Six Flags Announces Nation's Best Theme Park VIP Program
Lord Gonchar said:
Whether you find it unfortunate or not, when doing business (and it is the amusement industry) - money is the goal. If the goal is goodwill to all - that's charity.
And the best businesses out there will do the former while convincing you they're really doing the latter.
(I'll refrain from pointing fingers, but all those small parks people mention as the better alternatives to SF are guilty ;) )
Now, how do I make money off these "instincts"
It's called the futures market...
I actually don't know whether it is good business or not. However, with only one exception, the people who make the decisions seem to think it is.
Almost all of the parks that had differential access to attractions based on guest spending (directly or indirectly) have kept it (all of the Six Flags parks with flashpass). One park has adopted it (Dollywood), and one chain eliminated their free version and retained their revenue-based versions (Universal).
The exception, strangely enough, is the money-hungry Mouse. Anaheim had it, and dropped it (the deal where AAA/WDTC packages in Disney-owned hotels got you uber-fastpasses.) On the other hand, you could argue that the hard-ticket after-hours parties in Florida fall into this category; they are limited in sales, and so the lines are usually pretty short. But, an AP or "regular" ticket won't get you in; you've got to buy a separate ticket to go. This one is pretty dodgy though, because the parties are arguably a fair value, and you don't need regular admission to attend---just the party ticket.
Brian Noble said:It's called the futures market...
Now, how do I make money off these "instincts"
Now you and I are both *keenly* aware of the old adage about it taking money to make money...and I like my house too much. ;)
13 Boomerang, 9 SLC, and 8 B-TR clones
Brian Noble said:
Of course, a business' values can impact it's profitability. As an example, which I've offered before, I do not shop at Sam's Club (or, for that matter, WalMart). I gave up my Sam's Club membership, and bought a Costco membership instead. I did this despite the fact that CostCo memberships cost more, their prices for products are higher than they are for the same product at Sam's Club, and CostCo is farther away from me. The reason I did it is that Sam Walton is Satan's Spawn, and his companies are the Devil's Playground.
Wow... in all the debate, we have some common ground. I'm like you- I hate anything and everything related to Sam Walton and Wal-Mart and will go out of my way and spend a lot more money to avoid giving one penny to that drain on American society. I know this really has nothing to do with the topic at hand but I just wanted to let you know that I completely agree with you on this one.
Except that the CEO of a publicly-held company is duty-bound to do EXACTLY THAT. Their ONLY JOB is to maximize shareholder return. To do anything else violates their fiduciary duty, and can land them in court or worse.
That's not entirely true. While a CEO is hired to make a company as profitable as can be, it is a corporation's goal to be a positive impact on society as a whole. That's what leads corporations to make huge donations to other causes- donations that actually decrease profit instead of increasing it. If the task of a corporation and it's CEO was to make as most money as possible, I guarantee you'd see them doing things that would make Sam Walton look like Mother Theresa. The fact that a corporation has to benefit the society in which it does business keeps it from being all about the money and nothing else.
Of course, there are many ways to improve shareholder return that do not necessarily reduce costs to run the business, or increase prices for the customer. For example, paying your employees a little more allows you to hire better people, and provide better service, and that could lead to more profits. Likewise, reducing prices a little bit could attract enough guests to make up for the decrease, and in turn increase profits.
And there is my point. Just because something makes a company a lot of money, does it mean that it's the right thing to do? Suppose 10 regular Six Flags customers get so pissed off by Qbotters "cutting" them in line and vow never to return? Six Flags just lost out on their repeat business. Is the profit to be realized from Qbot sales going to be enough to compensate for the loss of that business? I don't know what the answer is to that question but I have a feeling that, sooner or later, regular customers are going to have an issue with it. While Jeremy made a good point about this sort of thing happening in just about every industry (to some extent), a theme park line is one place where this sort of thing is going to become painfully obvious. I might not mind a cashier being taken from his/her register at Home Depot to deal with a contractor buying lumber in bulk but when I'm in the middle of a never-ending line made possible by poor operations and slow employees, I promise you I'm not going to be as willing to accept someone else getting special treatment, and I'm sure others feel the same way.
Wow... in all the debate, we have some common ground. I'm like you- I hate anything and everything related to Sam Walton and Wal-Mart and will go out of my way and spend a lot more money to avoid giving one penny to that drain on American society.
I'm in on that too.
But in the interest of playing devil's advocate...
I heard or read a statistic that said something along the lines of:
"Wal-Mart has done more for the poor of this country than any corporation ever has. In addition to the jobs it creates, it save the average consumer more than $2000 a year because of the low prices."
Not saying I agree with that. Not even close. But there's always a flip side.
I know and associate with all kinds of people - from those using welfare and government sponsored health care and still not making ends meet to people who own multiple homes, boats, unlimited 'toys' and drive cars worth 6 figures. The most ironic thing I see about the Wal-Mart topic is that it seems like for the most part those people I know who are less fortunate financially like Wal-Mart and those that don't have to worry about their money too much hate it.
Go figure.
It is true that the people shopping there are saving some coin. That can make the difference between not making ends meet, and having a few bucks left over at the end of the month. But, at what societal cost? When the SamsMart employees or their children get sick, guess who picks up the tab? When those employess have nothing other than social security to retire on (and that's not anywhere close to enough), guess who picks up the tab? Etc. and so forth. The tab is picked up by you, me, and the fellow behind the tree.
Walmart is a classic example of something that's locally optimal for an individual consumer, but globally bad for society. I'm not entirely convinced that it's a net negative, but I'd be willing to bet a donut on it. So, I shop at costco instead, where the employees get health benefits and a living wage.
Just because something makes a company a lot of money, does it mean that it's the right thing to do? Suppose 10 regular Six Flags customers get so pissed off by Qbotters "cutting" them in line and vow never to return? Six Flags just lost out on their repeat business. Is the profit to be realized from Qbot sales going to be enough to compensate for the loss of that business?
Well, this is the right question---we now agree on the definition of "right thing". It's the right thing if the people who get annoyed are more than made up for by those who pay up. It's the wrong thing otherwise.
I don't know the answer. So far, three separate park operators say "yes"---Six Flags, Dollywood, and Universal. One operator has given mixed signals: Disney dropped their Anaheim tie-in between fastpass and resort packages, but WDI has also patented even more clever ways of tying guest spending to fastpass access. Who knows what they are going to do?
That means, to continue supplying the same product, you have to take less money. Despite inflation. You can be more efficient, but that can only go so far. You can't even price differently between WalMart and, say, Target, because the consumers won't buy your pickles at Target for 5 cents more a jar if they can buy them at WalMart for less. Pretty soon, you have to pay your own people less, or scale back your business, and leave your own people out of a job too. Pretty soon, the WalMart supplier has a bunch of employees that used to be able to afford CostCo, and now have to shop at Sam's Club.
It's like the Company Store meets Viral Marketing. It's ingenious. I wish I'd thought of it first, but as I didn't, I declare it evil instead.
*** Edited 3/29/2007 3:00:00 AM UTC by Brian Noble***
Just throwing the other side out there.
Might be a good week to watch Penn & Teller ;)
(that's Thursday night at 10pm)
But on the Sam's Club front - the nearest Costco is 35 miles away. I can see Sam's from the upstairs windows in the back of the house. I miss Costco. :(
As much as I'd like to stick to my guns, I find myself in the Wally World more than I'd like. I'm grateful that a new supermarket is opening up before the end of the year.
Lord Gonchar said:
I heard or read a statistic that said something along the lines of:"Wal-Mart has done more for the poor of this country than any corporation ever has. In addition to the jobs it creates, it save the average consumer more than $2000 a year because of the low prices."
Interesting quote. Perhaps Wal-Mart has done more for the poor of this country than any corporation ever has, but what Wal-Mart fails to acknowledge that they put a lot of those people in poverty in the first place. By forcing prices lower and lower, jobs were sent overseas, and once those jobs disappeared, the people that used to be employed by American factories had no choice but to seek employment by Wal-Mart. I'm not if those people are blind to the big picture or just suck up and deal, but I always find it ironic when Wal-Mart claims to be so good for the people of this country when their business practices are the number one reason why so many people are out of work. Yeah, they're not the only company forcing production overseas but as this country's largest corporation, they're more responsible for the damage done than any other corporation.
I know what you're talking about, Brian. The company I work for supplies material to companies that sell product at Wal-Mart and they are miserable people to deal with. If you don't meet their unreasonable demands, you're sh*t out of luck, and when Wal-Mart has a monopoly in many markets (especially the south and mid-west), you're forced to put up with it or face the prospect of losing a ton of business.
And this is where terms like "unfair" and "not right" come into play. I understand that Wal-Mart, as a corporation, needs to make a huge profit. But look at how that profit is realized! Suppliers are squeezed so tight, they have no choice but to send jobs overseas to China and India. Despite making something like $6 billion/year, most employees make so little they can't afford to pay their own health insurance, forcing the government (and therefore other taxpayers) to pick up the tab. Wal-Mart moves into towns, obliterates all locally-owned businesses and then packs up and moves down the road, leaving a ghost town in its wake. And on top of all that, it has the nerve to act like a savior to all the people that it forced into poverty through all of that.
Wal-Mart is making a ton of money, yet look at how it accomplishes that. Don't get me wrong- I'm not comparing Six Flags to Wal-Mart- all I am trying to do is illustrate there are right ways and wrong ways to make a profit. It's not as simple as black and white.
*** Edited 3/29/2007 3:21:22 AM UTC by Rob Ascough***
Lord Gonchar said:Q-bot offers more, offers more freedom and offers it to all who want to take that opportunity.
if you're wasting money on amusement parks in the first place then wasting a little more shouldn't be an issue ;) )
You make it sound like money grows on trees and if someone wants something, all they have to do is buy it. Q-Bot doesn't offer their services to "all" who want to take the opportunity, it offers it to all who can afford it.
Lord Gonchar said:I'm not so sure what's so confusing about the concept that even if I want to participate in the free system I may not be able to, but with the pay system I always have the opportunity in front of me if I so choose.
You do not have the opportunity to do so if you can only afford to park, pay for admission, and get a meal while at the park, do you?
Brian Noble said:That's been my argument all along. It's not more fair, because they are both completely fair...
...Or both completely NOT fair. Line cutting, except for the very exclusive VIP, was unheard of before Fastpass and Lo-Q.
Brian Noble said:
...the hard-ticket after-hours parties in Florida...are limited in sales, and so the lines are usually pretty short. But, an AP or "regular" ticket won't get you in; you've got to buy a separate ticket to go. This one is pretty dodgy though, because the parties are arguably a fair value, and you don't need regular admission to attend---just the party ticket.
This is the only fair and honest system I recognize. It doesn't do anything to devalue a persons admission who attended the park before the event.
Ajrides said:
...for every one person against flashpass there is a thousand for it which is apparent as they are making millions of dollars.
The Thousands of people who seem to be for it either:
1) do not understand how it actually works and think that somehow it magically make ride capacity better.
2) or they do understand how it works and see it as the only way to prevent people from cutting in front of them.
3) and/or sees it as the only way to enjoy the park without having to deal with being on the butt-end of the deal.
Rob Ascough said:Wal-Mart is making a ton of money, yet look at how it accomplishes that. Don't get me wrong- I'm not comparing Six Flags to Wal-Mart- all I am trying to do is illustrate there are right ways and wrong ways to make a profit. It's not as simple as black and white.
Although I dislike Wal-Mart, I have had to shop there because of the extremely low wage I made at Universal Studios. When I lived in Orlando, I remember after paying bills one time I only had $20 to buy 2 weeks of groceries. I didn't enjoy shopping that day.
The greed of a business only thinking about profit and nothing else is a terrible strain on people, weather it be unfair pricing structures (like Q-Bot), or ultra low wages for hard, honest work.
I stand by my comments that you quoted and still say the system is available to all. Whether you can or will partake is your decision. The best way I can put it is - Six Flags isn't exactly a inexpensive place to visit in the first place. If that line is too fine, maybe it's not a smart idea to be walking it in the first place?
There are two types of people in the world. People who like coasters and idiots.
www.freewebs.com/alexibrahim (new forums have been added)
rollergator said:
millrace said:That's a really poor way of looking at it. Because something is profitable, doesn't automatically mean it is good.Good? Even a liberal wacko such as myself sees that as WAY down on the list of things I can *expect* from a business. Note that I didn't use the word "want".
You might be misunderstanding me. I am/was making a value judgement on a business. Business, such as it is, has no capacity for good or bad. It can only serve to generate a profit. People (and laws) are there to steer it according to notions of good or bad. And I'm not expecting a business to be "good" (based on my values), but I'm not going to call it "good" just because it is profitable.
I take exception to radical corporate libertarianism that assumes that unending profits at any cost is always "good" in all senses of the word. I am not Six Flags, therefore, I do not care what is good for Six Flags, I care about what is good for me and good for society. That's all I meant.
Oh, and I believe that buying a fast pass or whatever is a foolish waste of money. Others may feel differently. :)
*** Edited 3/29/2007 12:39:54 PM UTC by millrace***
You must be logged in to post
