Six Flags Announces Nation's Best Theme Park VIP Program
Secondly how much more are you spending than a regular day at the park? Obviously most of us aren't paying that much at a park but once you calculate two nice meals, preffered parking, admission to the park, QBot, park tour, midway games, etc....
The list really goes on and on. I think this is something I might try when I only have one day at a park. *** Edited 3/22/2007 4:40:13 AM UTC by Medusa Man***
To people who say that VQing is "cutting in line" or "taking away from the experience" of others who aren't paying for it. It's a misconception with which you have managed to dilude yourself. Here's why:
Everyone - Qbot or not - is in line. Some people just aren't physically in line. I'm going to make up numbers just to keep them small. Let's say for the sake of argument there's a ride that seats 20 riders, with a cycle time of 2 minutes between dispatches. Let's say there are exactly 100 people in front of you physically in line. You think there's a 10 minute wait. What you don't SEE in front of you are 100 VQers who have Qed that ride BEFORE you got in line. In reality, you're waiting behind 200 people. You just can't see the other 100. So when they come up the exit/merge point, they're not cutting in front of you - they've been waiting (approximately) the same amount of time you have. They just haven't been standing in cattle chutes. They're not linejumping - they're just appearing in their spot in line that was being held by a technological device. It's not just someone claiming they were in line -- there is technological PROOF that they were in fact there first.
It's like going to the deli - you see 2 people and figure it won't be long so you take a number "F34" - just then someone behind the counter calls out "F25" and someone dashes around the corner from the next aisle over and proceeds to give their order. They were using the time shopping in the next aisle while the piece of paper effectively saved her spot in line to save THEIR time. Instead of waiting in line and THEN shopping, they were able to get some shopping done until their reservation was called. They didn't make you wait any longer. It might have been longer THAN YOU WERE EXPECTING WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE SIZE OF THE LINE but it wasn't any longer than you would have waited if there were just a queue like at the bank with no numbers to "hold" spaces in line.
When you say it takes 2 hours to ride something that you previously used to wait 1 hour for... did you ever stop to think that the ride and/or park is just twice as popular with close to twice as many people visiting?
There aren't many people who will Q 1 ride and go ride another (at least not a major ride.. maybe a flat) since there is a risk of losing your reservation if you miss it by too much. Of the 2 times I used Lo-Q at Great Adventure, the one time I did this (Qed a ride and then stood in line anyway - and the estimated wait times were almost always spot on! Every time I was walking down the exit ramp while it would go off that my reservation was ready, so I would scan it and get back on that ride).
The other time I took advantage of the extra money I had spent and just enjoyed myself without having to stand all day. I would Q a ride, then go eat food someplace sit-down, then ride. Q another, then go to the bathroom and maybe ride a flat, then the coaster. Q another, then just sit on a bench (in the shade) by the entrance watching the hot girls walk by and get in line until my reservation came up, etc. For me, it was about not standing in line sandwiched between the whiny valley girl who feels the need to complain at the top of her lungs over a cell phone about everything I happen to hold dear and the fat-a** chain smoker who doubled up on the beans at the Taco Bell drive through on the way to the park and doesn't believe in deoderant or breath mints.
But as was said before, it's a case of the haves vs. the have-nots with a little bit of stubbornness (sp?) thrown in.
Granted, the VIP program *IS* just cutting to the front of the line with no wait at all, but ironically most who have a problem with Lo-Q don't seem to have a problem with VIP because they feel it won't be utilized near as much.
In the case of virtual queuing, you don't know how close you are to your turn, because you don't see all the other folks who are "queued" for the ride, and you don't have your "number" called like the virtually-queued folks do.
This can definitely upset people waiting in the regular line who don't realize this, and it appears that the flash pass people are cutting the line.
Maybe they should implement electronic signs throughout the regular queue and at the beginning stating how long the wait is and how many people are virtually queued?
I'm still pretty much against the whole system--and trust me, I could afford a flash pass if I wanted to get one.
coastin' since 1985
Maybe this wouldn't bother me so much if parks put a little money into figuring out how long the lines actually are and posted accurate numbers. How about they take come of that money that they make from the VIPers and put it into computer software that takes into account ride capacity, people physically waiting in line and people virtually waiting in line and tell non-VIPers how long their wait will be based upon all of that? That way people without Qbots and VIP passes won't feel like they're getting misled the same way that Gonch feels that he's being misled by "free parking"?
But Gold-bot is like going up to the deli and the next number to be taken should be F34, but instead you get F19.
Regular Q-bot is not even close to line cutting. However, it can result in longer lines if people virtually queue for one ride, then physically queue for another. (or even the same ride, which is a great way to double up on rides :) )
Dude, quiet with that kind of reasonable talk.
Unfortunately, I got sucked in on the other thread. So much for reasonable.
"It's not fair!" :)
*** Edited 3/22/2007 5:04:43 PM UTC by Brian Noble***
It's entirely fair---everyone has the same opportunity to decide how best to spend the resources available to them. You have exactly the same opportunity to buy a flashpass as the next guy. You may decide that it's not worth it to you. The other guy may decide differently. The fact that you make different decisions isn't "unfair", it's just different valuations of the same opportunity. In short, you value your $10 more than your time. He values his time more than his $10.Now, if your fundamental complaint is that some people have more money than others, well, yes, you are entirely correct. The way I value an hour of my family's time is probably somewhat different from most, but in my case, it's fairly easy---both my wife and I have consulting businesses where we bill clients directly for time, and so I know, *precisely*, what an hour of my family's time is worth.
As an example: it's almost never worth it to me to fly home from vacation on a Monday rather than a Sunday to save money on airfare, because even ignoring the extra hotel night, we lose more money in lost income than we save in reduced airfare. Others have different constraints; the savings in airfare is greater than any lost income. This could be because they get a salary, and the extra day costs only a vacation day, and not real dollars. Or, it could be because the lost income is less than the saved air fare.
Another example: most cities have higher property tax rates than the surrounding suburbs. But, most jobs are in the cities, so commute costs from the suburbs are higher. If you have a very nice, expensive house, you save more by paying taxes in the suburbs than you spend in commute costs. If your home is more modest, you save more by cutting commute time at a higher property tax cost. Is it unfair that the taxes are different in the city than in the suburbs? No. If anything, the unfairness is that some people can afford McMansions, and others can't.
The bad news is: different people have different levels of discretionary income, and that's just the way the world works. If a theme park can make more money by exploiting this fact, then they absolutely will do so, and wishing that they would not is like hoping the earth will stop spinning. As the pay-to-cut systems spread, it would appear that more and more park operators have decided that, yes, they do in fact make more money this way.
They could be wrong, and you could be right---this could drive away so many guests that they end up losing money. But, so far, I am not aware of *any* park that had a pay-to-cut system and got rid of it. Universal Orlando got rid of their free system, and now has only a paid version---paid either in cash, or indirectly by staying in their high-dollar hotels. Cedar Point got rid of its free system. Disney parks have retained their free system, but TWDC has patents on versions that reward higher levels of guest spending with better access. Six Flags parks that had them have retained their paid systems. Dollywood is expanding theirs.
You could be right, and Universal, Six Flags, and Dollywood could all be wrong. If I were a betting man, I know where I'd put my money.
But when it comes to services that people have traditionally paid for, I'm not okay with the system. I don't think that people should be able to walk into a grocery store and pay more money to get checked out faster. I don't think people should be able to pay a rental car company more money to jump ahead of people that have been waiting patiently in line. And I don't think that people should be able to buy more expensive theme park tickets to be able to get rid of lines- something that has been a part of the amusement park since the dawn of the amusement industry.
Why do I have an issue with paying more money for services that people pay for? Because by providing people with the option to pay for more service, it's a strong possibility that, in order to convince people that they should spend for more, they will get less for what they once paid. Most companies are greedy, and once they realize that a few suckers are willing to pay more, they'll find a way to get others to think the same way.
Consider this: You pay $100/night for a hotel room. That normally includes everything- parking, bed linens, electricity, etc. Imagine that some crafty hotel owner comes up with a plan to charge people $500/night for a "VIP" experience that includes everything plus mints on the pillows, a free bottle of wine and twice a day maid service, and in an attempt to convince everyone that they should buy the service, he starts charging extra for the things that were once included: parking is extra, bed linens include sheets but not comforters and electricity is limited to a certain wattage. If people want what they once got for $100/night, they either have to pay extra or they have to upgrade to a VIP room package. Is that fair? It doesn't sound fair to me.
I view numerous things as off-limits, just because I think everyone is entitled to them. A place in line? That, to me, is something that no one has a right to take away from you, regardless of how much someone else is paying. Lines, to me, are a service, and it's one of those services that should be for everyone without prejudice.
But I see I'm pretty much alone in fighting for what I believe is mine...
*** Edited 3/22/2007 8:42:55 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***
In fact, I'd argue that pay-per-ride was vastly more "fair" than all-people-equal. Someone who only wants to ride a few things and enjoy the atmosphere is forced to pay just as much as the person power-riding the big, expensive-to-operate roller coasters. Of course, in the present POP admission world, coaster enthusiasts benefit---we are in effect subsidized by the parents with young kids who paid $43 to watch their whipper-snappers go around on the kiddie rides all day. However, no one here really complains about it much, because we all are on the positive side of that particular imbalance. Now that we are expected to pay up or wait a little longer, we get all high and mighty about principles.
As far as I can tell, differential pricing is a RETURN to the days of "services that people have traditionally paid for," not a departure from them.
rablat5 said:
Maybe they should implement electronic signs throughout the regular queue and at the beginning stating how long the wait is and how many people are virtually queued?
Excellent idea! (and I mean that seriously!)
I think I mentioned this elsewhere (if not I wanted to :) ) but here's my vision for a perfect world:
The only queue system is a virtual one. Everyone has a Qbot, and the actual lines are replaced by a shaded patio. You could either wait on that patio (with benches galore) or go elsewhere. When you get close to the beginning of the line, it buzzes you, and you go wait in a line that's about 5-10 minutes long (pretty much in the coaster's station). The Qbot would show you how many people are queued in front of you, and the estimated time remaining (the people in front of you would be updated realtime)
Did we complain about the "unfairness" of it all when season passes were invented, and the day guests began subsidizing the frequent visitors?
No. We laughed all the way to the bank.
The only difference between moving from pay-per-ride to POP, moving from daily admission to season passes, and moving from universal queuing to pay-to-cut, is that in one case, enthusiasts don't make out like bandits.
Guess which one we complain about? *** Edited 3/22/2007 9:23:51 PM UTC by Brian Noble***
Hersheypark was originally built for the factory workers. I doubt steel company executives and managers actually rode trolleys, to Kennywood or anywhere. And the Upper West Side crowd headed in the opposite direction from the millions crammed in down at Coney. Places like Geauga and numerous others drew their crowds from the union picnics and the ethnic days, while the upper class assimilated.
One exception may have been the Mauch Chunk railroad which was all the rage among wealthier vacationers-- even Thomas Edison rode it. But you can bet not many people living in and around Mauch Chunk working for the mines and railroads travelled on vacations at all. Then again, look which attraction I mentioned closed and which ones are still open.
Now we get pseudo-celebrities like Paris Hilton riding Tatsu with a thousand reporters watching her every facial expression. And it's cool for the upper class to hit up theme parks as long as they don't actually have to stand in line near anyone not in their social strata.
Put another way: next time you are in a park, count the mullets you see, and the polo shirts. The former will outnumber the latter by two orders of magnitude.
My point remains: the main shifts in *cost* over the past several decades have favored enthusiasts at the expense of others. No one complained then. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's the end of the world as we know it.
Hersheypark was originally built for the factory workers. I doubt steel company executives and managers actually rode trolleys, to Kennywood or anywhere. And the Upper West Side crowd headed in the opposite direction from the millions crammed in down at Coney. Places like Geauga and numerous others drew their crowds from the union picnics and the ethnic days, while the upper class assimilated.
I'd go as far as to say the newer, more modern corporate parks weren't created with that mindset in the first place.
They're more the product of the interstate system and the suburbanization of things. They're not tied to a local community.
They were meant to attract a comfortable, middle class clientele who liked to hop in the family sedan and ride the highway to a destination and spend.
You must be logged in to post
