at Fort Myers, passing a Wal-Mart and driving ten minutes down the road to another store so I could buy some nasal spray for a few minutes of relief. Wal-Mart was more convenient and would have been a lot cheaper but even feeling like crap, I couldn't convince myself to give them my business because they truly are the Evil Empire (not the New York Yankees, as many would have you believe). I have no tolerance for a company that pays it's employees so little that they have no money for health care... no tolerance for a company that makes people think it's doing them a favor by lowering prices when they're busy sending their jobs to China.
But I digress ;)
They're even having a tough time in LA competing with Disney and Knott's, and they almost high tailed it outta here as well.
Six Flags and Universal are both living and dying by offering "play pass" options, designed to lure the local customer away from the other two parks. Meanwhile they both raised gate prices to force people into first option, encouraging repeat visits and a higher per-cap.
If the food is pricey and not quality, I will not eat anything there and will leave for something of better value outside the park. If I'm going to spend $10+ on a meal, it better be really good at like a sit-down mexican restaurant with chips & salsa for instance. Otherwise I'd rather go to Subway or Taco Bell (guilty pleasure)I. Unless it's reasonably priced, I will not even buy a soda when I can stop at the drinking fountains all day for free. If I feel the food is reasonably priced, I will splurge and eat/drink whatever I feel like.
Reasonably priced is different for everyone, but for me personally, I have no problem paying $1-$1.50 for a soda or $2 for a delicious Indiana Beach taco. But in most cases, I'd rather take a break from the park and go to Taco Bell for $6, getting a value meal with free refills instead of paying $4 for a large soda (with a lot of ice) and $8 for a mediocre hamburger and soggy french fries or bland Papa John's pizza.
Not quite the same thing as food, but If I see a t-shirt or hat I like and it's only $10-$12 or so, I may buy it. But if it's much over that, I will not buy it.
AV Matt
Long live the Big Bad Wolf
While the prevailing argument seems to be that families are hurt most by these prices, I'd argue that families are most likely to be used to paying high prices.
Matt's comment about drawing the line at $10 as far as expectations for a good meal really stuck with me. In my mind going out to eat is bare minimum $50 and that's if everyone cuts corners and we go somewhere cheap.
Just this past weekend we stopped by Olive Garden on a whim. (decidedly middle-of-the-road chain restaraunt). We got drinks, an appetizer, entrees (my son ordered frm the kiddie menu, my daughter from the adult) and dessert. No one got anything particularly extravagant and the total came to just shy of $75 (it was $74 and change) and when you add a tip it ends up in the range of $90.
$90 for a pathetically average meal at a pathetically average chain restaraunt for a family of four. Read it again.
Suddenly, $8 for the kids to split a funnel cake isn't that scary. $7 for a refillable cup with $2 refills becomes a serious value. Burgers and fries for four at $12 a head is less than $50. Not too shabby.
Those $12 shirts - well, I have two kids and they each get one. That's $24 in my world and honestly the a $17 shirt making the total $34 just doesn't make a lick of difference in the long run.
$3 games...well if we all want to get in on it and have a little fun, that tiny plush animal we won cost us $12, but we laughed while playing.
$15 parking sucks, but it added less than $4 per person to the cost of our day. Online tickets for $40 instead of the 'listed' price of $60. Guess what? We just 'saved' $80!
I guess I'm coming back to perceived value, but I think what I'm saying is that it cuts both ways. What the solo enthusiast might perceive as "nickel and diming", I perceive (as a family of four) as the same old cost of having a family of four.
I really think that the average family already knows that it costs a lot to do anything and has long ago given in to that fact, while the solo visitor is going to be more taken by the pricing...and the traveling enthusiast even more so.
But if I go to Six Flags and spend $20 for a hot dog, fries and a soda filled with ice, I'm going to feel cheated and ripped off... and that's before the people behind the counter made me feel as though I was bothering them. If I go to Knoebels and get a hamburger, chicken fries, a few sodas, ice cream and a funnel cake for $20, I'm going to think I got the best deal in the world.
Yeah, but what if you had $20 and only wanted the hotdog, fries and drink. I still don't buy the idea that someone is going to score a few extra drinks, ice cream and a funnel cake just because they can.
Since we're using Knoebel's as an example (and let me reiterate that I'm not picking or pointing fingers, just sticking with the example) look at it this way.
Do you really think Knoebel's could get their customer base to pay SF prices? Of course not. They're not going to get $40 at the gate for what they have available, they're not going to get $4 a drink - and they know it. In that sense they've done the exact same thing SF has and identified their potential customer...the value seeker. Look at the new home page for their site:
- A graphic that proclaims, "America's Largest Free Admission Park"
- The word "FREE" (in all caps) four times on the page
- "...your day of fun won't break the bank"
It's aiming squarely for a certain type of customer...the same way we suspect SF is trying to attract a certain type of customer.
I have a hard time seeing any difference on that front.
The thing is, I suspect if SFGAdv and Knoebels were right next door to each other that the attendance numbers would stay in ratio. Why?
Some (most?) people just want more. That's doesn't necessarily mean more for your money. I've said it a million times. I find the level of things to do at a SF park, combined with the 'escape' of a large theme park more appealing than the lesser prices, less to do, walking-through-the-woods-on-gravel-paths offering. I lived in Allentown for 2 years. In that time I practically lived at Dorney (locals stay local) and visited SFGAdv 4 times as often as Knoebels (bigger is better mentality?).
Yeah, that's just me - but how do you explain that those parks are all similar drives from NYC and Philly and that Allentown (the thrid largest city in PA) is home to Dorney and centrally located and still SFGAdv outdraws both parks combined?
Second in attendance? Dorney - the other high-priced 'corporate' park.
All it says to me (and this is based those on actual numbers, not speculating on who would do what, mind you) is that price doesn't affect where people visit nearly as much as the other factors do. Seems like people just accept the cost and adjust accordingly.
Edit - typos :(
*** Edited 1/23/2007 10:50:32 PM UTC by Lord Gonchar***
Regular Joe thinks, "SFGadv" has 14 rollercoasters, well known costumed characters, will take twice as long to walk through as most parks, of course they're going to charge more".
Once again it's *perceived* value, and that isn't always as logical as enthusiasts like to believe.
Heck, George W Bush is a perceived value to a lot of folks. ;)
By the way, if the park offered that exact same "nice meal", I would have no problem paying them $5 for it; maybe even a couple extra bucks for the convenience. But I'm also not going to want to spend that much money for a meal on every park visit when I can go elsewhere close by and get my $5 Taco Bell fix, $6 Arby's fix or $8 Subway fix. IMO, the $5 Taco Bell value meal is way tastier than most theme park food.
AV Matt
Long live the Big Bad Wolf
AV Matt
Long live the Big Bad Wolf
Perhaps the Gonch family lives a little on the lavish side.
Heh. I wish. Do the math - $75 divided by 4 people = $18.75 per person for drinks, appetizer, entree and dessert. (and then the tip on top of that)
Suddenly, it's really not a bad deal. Which is exactly my point. The single person thinks, "$10 or $15 bucks for a decent meal" - the family thinks, "If we want to eat at a restaraunt (even Olive Garden) we're looking at $75. God forbid, we head somewhere nice or order decent steaks.
The perception is very different.
But I'm also not going to want to spend that much money for a meal on every park visit when I can go elsewhere close by and get my $5 Taco Bell fix, $6 Arby's fix or $8 Subway fix. IMO, the $5 Taco Bell value meal is way tastier than most theme park food.
I agree as long as we're in terms of quality. But that convenience is another perk of the 'solo enthusiast'. Heading out is a skip and a jump and back. The family has to convince the kids to leave the park, drag the kids and potentially all the dumb little things you keep with you when you have kids of various ages, load up the minivan, head out into traffic with kids whining about being hungry, find a place to eat, eat, and reverse the process with the kids whining about wanting to get back to the park.
Or they could just pay a few extra bucks and stay put. I think most parents would sacrifice a few dollars in the name of convenience and sanity.
However, I don't think it's justified to charge unreasonable prices for bad food. The quality should match the price IMO.
In a perfect world, yes. But aside from the usual suspects - a handful of parks - who really has particularly decent food? Most parks have the same processed, reheated crap across the board. The kind of stuff that makes McDonald's look good in comparison. And they ALL overcharge for it...some just more than others. If the food quality was of much concern, I'd be somewhere else everytime, regardless of price.
For me, 97 percent of it is still over-priced, crappy, fatty food that I eat because I know it's not something I do everyday, and it's convenient.
Acoustic Viscosity said:
To me $90 for dinner for four is excessive.
Wow! Just wow! I wouldnt blink twice at dropping $90 for dinner for 4. Hell, I've many times dropped that much for dinner for two (And we wont even *talk* about how much Disney's Victoria's and Albert's was ;)). Heck, today's lunch for 2 was $35 (including tax/tip) and there was no appetizer dessert. Double it to get to four and you're @ $70. You toss in another five bucks per person for dessert/salad and there's your easy $90. And this was @ Ruby Tuesday. We didnt order anything extravagant. I got a soup/sandwhich combo and my co-worker got a grilled chicken something and a couple of iced teas. That's just the cost of eating out!
If you want to make the case that folks should dine out less, I'd tend to agree with you. But to find $90 for 4 ppl "excessive" is just something I cant get with. Unless you're getting gyros from the local carry out, I dont see where you go to spend significantly less. Granted, I live/work in an expesive area (DC metro) and I am absolutely upper-middle class by income (of course it doesnt go as far as you'd think), but I just see that as a price you have to pay to play.
BTW: What sit down places do you frequent? If you're eating for less than Olive Garden/Ruby Tuesday, I'd like to know those places.
GL is "value priced" ar far as admission is concerned and is one of the least expensive mid-sized parks according to this criterion. Many people, however thing of it as a "dumbed down" Cedar Point and go off to the bigger park. Those that go there do so largely for the waterpark/rides for one price deal or just for the H2O.
Time is precious and people often want to make the most of it. A day at CP offers bigger thrills overall than a day at GL.
Even KW benefits from this mentality. KW is the highest priced of the six parks in western PA but it has by far the most to offer so it draws something like three times the attendance of the next most attended of these parks.
The combination of greater attendance and higher admission prices compounds to the point that the bigger parks can offer rides much more expensive than smaller parks can. KW has a hypercoaster but who could imagine one at DelGrossos or Waldameer. Waldameer in turn is building a big woodie that would be out of the question at Lakemont or Conneaut Lake (even if the latter had no debt).
It will be interesting to see how KW changes if that road ever gets built and KW grows into a major park comparable to HP or SFNE. I would expect the full admission prices to go up into the upper 30s (based upon current dollars) but I would not expect Six Flags or even CP food prices. Good, reasonably priced park food is a big draw at this park as are the picnic facilities. Free parking might go but the price for parking would be fairly reasonable. Most games would probably be $2 instead of $1. KW would want to avoid alienating those lower income patrons that contribute to their attendance levels and that manage make that day at the park their one big getaway of the year. They're happy to get that $20 from them at a School picnic and would keep the price around $25 for them (current dollars) after the growth. Season passes might finally be introduced but would be priced relatively high to minimize the use of the park as a babysitting service or a teen hangout. The senior age would be raised from 55 to 60 because too many upper 50s are getting too much of a deal--low prices even while they are still fit and willing to ride the coasters and other thrill rides.
Even with the higher prices, KW would be perceived as a great value because of the better ride selection and more top-notch coasters.
Personally, I plan to go to Waldameer when they add Ravine Flyer II, even though this will probably add a significant amount to the POP price. It's a matter of what you get for the price rather than the price itself.
I don't gripe about the admission prices charged by the big parks. The rides and other attractions justify the prices charged. It's just that grossly overpriced food detracts from the overall park experience.
Arthur Bahl
AV Matt
Long live the Big Bad Wolf
You must be logged in to post
