Six Flags Announces Nation's Best Theme Park VIP Program

That's probably the case in theory, but I don't think the majority of Six Flags visitors are upper middle class, and getting the current regular middle class people to upgrade- or convincing the lower upper class to visit- isn't going to work.

There is something to be said for a company sticking with what it knows. Six Flags has had the same guests for years, but in ever-decreasing numbers. Instead of trying to attract a new crowd, why not try to better satisfy the current crowd so they show up in greater numbers?

That conspiracy theory does make sense. Nintendo originally said it would be able to satisfy demand by Christmas, yet here we are three months later and things are no better for those that want a Wii. If Nintendo's fiscal year does begin in April, I imagine there will be a ton of Wiis and DS Lites available in another week or so, especially since killer aps for those system aren't going to be arriving until next fall, unless you count Paper Mario 2.

*** Edited 3/29/2007 8:06:17 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***

---

Brian Noble said:
The kids buy neither the Wii nor the ticket---their yuppie, SUV-driving, chardonnay-swilling parents do. I think the argument here is that Six Flags is trying hard to appeal more to the Benz set. Sort of like why people rob banks: that's where the money is.

---

Chardonnay and Merlot are passe! All the reall cool kids are drinking Gerwurztraminer and Petite Sirah.

But I think you all are aiming to high. SFI isnt after the top 1%, but perhaps in the top 5 - 20% (91K - 166K 2005 household income). There arer over 20million households sporting this number. As this is where I, and most of my friends/co-workers live, I can assure you that we aren't the uber-wealthy that you all seem to think that SFI wants as guests.

But I'll tell you what we *are*. We are the ones who can and (sometimes stupidly) will buy our kids the latest pair of LeBron's. We are the type more likely to have an Xbox 360 for ourselves *and* a Wii for the kids. We're the type that owns a house that, for whatever reason, always has a toliet that's clogged up, a dishwasher on the blink, and a deck that needs to be stained. We work so long and hard (usually you need two incomes to hit those #'s) that many times we are too tired or to late to cook, so we'll just grab a pizza on the way home.

We also have disposable income. We dont always get to take vacations, but when we do, we feel the desire for some of the finer things. Whether that be a day spa, a "Keys to the Kingdom Tour", or dinner at a fancy restaurant. And we can, not because we're uber rich, but because we *do* have disposable income.

That is the market that practically *every* industry wants to court: those who have 'some' money and arent afraid to spend it!
lata, jeremy
--who learned a lot last year in Napa/Sonoma

Yawn.....

Don't forget Chianti, Jeremy.

You're absolutely right... Six Flags is targeting people like us (although I have a 360 & a Wii for myself!)... people that aren't technically wealthy but have enough money to play around with. Which begs the question, are people like you and I going to go for Six Flags "upgrades", or do we want to see positive changes for guests that are paying what they've been paying (relative to inflation) for years? I know what I'd prefer so I can save that extra money for another vacation or some more Wii games.

---

There is something to be said for a company sticking with what it knows. Six Flags has had the same guests for years, but in ever-decreasing numbers. Instead of trying to attract a new crowd, why not try to better satisfy the current crowd so they show up in greater numbers?

---

Because if it wasn't working before, then why stick with it? We could argue that operations and service suck, but is that all of it? I don't claim to know.

The old way of thinking is exactly what Shapiro spoke about at IAAPA and the basic idea seemed to me to be (my paraphrasing) - "Look, you guys are doing business the way you have for way too long. The world is ready to pass you by. It's time to change the way we approach things there is still plenty of growth to be had. Wake up or fall behind."

I think that speaking engagement showed Shapiro's outlook more than anything. He wants to change things. It may have been good the way it was (and in SF's case it wasn't), but it could be even better the new way.

Sometimes 'good enough' isn't good enough. :)

---

Rob Ascough said:
You're absolutely right... Six Flags is targeting people like us (although I have a 360 & a Wii for myself!)... people that aren't technically wealthy but have enough money to play around with.

---

Hey! Isn't that what I said!? :)

But it was working before. Up until the mid- to late-90's, I think the majority of Six Flags parks were very successful. It's not the market that changed, it's the way that Six Flags went about taking care of the market that gave them their business. In my eyes, this is Six Flags admitting that they no longer know how to take care of the customers they once had, so instead they'll go after new customers. That doesn't make a lot of sense. Like I said, you're selling steaks to vegans- do people with a ton of money (the kind of money that can afford VIP tickets for a family of four) want to go to Six Flags or do they want to go on a cruise? And do people like us with a little disposable income want to blow that kind of money ($1000) on a day at a theme park when we could get so much more for it? Somehow I doubt that.

---

SFI isnt after the top 1%, but perhaps in the top 5 - 20% (91K - 166K 2005 household income).

---

Sounds about right to me. Basically, the folks that might not be able to drop $6K every year on the Mouse, but *can* drop $500 for a day visit to SF once or twice a year.

And, don't discount the $1000 idea---it's *just* inside the ballpark for "could afford it", and it's got the appeal of being something that's very exclusive.

Rob: as long as you remember to pronounce it key-AHN-tee and not key-ANNE-tee (damn you Dr. Lecter...)

And my whole point is that they are *not* selling steaks to vegans. If anything, keeping with a food analogy, they are attempting to sell gourmet burgers to the ribeye crowd. And, quite frankly, people in our income range *do* blow that kind of money on a trip to an amusement park. When us non-locals go for a Disney vacation, we really are talking in those terms of cash. Sure, we're sleeping in someone else's bed and paying someone else to cook our meals, but at the end of the day, the money gone from our pockets is the same. And all in the effort to visit an amusment park.

Most of us would consider it "worth it" because we leave Disney with positive feelings. I think the biggest reason this move by SFI is met with so much ire is because many of us already have 'negative' feelings towards SFI. It's like Gonch alluded to re. Dollywood, it's not as bad because it's not SF! But those who would try this program (in particular and FlashPass in general) are most likely going to leave the park with positive feelings and be willing to do it again. Perhaps not on the very next day, but in the future. My wife and I, for example, blew $350+ on dinner @ Victoria's and Albert's on our honeymoon. Now there's no way in hell that would be feasable for us to do everynight, but will we return someday? Absolutely.

And you're right, there will be some of us who say a grand is not worth the cost. So what? Not *everyone* who goes to CP wants to buy their VIP experience. Not everyone who goes to Magic Kingdom wants to purchase the "Keys to the Kingdom". However, there obviously are some people who do. The mere fact that CP has offered and continues to offer a VIP program shows that there is some market for it. I'd think that we would agree that the "average prospective CP guest" and the "average prospective SF guest" would be strikingly similar in demographic profile. If it works for CP to offer such a thing, why *wouldnt* SFI say "Mii too!"?
lata, jeremy
--"It rubs the lotion on its skin or it gets the hose again..." *** Edited 3/29/2007 8:55:57 PM UTC by 2Hostyl***

---

matt. said:Prostitution.

---

Once again, I failed to let fly...

I had typed and submitted "Mustang Ranch" (also tagged the CAR folks, LOL)....then I deleted it cause I thought it was too close to the line... I stink!

P.S. Gewurtztraminer is good stuff. Hard to pronounce unless you're German...kinda like spelling my last name... ;)

*** Edited 3/29/2007 9:05:45 PM UTC by rollergator***

---

Rob Ascough said:

---

Brian Noble said:

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.

---

It's still ultimately about the bottom line. Sure, it may take some cash off the bottom line to give the donations to other causes, but it really won't decrease profits. First off, the employees feel better about the company they work for (especially if they can participate in a volunteer event) which in turn makes their productivity higher. Whether that means a happier customer who thus spends more or just simply more product to sell, it's still more utility. Second, it paints a good image to society, especially for humanitarians who want to patronize businesses that give back. Looking for a new cell phone from a GSM carrier? You can either go with AT&T which charges more for their plans or T-Mobile which is cheaper *AND* gives back to the community - T-Mobile's HuddleUp gives back to lower-income families that lack provisions for childcare after school ends. in 2006 there were 10 events around the country where employees were *PAID* to take the day "off" from work and "volunteer" with City Year (and another organization I can't remember the name). That does a huge amount of word-of-mouth advertising. All those families, center-workers, and just people who read the paper. Who are they going to choose for cellular service? It's a no-brainer.

That's not to say it's not a we-care-about-the-community mode of thinking, but if you think it's 100% charity, then I feel you're mistaken.

I believe that the Six Flags parks don't really have that much that would appeal especially to the well-to-do.

If money is no object, then the more likely choice is to fly to Florida more often and go to those Disney and Universal parks and stay in the best accommodations on-site. Or you might go overseas and sample the experiences that parks there offer.

Because Disney is the *once every couple of years* trip. Six Flags wants to be 2-5 times a year venture (note the heavy emphasis on season pass sales).

I think that at 22 pages I can offically say this now but: I believe this thread is now the longest thread in CB history that was not about a new coaster. And as someone who did contribute to it I pat myself on the back and vitually to all the "heores" out there that were able to make this thead happen. ;)

T-minus 3 weeks until the season starts for the Ohio/PA contingent (incudling me) and it cant come soon enough :)

---

Lord Gonchar said:
Might be a good week to watch Penn & Teller

(that's Thursday night at 10pm)

---

Hoping someone took my advice. The guys took the pro-Wal-Mart stance and made some good points. (and one guy even used the "it saves the average consume $2000 a year" line)

The entire show seemed to confirm what I said about my personal experiences with people I know in life and Wal-Mart:

Those that we think it exploits and hurts the most are the ones who seem to say it helps them the most and those that hate it are the ones that seem to be able to live without it.

Kind of like where the lines seem to have been drawn around here with the Q-bots! ;)

What am I missing, Gonch?

The ones who we think Q-Bot hurts and exploits the most (People who wait in uberlong lines, watching the Botters cut in front of them) are the ones who seem to say that it helps them the most?

(How does it help me when I stand in line for 1 1/2 hours while other people cut in front of me.)

...And those who hate Q-Bot (those same people who wait in uberlong lines,...blablabla) are the ones who seem to live without it?

(I still stand by my opinion that Q-Bot is not a choice. Not everyone is able to rent a Q-Bot. If they were able, we would hear about Lo-Q selling out of them more often.)

Although I understand where you're coming from most of the time (although I disagree), I don't get this one. This just shows me that we are NOT anywhere near being on the same page on this issue. I should be able to easily read between the lines in your statement comparing Wal-Mart and Q-Bot, but instead I draw a blank.

I guess I am asking for your help in understanding what you meant.

Is this the longest Q-Bot thread ever on Coasterbuzz?

Hmmm. Sorry, that does read weird, doesn't it?

I guess what I was trying to say is that when it comes to Wal-Mart we got people who obviously can afford not to shop there saying they hate the place and it exploits the workforce and all that, but the very people we think we're hoping to protect are saying, "Wal-Mart gives me a job when I otherwise couldn't get one" or "Wal-Mart is what enables me to make ends meet."

In other words:

The people who don't go to Wal-Mart seem to be the most outspoken about its evils even though tons of people work and shop there (rely on it, even) everyday and can easily explain why from their POV it's good for them- perhaps it's the folks looking in from the outside who just don't get it?

Now let's just change the product and write that again. :)

The people who don't use Q-bot seem to be the most outspoken about its evils even though tons of people use it and can easily explain why from their POV it's good for them - perhaps it's the folks looking in from the outside who just don't get it?

Don't read too much into it anyway, it was barely an afterthought comment. Just seemed funny considering the Q-bot/Wal-Mart direction this thread went for a while.

I wonder how many people say "I hate working at the WalMart, but it's the only game in town since I lost my job of 20 years at the locally-owned business that went out of business. I make half as much, but at least I save SOME of that by shopping at the company store"....

Just a thought...

Quite a few, I'm sure, Gator. And I've seen enough episodes (all of them) to know how slick they are in presenting the facts to support whatever angle they want to play the show to.

But then again facts are facts. (sadly, my coin is often as multifaceted as yours ;) )

For instance, the average pay nationwide for full time Wal-Mart workers is $10.51 an hour. Somewhere around 60% of their employees are full-time employees.

By my calculations, the average full time Wal-Mart employee makes almost $22,000 a year. (not bad when the current poverty level is set at $9,800 annually)

Just an example and I still hate Wal-Mart, but did dig the opposite side being presented.

---

Arthur Bahl said:
I believe that the Six Flags parks don't really have that much that would appeal especially to the well-to-do.

---

I really wish you all would define what you think "well-to-do" means. There are *plenty* of people who have money to spend that aren't "well-to-do" and I think these ppl *do* go to SF parks because 'flying off to Disney' every year is too expensive.

RGW: If you like Gewurtztraminer, try the 2004 Covey Run Gewurtz from Washington state. Spicy but not overpowering, refreshing and *cheap* (~$9). Goes great with turkey dishes.
lata, jeremy aka le sommelier du Coasterbuzz