Theme parks cost cutting = lower quality experience
Jeff said:
I can't believe it took to page 4 for someone to take a stab at me making money with this site.
I think the exact insinuation was that you have Gonch here to stir up controversy which in turn creates more traffic which in turn creates more ad revenue.
My only question - how much of a cut does Gonch get and whose butt do I have to kiss to get me a piece of that? ;)
Have the parks eliminated late night hours completely? If so, you might have a point. Or have they cut back on the 'quiet' ones instead? Cuz if that's all they've done, you don't.
And the fact that there's people on both sides who can't see past their nose? I've already said that twice before you got around to it.
So what are you saying?
But moving right along--let's look at this from a Cheepy vs. GP point of view, shall we?
Cheepy: Quality over quantity. Make me happy.
GP: Why would I go back to Amusement Park X? I've rode all that stuff already.
Park Owner: Guess I'll be adding a new ride!
Cheepy: I've got my sack lunch in the car.
GP: That'll be four RipOff burgers, four $3 Cokes and--did you want cotton candy, Little Johnny?
Park Owner: Guess who I'll be listening very carefully to?
-CO
NOTE: Severe fecal impaction may render the above words highly debatable.
I didn't say anyone was a hyprocrite. All I did was comment that it's likely a lot of people that claim night hours at amusement parks aren't necessary are ones that will eventually be enjoying an amusement park at night as part of a Coasterbuzz event. Take from that what you will. Well, come to think of it, you already have.
What I was taking offense to was your classification of the people in this argument because I don't fit into any of those categories, nor do any of the people that you're lumping in with the cheapskates. You're flat-out saying anyone that chooses not to take the business side of this argument is tight with money, wanting everything for nothing, but that's not the case.
That's an incredibly absurd question. It ignores three things that I find obvious:
Rob Ascough said:
But you said so yourself, Jeff- parks are already highly profitable. If that's the case, why can't they be happy with the profit they're making and make sure they keep offering people what they've always offered them?
1. The company is accountable to its owners. If my units of FUN decrease in value, or the distribution goes down, I'm going to be pissed. Even a place like Holiday World, privately owned (and without late hours, by the way, what a rip off ;)), has to account for point #2.
2. This is a capital intensive business that is susceptible to fluctuations in revenue from weather and the economy. The more you bank, the more you can respond to changing conditions from year to year.
3. Regarding the last part of your question, you're assuming that because you want longer hours that it's a need that should be filled, without considering what their data says the majority of customers need. That's the part you don't seem to accept, that the cost of offering something "they've always offered them" does not, in fact, offset the cost of that offering. My local grocery store doesn't offer organic laundry soap anymore because people other than me were obviously not buying it. So why keep it?
Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
I just want to deal with Dexter's post first.
dexter:
I would NOT visit LordGoncherland! The park would not be a good value. Parking would be $30 per "poor person" parking space and $60 for "High Class" parking. You would pay $75 to enter the park and then pay again for ride tickets, $10 per ride. Free drinks are not available like at a few more reasonable parks; they are $10 per bottle. The park has no water fountains so they can sell more drinks. Fastpass is available for only $100 extra plus an extra $20 per line you skip. VIP is available for only $1000 per person. The park is only open from Noon to 6pm.
Wow. Imagine if you could get away with something like that. It'd be a license to print money. :)
Come on though, we all know that wouldn't work - except in RCT. :)
Business don't need to rip off their "valued guests" to be profitable. Repeat business is much more profitable than "get as much money from them as you can the one time they visit and then piss them off".
Sigh. We've been through this a million times. Changing your hours or pricing or whatever the complaint of the day is, isn't necessarily ripping people off. As I said in the post directly above yours - the customer holds ALL of the cards. If the people truly disagree with your latest attempt to milk more money from them, you'll lose business. You'll lose money. You'll have to change. No one can force the customer to visit.
LG, you always have a way of getting under my skin with your, "When a business is ripping off it's customers, it is good for their profits and therefore is a good thing" logic.
I'm not sure I ever said that. I do say that if the parks find new or different way to increase their bottom line and the people don't seem to have a problem with it (meaning that they still go to the park) then it's smart - no different than you finding a way to increase your paycheck.
Face it, the big parks that do $3-4 drinks and $10-15 parking with upcharge parking available and hamburgers for $4 do just fine. If people were feeling ripped off, the parks wouldn't draw millions and millions of people each year.
On top of that, I think when we all get our panties bunched up in discussions like this, we often miss the point. People go to parks for the rides, the shows, the atmosphere - not because of pricing schemes. Your average 'big' park has 10, 12, 15 coasters, a ton of flats, a handful of shows, nice, fat kiddie areas - that's why people are going. The cost of spending the day at such places is what it is and the parking lots are almost always full. No one is making anyone go there and no one is forcing anyone to pay prices inside the park either - but people do...by the millions.
Do you really think these people feel ripped off?
I find your posts very difficult to read all the way through because they get me so fired up.
Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. But I suppose that's a good thing, because it means you feel strongly about your position in the discussion.
Which is probably your job here on CoasterBuzz, to start controversy. An advertisement funded website would probably be more profitable if it's web pages got more hits, no? When you cause a frenzy, More people view the site, which causes CoasterBuzz to generate more profit.
Sonuvabitch, Jeff - we're busted! Run! ;)
I'm flattered that you think I'm single-handedly capable of driving the revenue of one of the most trafficked coaster forums on the internet.
And if it is true, I certainly ain't getting a cut of the action. (Looking in your direction, Jeff :) )
Lord Gonchar said:
As I said in the post directly above yours - the customer holds ALL of the cards. If the people truly disagree with your latest attempt to milk more money from them, you'll lose business. You'll lose money. You'll have to change. No one can force the customer to visit.
I think that's the gist of it. Somebody is unhappy with something about a park so they decide not to go. You just said that's fine and dandy and what people should be doing.
But what seems to happen around here is whenever somebody is unhappy about a park, they are told to get over it, that it's good for you, and why don't you have any busines sense.
Maybe cutting hours makes sense and maybe it doesn't, and maybe nobody really knows. But it clearly DOES offer a lower quality experience for SOME people. Why bother arguing about somebody else's idea of a low-quality experience? It's all subjective.
Rob:
There is nothing to fix. It's not like park operating hours suddenly swelled in the past decade. For as long as I can remember, parks were open to 10pm and 11pm at night on busy summer days- since when are late nights ar parks a new thing?
You took the qualifier off of the piece you quoted.
I was talking specifically about Carowinds - which was cited in the original post that set this whole thing off.
In the case of Carowinds, based on the info I can find, they did indeed close at 8pm as recently as 1990.
So yes, their park operating hours increased at night sometime in the past 15 years. They weren't 'always open late' - in fact, in the big scheme of things they've 'always closed at 8pm'
Sometime after 1990 and before now hours increased. Now they're going back. Looks like the park didn't think it was a good idea to stay open until 10pm after they tried it for a while.
The cutback is the fix for the mistake of thinking they could run longer hours profitably.
But it clearly DOES offer a lower quality experience for SOME people. Why bother arguing about somebody else's idea of a low-quality experience? It's all subjective.
But it clearly DOESN'T for others. Why bother arguing/complaining/worrying about something you have no personal control over? It is all subjective and if every person who visits this forum in a week voted with their wallet it wouldn't change a thing in the big picture.
the customer holds ALL of the cards
Spot on. And from the sounds of it, I think these parks will lose some customers because of this decision. Not me because I lost all my stamina after the birth of our son. So I guess we'll see if it works out for them.
Now, if we were to talk about electricity in California....don't EVEN get me started. Then again, you piss off customers who don't have a choice enough, they'll find a way to get a choice...which could actually be a good thing (alternative energy, etc.)
Lord Gonchar said:
But it clearly DOESN'T for others. Why bother arguing/complaining/worrying about something you have no personal control over?
You tell me. You're the vocal one around here.
Great Lakes Brewery Patron...
-Mark
millrace:
You tell me. You're the vocal one around here.
Touche. :)
Unfortunately, I wouldn't know either. I'm the one who is ok with things I can't control.
I don't undertand the assertion that it's ok to complain that hours are cut (or upcharges are offered or prices raised), but not ok to offer a retort explaining why I think changes like this are made.
But in a continued effort to fit in...booooo to all you icky concrete slabs with high prices and a class system in place that constantly take more and more away while expecting me to pay more and more.
There. Am I a 'good guy' now?
Has anyone asked their friends or co-workers what they think of reduced hours? Most of the people I've talked to don't care at first. But when you ask them, won't you miss how the rides look at night? You get a reaction quick enough and it's usually not happy.
But isn't that leading someone to get a response? The initial reaction is one of noncaring, but when you push further with a negative, then you sway the opinion.
Is it their fault if they don't check hours, sure. Will they find some way to blame the park, chances are.
Sure, it's leading. The ones I've asked: would you go to GL or CP if it closed before the sun went down, gave quick negative responces. A few even said: why bother going? *** Edited 4/25/2007 5:28:35 PM UTC by FLYINGSCOOTER***
Great Lakes Brewery Patron...
-Mark
Lord Gonchar said:But isn't that leading someone to get a response? The initial reaction is one of noncaring, but when you push further with a negative, then you sway the opinion.
Isn't that what you do, only in reverse? ;)
Jeff said:
I'm not even sure what Rob is trying to argue anymore.
I don't think you've ever been sure of what I've been trying to argue. You talk like an extension of the corporate boardroom while ignoring what the people that disagree with you actually have to say.
That's an incredibly absurd question. It ignores three things that I find obvious:1. The company is accountable to its owners. If my units of FUN decrease in value, or the distribution goes down, I'm going to be pissed.
It's absurd to want to take the cautious route and protect the profit that's already being made? Remind me not to get into business with you.
This is a capital intensive business that is susceptible to fluctuations in revenue from weather and the economy. The more you bank, the more you can respond to changing conditions from year to year.
Fine, I'll give you that.
Regarding the last part of your question, you're assuming that because you want longer hours that it's a need that should be filled, without considering what their data says the majority of customers need. That's the part you don't seem to accept, that the cost of offering something "they've always offered them" does not, in fact, offset the cost of that offering. My local grocery store doesn't offer organic laundry soap anymore because people other than me were obviously not buying it. So why keep it?
So where is this data that says customers claimed they don't need as much time in amusement parks anymore? I doubt that any amusement park operator has ever talked to actual park guests, suggested cutting park hours and got a positive response. Considering that, I think this is a case where the park is telling the customers what it needs and wants, not the other way around. No one went to guest services and told them that the operating hours allowed them too much time at the park and they should consider cutting back their hours. It's no secret that any data can be manipulated to prove just about anything.
Lord Gonchar said:
Sigh. We've been through this a million times. Changing your hours or pricing or whatever the complaint of the day is, isn't necessarily ripping people off. As I said in the post directly above yours - the customer holds ALL of the cards. If the people truly disagree with your latest attempt to milk more money from them, you'll lose business. You'll lose money. You'll have to change. No one can force the customer to visit.
Which is what I've been saying. Here's the difference that I see. Some people (I guess we'll call them "people with obvious business insight") are doing their best to prove that this is a business decision that makes sense. Other people (we'll call them "cheapskates" since CO feels that everyone that doesn't think like a CEO is either poor or refrains from spending money) are thinking that this might not play out as well as the amusement park operators think. Which leads me to ask, why is speaking hypothetically a bad idea? All a few of us are doing is playing the other side of the coin, but instead of being considered to bring valid points to the table, you talk down to us like we're a bunch of idiots that can't see what you see.
Anyway, the point I have been trying to make is that many little things could lead to an erosion of attendence. Maybe cutting hours on certain days isn't going to make a huge difference but with ever-escalating prices, an increase in the number of extra perks available for people to buy to make their day better and a decrease in hours might serve as the breaking point for many. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
*** Edited 4/25/2007 5:55:42 PM UTC by Rob Ascough***
No one's opinion seems to have changed over the course of all these discussions. All the same players are all still on their respective sides of the fence with not even a hint of swaying.
But I'd be curious as to the responses you'd get if you asked about the hours and then followed up with, "It's not that big of a thing though, because you usually leave around the time it gets dark anyway."
I'd bet you get a whole different reaction.
Edit - Rob slipped a post in on me.
*** Edited 4/25/2007 5:58:45 PM UTC by Lord Gonchar***
You must be logged in to post
