Six flags season pass parking change?

Season Pass parking was also raised. Last year it was $42.xx plus tax to equal $45 total, then when I processed my 2011 pass last fall it was $45 plus tax and was $48.xx total, now it is $50 total with tax so they technically raised season pass parking twice this season. Preferred Parking is still $25 though. I wonder how long until they offer season long preferred parking for more money.

LostKause said:
I just read on Screamscape that the parking fee was raised to $17 at SFGAdv, and $20 at SFGAm.

Heh.

If you'd have read a few posts above yours you've have seen crazy horse mentioned that.

If you read my reply to his post or most of the conversation prior to that you'd have seen we were using those numbers already...long before Screamscape mentioned the change (that has been on the SF website for at least as long as we've been talking parking prices in this thread).

So, in a nutshell...yeah we know. :)

Oops! I missed the part in crazy horse's post about the info being found on Screamscape... Or I probably forgot that I read it. :)

And Gary said he would gladly pony up an upcharge for an all parks season parking permit but I think the question is how much will the number of visits to the parks decrease because he has to pay for parking each time.

I too would and have paid for season pass parking for multiple parks. I got free parking at SFGAdv when we purchased 4 passes there, but I still asked if I could purchase an all park parking pass. The answer was NO.

In the past we would often hit a park for a few hours in the evening on our arrival day or in the morning of our departure day, with a full park day in between. I am not going to shell out $17 to park for 2-3 hours, instead we have been finding other things to do and places to spend our money.

I also have found that most of our souvenir purchases came on our last day as we have had a chance to sleep on the thoughts of all the goodies that the park has to offer.

This brings up another stupid thing that SF did last year. They closed all the shops as soon as the park officially closed. There were still a ton of people in the park and many of them wanted their last chance to spend some dollars only to find the doors already locked.

I am not going to shell out $17 to park for 2-3 hours

Really? You say "we", so I'm assuming you have at least two people with you there, so you're talking $8.50 per person. If so, I assume you've been to a movie lately, right?

I honestly do not see why you think you are entitled to entertainment that is nearly free.

The season passes are too cheap. They should be more expensive than they are.

I dislike the whole idea of paying for parking, as it is not something that one can easily avoid in the vast majority of parks in the USA. I have taken the boat/bus combination from San Francisco to SFDK, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

Personally I'd favour something like $100 for a one-park pass (including parking) and $250 for a multiple park pass. If you want to visit multiple parks, then pay for it!

Richard Bannister said:
Personally I'd favour something like $100 for a one-park pass (including parking) and $250 for a multiple park pass. If you want to visit multiple parks, then pay for it!

Makes sense to me.

So if you figure SFGAdv passes are $90 and buy three get one free. It'd be $270 for a family of 4. If you visited other parks 10 times and paid $20 parking, you're still only at $470 and that doesn't count the unlimited visits to SFGAdv itself. Visit SFGAdv just 5 times and you got a total of 15 visits to however many different parks you choose to travel to for a total of $470 or $7.84 per person per visit.

Seriously. Less than $8 per person per park visit.

And that's unreasonable?

DaveStroem said:
I am not going to shell out $17 to park for 2-3 hours, instead we have been finding other things to do and places to spend our money.

But that's just $4.25 per person for a few hours at the park.

Hell, at that price consider it a small 'convenience' fee for using your pass at a different park.

When you think of it that way, SF is almost running a model similar to the warehouse club model (Sam's, Costco, etc). Pay a fee upfront for membership (the season pass) and get reduced prices. (90% admission to parks all over the country or free admission at your 'home' park)

In comparison, 15 visits with:

- your Cedar Point Platinum pass works out to $11
- your Holiday World pass works out to $10
- your Hershey Gold pass works out to $12
- your Busch Gardens Platinum pass works out to $20

No matter how I break it down, it just doesn't work out to be a ripoff in any way. Seems like everyone is hung up on the semantics of the fee being for 'parking' and not something else.

I think that the issue here is that one (Dave, for example) has already purchased a season pass, and therefore, no matter how much was paid for it, one would like for it to include the entire package.

I don't buy season passes (because there are not any parks near me), but if I did, I would love to pay for it all at once (including parking), and forget about it, whatever the price.

It's still a good deal, as Gonch pointed out, but to me it just seems like a kind of discount card, entitling one to enter the park at a discounted admission.

I am not going to shell out $17 to park for 2-3 hours, instead we have been finding other things to do and places to spend our money.

I don't want to make this "gang up on Dave night," but I must ask... what other entertainment did you find for 4 people for 3 hours for $17 total in lieu of going to an amusement park?

He already paid for the season pass, so that's not fair.

^Yup, I already have my pass - and the deal was parking for the entire season at ANY six flags park.

At this point, I'm convinced all reason has been thrown out the window and it's just fun to complain.

Is it really unreasonable for people to complain about things they don't think are a good value?

I was just complaining to complain and try to get the most I can out of Six Flags, since I don't agree with the way they run things. Whew, what that truth serum can do ;)

It's still a good deal...

Jeff said:
Is it really unreasonable for people to complain about things they don't think are a good value?

Yes. :)

And I don't think it's quite that simple here. It's the cheapest pass in the industry - even with parking fees at non-home parks. So if the value isn't there, it's in the product because it's certainly not the cost. In which case, why are you buying a pass if you don't like the product?

^Cuz I love the Whizzer, Demon, American Eagle... Mind Bender....

It's a trade off. I can still have my complaints about the service.. it's hit and miss anyway. Mostly miss.

But you still see enough value to buy the pass. It's worth riding those rides. Willingly paying a given price for a service or product that you like is the definition of finding value. Even with the misses, there's enough value in those rides to make you buy a pass. No one is making you. Your argument has nothing to do with value.

And if you're just going to that one park for those rides, you're not paying additional parking, so the argument is irrelevant for you anyway. Jerk. ;)

---

Beacuse I have nothing better to do tonight...

And more related to the pure cost value of the passes, in a perverse sort of way, one could argue that Dave (again, not trying to harp, but he gave a real-world example) lowered the value of his passes by not paying that $17 to park because each visit lowers the inital pass purchase's cost-per-visit...even with the parking fee. And in an even weirder way, each time you pay for parking the value of the pass purchase increases...even at $20 to park.

The initial cost is $67.50 per pass.

I'll even assume worst case scenario where you never visit your home park again.

That initial visit = $67.50 per visit.

The second visit costs $20 parking ($5 per pass) for a total of $72.50. Divide by two visits and we're already down to $36.25 per person per visit. (pretty much the cost of individual tickets)

Following that pattern:

3rd visit = $25.83 per person
4th visit = $20.62 per person

and so on up until...

15th visit = $9.50 per person

And even worse, on that 15th visit after paying $20 parking for the 15th time, your total cost per person is still only $142.50. Less than Cedar Fair passes, Busch passes, Hershey passes, Holiday World passes, Disney passes...they're still the least expensive player in the game after 15 parking fees. Maybe they should resort to offering a home park pass at normal costs and a chainwide $150 - $180 per pass like everyone else and include parking...give the lemmings what they want to hear. Let them pay more.

There's absolutely no value argument to be had...except compared to the past. And in that case; things change, suck it up, princess. :)

Sure, if you're the type to feel like breaking out all of those numbers on each trip (or when you buy the pass), you might realize the value. However, even among enthusiasts, I'd bet almost no one does it. When people buy a season pass, the focus is on admission, and parking is an extra goody. So why should that extra goody be included at a possible loss of what is essentially "free profit" for the park? As much as parking is basically free profit, what if someone buys their SF season pass, shells out for their park's parking pass add-on and then says "Hey, I have to pay $20 extra to visit another SF park!" They're not going to view it as just another $X.xx/person in the car, they're going to view it as a "hidden" charge, basically.

How many people are going to curb their in-park spending or not visit other parks because of it? I don't know, and it probably isn't too significant of a number. However, it can create a rather large issue with value perception for future product use (i.e. next year season pass sales), I would bet.

Heck, when I buy a season pass, even though I check for the inclusion of parking, my thought process is entirely centered on the admission cost at the gate.

You all are missing my point. I am talking about an additional visit to the same park on consecutive days. There have also been many a time where we would just pop into a park that we were passing on our way home for a lap or two on our favorite rides. This won't be happening at Six Flags parks this year, but it still will for CF parks.

As to some of the other comments

I assume you've been to a movie lately, right?

Nope, only go to 1-2 movies a year.

I honestly do not see why you think you are entitled to entertainment that is nearly free.

Nearly free???? The cost for me to go to my "Home Park" run much higher then the cost of the passes and parking. My last trip to SFGAdv cost over $600 of non park costs.

but I must ask... what other entertainment did you find for 4 people for 3 hours for $17 total in lieu of going to an amusement park?

This past weekend we went to Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell exibit. On a trip last year we went to Gettysburg on our way home from Kings Dominion.

And to my friend Gonch, you more then anyone else on this board should recognize that buying decisions encompass much more then just dollars and cents. If you feel as though your not getting a good value (fact or not) you are much more likely to pass on a purchase. I also never called a Six Flags or any pass for that matter a Rip-off.
I also think you will find in my statement above that I was willing to pay additional on top of my "free" parking for a parking pass at all parks if one was available.

I have been in retail for 29 years and I can tell you first hand that perceived value is much more important then actual value. So you can through all your numbers out the window.:)

And to your last comment, I have sucked it up and made our decisions. Yes, it is going to effect some of our travel plans, but not much.

DaveStroem said:
I have been in retail for 29 years and I can tell you first hand that perceived value is much more important then actual value. So you can through all your numbers out the window.:)

That's fine as long as it's a matter of perception, but the moment you have those real numbers in front of you, you have no excuse for falling for the guise of 'perceived' value. You're welcome. :)

As someone who has been in retail for 29 years, you surely understand that 'perceived value' is a nice way of saying, "Getting the customer to think something has value...whether it does or not."

What you're doing is, interestingly enough, exactly the opposite - complaining that something doesn't have value when you've been shown that it's one of the best examples of value you can find for that particular product.