What's going wrong at Cedar Point?

SFMMAddict said:
You call that bad.;) KBF has cheeseburgers for $7.75. I can leave the park, walk somewhere within 2 blocks, and get a meal for less than 1/2 as much money. Icee's are now up to $6.25 for a large too.

I have see icees as high as $9+ at cedar point. And don't even get me started on the $13 footlong subs($5 more if you want to add a soda and cookie). It's actualy cheaper to get a meal at famous daves.

wahoo skipper said:
I like Bill but why is he so much more successful than other experienced operations people?

He's one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet, and probably one of the most intensely enthusiastic people in the business. But that said, he's like eight feet tall and his physical stature is imposing. He's twice Dick's height. :) But seriously, I think he knows his stuff, his standards are high, and I suspect he has the patience to really work within the awful system. Just imagine what he could do if dad wasn't watching all of the time.

He's about four time Dick's weight, too.

Well, as you may expect, I kind of knew the answer. I agree on all points with Bill...particularly in regards to him being successful IN SPITE of Kinzel as opposed to because of him.

In fact, that is a trend at the park. When I was there my VP and Director did some successful things that Kinzel didn't catch wind of. For instance, keeping housekeeping staff motivated, particularly during the "hell weeks" in late August, is difficult at best. To try and encourage the staff (and to get the work done) he would order up some food such as hot dogs/chicken sandwiches/etc and give it to the staff at Sandcastle Suites during their lunch hours. This alleviated the staff having to truck all the way to the employee cafeteria or, worse yet, spend their own money at Breakwater, in order to eat. And, it got the lunch hour done and everyone back to work in a timely manner.

Was it SOP? No, and I would guess it was decisions like that one that may have resulted in him being transferred out of his job.

Is it the case that families with young kids in general have more discretionary income than teens and young adults with no kids? Teens typically do not support themselves living with mom/dad. Any income they have (from jobs, allowances, gifts from grandma/grandpa) are pretty much discretionary income. Young adults without kids do not have the expenses that young families have. I had more discretionary income when I was single even though I make about 10 times as much now as I did when I got my first real job after college. Kids seem like black holes when it comes to money. Its hard to comprehend where the money all goes but boy does it go. In a hurry. All that being said, I am just not sure that in general its the families with young kids who have a lot of discretionary income that CP needs to attract.

Why can't families with young kids enjoy Camp Snoopy together? My wife and I spent a lot of time there and on various flat rides when our kids were young. Both my kids are old/tall enough to ride all of the rides in the park at this point. My son does but my daughter doesn't like the big rides so she still spends time riding the smaller rides (not so much in Camp Snoopy now though). And I still view every ride in the park as a family ride. Three generations of my family ride them all which has been the case since I was riding Corkscrew and Gemini with my grandma. I don't think you can find a universal definition of a family ride. With pretty much any ride out there, you will find folks from families who will not ride it for one reason or another.

From what I have seen, one of the big problems with part time/seasonal jobs is that there are not as many kids in the area looking for part time/seasonal jobs. Parents have more money now and so kids are not as interested in jobs. When I was a kid in a middle class neighborhood, the only people who had lawn services were old folks (and many of them had neighbor kids cutting their lawns) and everyone cleared the snow from their own driveways. Now if you go to middle class neighborhoods, most folks have services cut the grass and clear the snow. And you have a difficult time finding kids who have any interest in doing either job. And a lot of parents are looking for resume builders for their kids summers which doesn't include a summer working at the Point. So the pool of workers to select from is not what it once was.

Food seems to be a big item in terms of complaints about CP. Haven't taken a tally but it seems like most of the complaints are about the food quality and/or price. We Americans certainly are obsessed with food. Its no wonder we are the fattest country on the planet. Seems to me that if you have the two worst meals in your life at CP, you will have 3 more the day after than and the next day and the next. But from talking to people, a bad meal can really ruin what otherwise was a great experience. So maybe CP should upgrade the quality of its food. Though it seems to me that based on the number of folks who frequent fast food joints and pretty crappy chain restaurants, that increased food quality may be lost on a good number of the folks who frequent CP and the folks I know who do not go to CP do not go there because of the rides and 5 star restaurants are not going to get them there. But maybe not.

The biggest issue I see for CP, as I have noted before, is location, location, location. The core areas of Detroit and Cleveland are about as bad as you can get in terms economic and population growth. And the region as a whole has lagged behind the rest of the country in terms of economic and population growth. Economic recoveries are not as strong in the region and are slow to arrive. And when you couple that with all of the other entertainment options that are out there, you have a very difficult operating environment in which to operate no matter what you do. And to me, the purpose of the Paramount purchase was to help diversify CF in terms of regions and in particular away from the CP market.

I spend WAY more in the parks now as a father of 2 then I ever did as a teen/young adult. Back then I could get through a day at the park with one meal (a cheap one at that) and maybe a snack. With two kids under 10 there is no way I'm getting through the day without at least two meals, several stops for drinks, a plus Snoopy of some kind and a few games to top it off. That plus admission X 4 and I guarantee you I'm spending more money.

And, of course, it is the families that are your target to fill the empty beds in the resorts...not the teens.

When I'm in Camp Snoopy or Planet Snoopy most of my time is spent watching my kids while chatting with parents who are there doing the same. Yes, we can ride some of the flats with them but...do you think I'm more eager to return to Universal so can I ride ET with the kids or Cedar Point so I can ride the Snoopy Submarine with them? (Yes, I know that not everyone can build ET but they could build more family friendly rides.) Actually, I feel worse for those families with the preteen group as well as the youth/toddler group. They are really split up around the park.

And again, I think the location of Cedar Point (sandwiched between to depressed cities) isn't helping today but I stand by what I said earlier. The troubles we are talking about began to show themselves well before we were talking about a market collapse and government bailout. So, yes...Cedar Point is dealing with some skin cancer right now (the economy..which can be fixed) but it is too simplistic to say that is the only real problem.

I agree wahoo, the family experience for the park is what helps the bottom line. Go to Soak City any day and tell me how many groups 4 people or less there are in proportion to families. The food revenue is what keeps the"city" going.
More importantly I think value these days is often considered after the fact. On the ride home or maybe even years later you hear your family talk about that trip to Cedar Point. The trips that create memories, that is lost once the pre-teen friend era kicks in. This is one reason why Disney is appealing at a young age. So I guess the question is what will you pay for that overall experience and still consider a value.
We can all talk of nostalgia and how it was as we were growing up, but the park's are more capacity inspired these days, rides are shorter, lines are longer, and food is crapier just so it all can all be mass produced like a car.
Unfortunately a lot of the small nostalgic parks in our country have been lost because of offering great deals, The atmosphere offered at these locations is what set our standard of how things should be now. Obviously the amusement/tech boom put these parks out of contention overnight, but let us not forget the little guys that started it all for us. In my opinion family owned and operated parks are forgotten to the mammoth rides and expectations of the modern era.
I think a good example is MI Adventure before the CF takeover...Yeah they have built a roller coaster with inversions, butt hey lost all the value. You used to be able to pay $15 and get admission to the water park and the amusement park. The food was decent too. $5 would get you a hamburger meal with frys and a pop. I recently went and was disappointed because of the changes that had occurred in just a few years. But I can't complain because there was probably 150 people in the whole park and everything was a walk on!!!
However if I have to pay $15 for a hamburger to ride the greatest 310' roller coaster ever built, I'll do it any day and that's whats wrong with CF!!
People like me...

JoshuaTBell said:
butt hey lost all the value....

Butt hey? ;)

I think we need to be careful not to brush with too broad a stroke here. There are still plenty of small family-oriented parks around that are doing great. Kennywood, Holiday World, and Knoebels are all examples of that. And they are even able to maintain their atmosphere while still building great coasters that people line up to ride.

And how is it again that lower attendance matched with higher per cap spending is a sign of bad things? Doesn't that mean that fewer people are spending more? Unless we know for sure that's directly due to an increase in gate pricing, I'm not seeing that as a problem. (I'm making the assumption that if attendance is down and per cap spending is up due directly to gate pricing, then you can presume the gate is too high and you need to make an adjustment.)

Sure, you want more people to be spending more, but an analysis of attendance trends may lead to a conclusion that has nothing to do with the cost of a hamburger. I'm pretty confident without seeing numbers that the cost of food is not likely keeping people out of the park. From what I hear here, most just eat outside the park if they have a problem with it.

Again, sure, that's lost revenue, but as long as per cap spending is up, is that a problem for now?

Carrie M. said:
And how is it again that lower attendance matched with higher per cap spending is a sign of bad things?

You're preaching to the choir, sister! :)

Different folks will view things differently. I road every ride in Camp Snoopy with my kids (other than the barnstormer planes and nascar things which I do not believe adults could ride). The balloons were pretty cramped for legroom. But I didn't go to CP to stand and talk with other parents; I went to ride rides with my wife and kids. I go on any ride that they will let me go on. Camp Snoopy rides were never my favorite rides in the park but I never saw that as an issue. I knew my kids were having a lot of fun (and therefore so was I) and I knew it was only a limited amount of time before we outgrew it. And to me, virtually every ride in the park is family friendly just not necessary all to the same family. But that will always be the case. Some folks do not like rides that go fast, that have big drops, that get you wet, that are in the dark, etc. So you will never please anyone. And I think currently CP has more rides for folks of all ages with all kinds of different interests than it has had in the past.

And I don't see an issue with families separating during all or parts of the day either. I have kids that are 2 years apart but my wife and daugther do not like the big rides and my son and I do. So we separate for much of the day. With cell phones it is very easy to do. As a kid, I went to CP every year with my extended family. 30-40 aunts, uncles, parents, siblings, counsins and grandparents were there. We ate lunch together in the picnic area and sometimes dinner. But during the day we were split up into numerous groups depending on what various people wanted to do. Back then without cell phones you were pretty much stuck with the agreed meeting time. So if you were to meet at 3 but a slower than expected line had you waiting for a ride at 2:55, you had the choice of jumping out of line or getting yelled at for being late. Now you can just call the other folks and let them know you will be 10-15 minutes late and they can go on another ride, get a snack, etc.

In terms of the economy of the region, I wasn't referring to the current economic meltdown/government bailouts. The region's economic issues go back much further than that. Since the mid to late 70s, the region's economic base which primarily on manufacturing has declined substantially. Relative to the rest of the country, Ohio and Michigan have lost population since the 70s. Ohio is expected to lose more electoral votes with the 2010 census. I have not seen what the expectations are for Michigan. As recently as 10 years ago, Ford and GM were in the top 10 employers for northeast Ohio. Last I looked, I am not sure either was in the top 25. I suspect the numbers are very similar for Michigan. My guess is that folks with manufacturing jobs were a very good group for CP. Those folks are largely gone at this point from the region. And the number of entertainment options continues to rise. Disney/Florida/beach vacations, cruises, trips to Vegas, sporting events, skiing, etc. And there are more entertainment options at home as well. And with large numbers of families, sports and other kids activities are a huge part of the schedule often times including traveling to distant places for tournaments. If the core area from which you draw your customers is growing, those other entertainment options do not present as much of a problem. But if its not growing, you likely will have problems.

Carrie M. said:
And how is it again that lower attendance matched with higher per cap spending is a sign of bad things? Doesn't that mean that fewer people are spending more? Unless we know for sure that's directly due to an increase in gate pricing, I'm not seeing that as a problem. (I'm making the assumption that if attendance is down and per cap spending is up due directly to gate pricing, then you can presume the gate is too high and you need to make an adjustment.)

(...)

Again, sure, that's lost revenue, but as long as per cap spending is up, is that a problem for now?

And yet I contend that it is exactly the first obvious sign of trouble, the very first thing that should be setting off alarm bells for people running the park. It means exactly as you say, that FEWER people are spending more. Never mind that overall revenue may be flat or even up slightly (as has often been the case for Cedar Point in this situation) this condition is the 'canary in the coal mine' to tell you that something just might be wrong.

What makes it even worse is if you compare the gate per-cap on a year-over-year basis. I have no idea what that is for Cedar Point, but I know that for the longest time their pattern was to increase the gate price by a dollar or two while also increasing the discount...so while last year it was $28 at the gate but you could get $8 off with a pop bottle, this year it is $30 but with $10 off. I'm deliberately using ancient numbers here, but you get the idea. If they are boosting their per-caps on declining attendance while still keeping the gate price aggressive (which I believe they have done) then that means *there is something else depressing the gate*.

It is well known that the population that feeds Cedar Point's ADI* isn't exactly growing in population. But that has been the case for a very long time. And yet Cedar Point has managed to increase attendance slightly or remain at least reasonably stable at around 3.0-3.5 million per year for decades. But recently, those attendance numbers have started to slip. So given what we know about the ADI, what we know about the historical trends, and what we know about the park, what do the numbers tell us? I submit that they are telling us one of the following:

o People who visit the park are not visiting as often.
This is possible. This is, however, contrary to the park's growth strategy of selling longer stays...two and three day tickets and season passes. Fortunately, this is something the park can measure and possibly adjust through pricing or other means, as it will show up in sales figures for those passes or multi-day tickets.

o People who used to visit the park are not visiting anymore.
This is the troubling one. Of course, we have seen historically that in an ADI where a day at Cedar Point doesnt seem to sell as well if there isnt something new and amazing ("it's the same as last year, and next year they'll do something special") we should expect to see attendance declines in a year of "cosmetic improvements"**, how do you justify a decline in attendance in three years in which new coasters have come on line?

It's this troubling statistic that should have park officials worried and scrambling to figure out what they are doing wrong. The decline in attendance year after year after year, independent of the influence of the broader regional economy means that the park is not drawing the way that it should. And that means that something is going wrong. People who have been to the park are not coming back, and people who have been to the park are not sending their friends. The problem with the increased per-cap is that a slavish attention to the per-cap without addressing attendance leads to pricing and operational decisions that allow the increased per-cap to hide, in the short term at least, the damage to the bottom line. The worst part of all is that if the allegations in this thread are true, it is very possible that the very factors that are propping up the per-cap are the same factors that are driving down the attendance.

Unfortunately it's hard to figure that out. The best we get are anecdotal stories from our friends and co-workers who tell us they had a "great time" but it was "way too expensive" and regale us with stories not of the $20 they paid for their $40 worth of admission tickets, but of the $12 they spent on $0 worth of parking and $40 they paid for their $10 worth of lunch. And when those anecdotes become, "and I'm not going there again" and the entertainment choice shifts to something else, we start to see alarming numbers.

Maybe I'm being a bit alarmist here. But then, the entire premise of this thread is that something *is* going wrong at Cedar Point, so if we're to work on that premise, I think we need to be a lot more critical than to simply trot out a bunch of complaints about the boss!

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

* ADI - A broadcasting term that reflects my age. Read "market".

** Marketing term for "Nothing we can really promote"

--DCAjr

RideMan said:

The problem with the increased per-cap is that a slavish attention to the per-cap without addressing attendance leads to pricing and operational decisions that allow the increased per-cap to hide, in the short term at least, the damage to the bottom line.

I don't disagree. That's why I reference "for now" in my last statement. But I still don't believe that hamburger sales are likely at the heart of the attendance issue.

The market may have been strained for a long time, but don't you think the past few years have seen an even greater challenge to the area? Can we really rule out the idea that regional economics are a significant issue for the park recently?

The worst part of all is that if the allegations in this thread are true, it is very possible that the very factors that are propping up the per-cap are the same factors that are driving down the attendance.

But I really don't think anyone outside of the folks with an inside connection to the park have any idea about most of the things talked about in this thread. The majority public would have no idea how employees are treated or about nepotism in the hiring, for instance.

Unfortunately it's hard to figure that out. The best we get are anecdotal stories from our friends and co-workers who tell us they had a "great time" but it was "way too expensive" and regale us with stories not of the $20 they paid for their $40 worth of admission tickets, but of the $12 they spent on $0 worth of parking and $40 they paid for their $10 worth of lunch. And when those anecdotes become, "and I'm not going there again" and the entertainment choice shifts to something else, we start to see alarming numbers.

Regardless of the reason, when folks start to say they aren't going back that will be a problem. But I don't think we are there yet. Nor are we close to knowing the reason that might be said in the future, in my opinion.

The biggest complaint we see here about those non-gate expenses is about value not price. That's because the pricing is pretty comparable to other parks and venues. So what else can we blame it on then? I guess we'll blame it on the quality. But I don't think the general public thinks this way.

I've had a season pass to Hershey the past few summers. I think the food if very expensive there. I don't really care for the quality of food there on average. I choose to not spend my money that way when I go. But I am definitely the minority. And furthermore, when I go with my family or for a special outing with friends instead of my regular coaster hop, I most certainly join in and get something to eat with the gang. It appears like many others do, too.

My point is that I would imagine that many posters here are in the same boat that I am. And even if they aren't, as some choose to never eat in the park, they are still attending.

But then, the entire premise of this thread is that something *is* going wrong at Cedar Point, so if we're to work on that premise, I think we need to be a lot more critical than to simply trot out a bunch of complaints about the boss!

I could not agree with you more, Dave! :)

I don't think enthusiasts are a good case study or representative of the public, because they'll go to ride no matter what, and sleep in their cars if they have to. Seriously, I'm often astounded at how cheap enthusiasts are.

I suspect (but don't know for a fact) that a lot of the folks who post on PointBuzz are closer to real life than we are. Heck, even Walt's not much of an enthusiast, he just likes Cedar Point. In any case, lots of folks are decidedly up in arms about one thing or another there, and the kids are easy to pick out because all they care about are the biggest and fastest rides.

As for what goes on internally, really you don't have to be an insider to know about the problems, and who causes them. We've seen enough stories from seasonals to reinforce what I've heard elsewhere (chief among them, ex-Paramounters). It's pretty clear to me that whatever problem there is, it's top down, and everyone on the down is not the problem. I still think the park has the best possible person for the GM job, but not sure it will ever matter with the guys in the big shiny new brick building.

I consider current or former employees to be insiders, too.

I really don't think the general public is aware and they are the ones to be concerned with regarding attendance.

Not enough hugging, that's the problem!

Must be an american thing.
The prices are too high too, yeah.
(and the Blue Streak, what a shame)

Visited Cedar Point for the first time this past summer. Ate at "Coasters" for dinner the first night, which is a fifties diner themed Cedar Fair repeat restaurant, for the uninformed. They charged a very high price for the worst burger and fries I've had outside of a high school cafeteria. The hamburger patty tasted like a piece of rubber and the fries were just tasteless, overall.

As far as I'm concerned, your only safe bets at Cedar Point are the corporate chain restaurants. (Chick-Fil-A, Johnny Rockets, Subway, etc.) And even those are marked up to over double the original price you'd pay outside the park. (Paid $11 for a number 1 Chick-Fil-A sandwich combo with a lemonade. Total at my local Chick-Fil-A for the same combo was $5.01)

Carrie, that's kind of what I was trying to get at. It doesn't really matter what kind of a tyrant the manager is if the results are good. There are a lot of people in the industry who would love to have the kinds of *failures* that Kinzel has had, let alone successes.

On the other hand, Jeff has an excellent point about how the top management shows through the entire operation. I've seen it through management changes at Kings Island where I've never even known who the GM was, but I could tell when it changed. I've seen it at Six Flags St. Louis where the whole park shines in unexpected ways that can only be attributed to local management. And most obviously, I've seen it at Six Flags Magic Mountain, where the new general manager has made a tremendous difference in a very short time. So it only makes sense that the same would be true of Cedar Point. Where, we might also note, changes in general manager have been less noticeable than in other parks, apparently because of the direct involvement of the corporate CEO.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

I completely agree about Kinzel's total lack of respect for CF's seasonal employees. Having spent 7 seasons with CF, I can't tell you the numerous times I heard upper management refer to seasonals as if they were second hand citizens. I think Kinzel and his team have really forgotten who is really running the parks most of the time.

I'm not sure why it matters who knows what about the internals, other than the fact that it lends insight to the reason behind the failures. And that's what this is about, right? CP's failures? John Q. Guest doesn't have to know who Dick is, but it doesn't mean he isn't aware of the failures. A company having to sell itself to save itself is not a success.

I think that's true to a certain extent. It just depends on what people are considering to be failures. Many that have been described in this thread, though, are the kind that have no bearing on the guest experience and therefore aren't really failures in terms of the business from a revenue generating perspective.

Have we now moved over to the line of thinking that if CF doesn't sell, it can't survive? I hadn't thought we got there yet. But if that's true and no one else steps up to make a different offer, then I guess the unitholders had better vote yes for this sale.

Jeff said:

wahoo skipper said:
I like Bill but why is he so much more successful than other experienced operations people?

He's one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet, and probably one of the most intensely enthusiastic people in the business.

I couldn't agree more. I think the biggest help has been that a lot ofhis friendliness and enthusiasm is focused on making the people underhim (from managers to supervisors to seasonals) feel valued. He goesout of his way to make sure employees know that if they're doing a goodjob, he'll be first in line to congratulate them. He's also done a lotto instill ownership and pride for the job into the various crews inoperations, and I think that's something that's been very visible tothe guests the last couple of years.

Carrie M. said:

Regardless of the reason, when folks start to say they aren't going back that will be a problem. But I don't think we are there yet. Nor are we close to knowing the reason that might be said in the future, in my opinion.

I would disagree. In the core markets,such as Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland and Columbus, families who have made 1-2 trips a year for decades are reducing or eliminating their trips for the very reasons being discussed. 15 years ago you always heard good things when people talked about their family outings to the park.

However, recently the trend has been that you're more likely to hear people talking about how bad their trips were because a major attraction was closed all day, or they paid too much for crappy food, or parking is too expensive, the hotel room was a rip off, or employees were rude/unhelpful, etc. Maybe you can chalk it up to Americans simply expecting/demanding too much these days, but to me it seems more like a slippery slope.