Six Flags Q-Bot Fastlane: Regular vs Gold. Is Gold worth it?
There's a difference between an evolving thread and a misguided one.
*** Edited 6/9/2004 2:25:23 PM UTC by Lord Gonchar***
I don't understand how you can't like the system. It works in your favor just as much as it works in the person who bought the Q-bots favor. The person who bought the Q-bot and just walked around a park for 2 hours waiting for the reservation, is bound to spend more money then you who didnt walk around the park for 2 hours or bought the Q-bot, but stayed in line instead.
Plus it allows more people into the line Queue lines for the park too.
Kyle Says: Diamondback was a lot of fun! Made his first time at Kings Island worth it all!
Kyle Fobe said:
Fastpass is good. Freeway is good. Both are worth money to pay as well, because if I have an extra 100 dollars to throw around, I would spend it on a Q-bot, mainly because the priviledge to get on a ride faster then 2 thousand other people in the park, presents itself to me. So thats why they charge 100 dollars.
Huh? 100 dollars? Where exactly is a Q-Bot 100$? I need to be going to parks with you! You're 14 and roll with that kinda cash?
I don't understand how you can't like the system. It works in your favor just as much as it works in the person who bought the Q-bots favor.
Hey boss, the Gold Q-Bot shortens the time so I'd say no, it doesn't work in the non-GoldQbot-payers favor at all. All this is discussed earlier in the thread.
Plus it allows more people into the line Queue lines for the park too.
I have no idea what this means. ;)
As for Gold Qbot, 3 freinds and I tried it at SFNE a month or so ago, and it was well worth what we paid. Every ride became a walk on and the longest wait was Superman at 7 minutes (which was really 2 minutes as it lets you in with 5 to go).
If you've got the money, I highly recomend it. If not, at least try to get a bunch of friends to get one, because after a day of near walk-ons on whatever ride you want, you'll be glad you spent the $25.
We rode every coaster running (Delayja Vu was down, the new junior isn't done) except Ninja (we didn't need that headache, USAirways would have enough pain for us later anyway). In most cases, multiple times. And that's with leaving at 5 to catch our flight. A QBot in those conditions would have been a waste of money (alhough, amusingly enough, it wasn't stopping people from getting them!)
--Greg
"You seem healthy. So much for voodoo."
and Kyle, maybe some day when you grow up, you'll have some responsibilities and understand the problem a lil better (no offense meant)
IMHO, for the Northeast parks (SFGAdv and SFNE), the Qbots are worth it, due to the lines in the middle of summer. THe lines are just insane.
When I went back two years ago, with some non-enthusaistic-but-eager-to-ride-everything-friends, we felt like being in an Simpsons episode (remember the "PAY ´n PARK n´ PAY"-Garage?!).
It was such an obvious rip-off for single-day visitors: After buying the parking lot you pay a high (but fair) ticket which grants you access to the park and all the operatonal rides. So you think as an occasional visitor.
The additional cost for the q-bot strikes you as a second, additional ticket which made our full-single-day-ticket useless when we endured the politics of the park for that day.
Rides were running one train, if they had two trains on the course the stacking would be laughable. If the operators would have moved a bit slower, time would have been running backwards.
It was unbearable and annoying. They DID sell our time for the price of a bunch of unsatisfied customers who in return didn´t care to visit any other SF parks on our US-trip or back home.
By reducing the capacity of their rides in order to make lines longer and to sell more q-bots, they are obviously laughing in the faces of common single-day visitors who foolishly think that they could actually enjoy a day at an renowned amusement park.
I understand that SF is selling cheap season passes and has every right to try to milk the frequent visitors, but it IS unfair for those people who buy a full admission ticket. I think it would be fair to give a free q-bot to single-day customers.
Basically what I'm saying is: Don't think of it as someone neccissarily having more money than you to part with, but think of it as someone willing to part with more money than you.
Its with anything that is done for recreation. If you are willing(not neccessarily able, but willing) to part with more money, then you are going to get more. When Janet Jackson goes on tour in Sept., I'll be more than willing to pay top price to get as close to the front as I can. Last time I had good floor seats, but I didn't have the best. On the same note, had I been able to get Madonna Tickets for D.C., I wouldn't have even paid $303 for a front row ticket(like her, but not as much as janet), cause it wouldn't be worth it for me.
If its your passion, and you are willing to pay more, then so be it. If its your passion and your not willing to pay more(wheather you have it or not), same applies... *** Edited 6/9/2004 6:07:52 PM UTC by TeknoScorpion***
tricktrack said:
I understand that SF is selling cheap season passes and has every right to try to milk the frequent visitors, but it IS unfair for those people who buy a full admission ticket. I think it would be fair to give a free q-bot to single-day customers.
Um, I live in Chicago. Where do I get a "cheap" season pass? And for anyone buying full admission tickets for any park, then you just are not doing your homework! I have a 5 park trip coming up, and I am not paying full price for any park (except Lakemont -- tee-hee). As for milking frequent visitors, actually the frequent visitors do it right (parking passes, bring food in a cooler in the car, go on slow days, know which rides to go on first, etc...
BTW, any of these knowledgable tidbits are available here on CB too so you can play it right and save time and money.
TeknoScorpion said:
Basically what I'm saying is: Don't think of it as someone neccissarily having more money than you to part with, but think of it as someone willing to part with more money than you.
I totally agree with Tekno. I am paying off student loans, a car, etc, so essentially I am in the red. I may or may not buy into the perks thing, depending on money, crowds, time, etc. Am I willing to part with more money than others? I guess it depends.
And please, don’t forget about reminding children waiting in lines, that there A LOT of children who are not in line at all, since they can not even afford to go to a theme park.
I don't like the idea of the Q-bot...it always makes me a bit upset seeing people "cut" the line...but man...was it nice to get every ride in not once, but twice, in one visit on a crowded day.
If there's bad food at CP, they get better food.
If there's bad food at a Six Flags parks, they'll build a new coaster.
If the ops are rude at CP, they'll get better ops.
If the ops are rude at Six Flags, they'll build a new coaster.
etc. etc. etc.
Don't let this fool you into thinking that CP isn't getting better food and nicer ops so you'll come through that gate again or buy their food again or otherwise empty your wallet at their park.
Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."
I think that the q-bot system is extremely fair, as you usually have to wait LONGER than the people standing in the actual line. I go and reserve S:UF, the wait time is 1 hr. The actual line is 50 minutes. I come back in an hour, get up to the station, and the people that were walking in the line at the same time I reserved it are already heading to ride GASM.
How is this wrong? I still had to wait, they still got to ride, and if they want to not have to stand in line, dish out the $12 per person and get a q-bot!
I guess that you think that the HOV lane on interstates is wrong too, because they can go faster than you on the freeway, all because they have more people in the car. It's the same principle, and I don't see anything wrong with either.
I believe that this sort of rule-breaking, pay-to-play, line-skipping system is a new development? Early versions like Disney's were not perceived to be breaking the rules because everyone had equal access to the system and it was free. It is easy to see how the new systems, especially those that go beyond holding a place in line and allow guests to skip the line altogether, would seem unfair.
The interesting things to think about might be: Why do some people believe in the "everybody treated equally" rule? Why do other people believe in the "pay to play" rule instead? How have amusement parks convinced people to believe that the "pay to play" rule is acceptable? And, why are people now willing to accept having unequal classes of guests? It will also be interesting to see if the new systems work and last in the long-term.
(Extending the concept further, will we ever see a park move to a pure auction system? Guests would bid every time they wanted to ride. Those willing to pay more would win a space on the ride. The costs would go up during peak times and down during slow times.)
Edit: grammar correction
*** Edited 6/10/2004 4:19:34 PM UTC by James Ben***
...the reasons why some people are more offended by pay-to-skip-lines systems is because they violate the "rules" that exist (or used to exist) for amusement parks...I believe that this sort of rule-breaking...
It's not a raping and pillaging of the rules. It's a changing of the rules. The game has evolved, no one cheated.
Why do some people believe in the "everybody treated equally" rule? Why do other people believe in the "pay to play" rule instead? How have amusement parks convinced people to believe that the "pay to play" rules is acceptable? And, why are people now willing to accept having unequal classes of guests?
Well, they've accpeted these "rules" at concerts and shows for years (you said it yourself in that post), so why should another form of entertainment be any different?
It will also be interesting to see if the new systems work and last in the long-term.
They're here to stay. If anything they will become more prolific with time.
Why do some people believe in the "everybody treated equally" rule? Why do other people believe in the "pay to play" rule instead?
That's easy. Some people have discretionary income, and some don't. ;)
Lord Gonchar said:It's not a raping and pillaging of the rules. It's a changing of the rules. The game has evolved, no one cheated.
In fact, if you really think about it, amusement parks used to be a class-based system when rides were on a pay per ride basis. You paid a small admission fee, or got into the park for free, and then had to pay for every activity you wished to partake in, whether it be the funhouse or a show. Those who had more money got to ride more stuff. It is kind of ironic that the revolutionary creator in that manner was Six Flags.
The shift is on in the amusement industry towards perks for those willing to pay for them. It represents a new revenue stream for the park and while it may seem unfair to those unable or unwilling to pay, it is representative of the way things are going to be. Think about the airline industry. Everyone on the plane is provided a basic service, transportation to another destination. However, first class patrons are treated better with wider seats, better service, the ability to board and disembark the plane before coach customers, and other amenities. There is a limited amount of first class seats on any plane.
You must be logged in to post
